The Newton Highlands Area Council’s Srdjan Nedeljkovic once again provides meticulous minutes from last night’s presentation for a proposed redevelopment of two commercial parcels at 1149 and 1151 Walnut Street into a mixed-use project consisting of 26 apartments and about 1500 square feet of retail space.
Crazy Divers: Men be like...
drivers man be like
I think it sounds like an excellent use of the site, which is right by the Highlands T stop. YIMBY.
This sounds like the kind of reasonable size/scale project Right Size Newton likes to say it favors but to date hasn’t. Maybe this is a chance for that group to demonstrate that they mean what they say by actively endorsing and working to make this a reality.
Greg, why do you always have to be so antagonistic?
Antagonistic? I’m trying to be inclusive. Nothing would be better than to be able to work with Right Size on addressing our shared desire for (as it says on their website) developments that benefit our existing neighborhoods and residents. This certainly seems to do just that.
Perfect. Can they build one at the corner of Bowers and Newtonville Ave, ? Pocket apartments with a pocket park.
Greg is not antagonistic. He is challenging people and groups to come up with alternatives to no. As ted Hess-Mahon dubbed them BANANA. Build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything
@Meredith, Yes I’d agree wholeheartedly , with the following provisos and with the postings criticisms.
Serge does a great job as secretary, however Bill Roesner and Carol Clark should not have been listed as absent members.
Absent as we were ( previous long standing social commitments ), we are no longer serving as Members and should not be included as such.
Further it is rather disingenuous ( and premature ?)to post these notes on V14 without the accompanying architectural materials. “A picture is worth a thousand words”, and this written description I find lacking, and confusing.
As to what I understand has been presented it seems to me that to build a major village center project on this site without undergrounding parking and utilities is to compromise the urban design context into which it is to be placed.
Also I would seriously propose not approving any zoning change until the developer acquired and demolished the pathetic eyesore at 1159-1157-1155 Walnut and expand and redesign his project to include the parking and utilities described above. This building has been radically compromised over the years and has no redeeming historic or urban design value in making any connection with the Stevens Building on the corner. The only possible alternative for its saving would be the removal of the single story sidewalk -contemporary addition, restoration of an original front door and first floor, removal of its rickety fire escape, and somehow design a sympathetic complex next door. (Perhaps an impossible mandate!?)
As regards the architecture,..
Let’s see the drawings!
@Blueprint: Great job finding a [BANANA] bunch of reasons to oppose this right out of the gate. When’s the petition drive?
I think this is EXACTLY the type of development needed in the Village Centers. Smaller, more affordable units with fewer cars. Truly transit oriented development that also addresses affordability
Can we get some of this in Newton Centre?? Santander Bank location would be great, if they could be incentivized to relocate or to occupy first floor space with some additional retail and the apartments above. Of course it’s unlikely a developer will bring forward such a project so how does the city encourage this sort of project??
Excellent. Right by the T and will inject some life into the tired village center.
The Area Council is getting pdf’s of the boards that the developer presented last night. The pdf’s along with the slides that Srdj presented and pdf’s from John Pelletier will be posted on the Area Council page on the city website and linked to in a comment here when they are posted . We will also post the audio recording from the meeting. Some of us are slower than Srdj’s amazing speed at getting documents posted.
Even better is that it converts an old gas station into a more walkable use. I’d love to see the renderings.
I appreciate the optimism but let’s hold developers accountable to what they’re pitching.
If they’re not going to provide enough parking then they need to deed restrict the property to limit the number of cars residents may register in Mass. We KNOW lack of parking doesn’t prevent people from buying too many cars–and then demanding the City provide free parking (here on V14).
Also, there is no indication that the market units are going to be affordable. In fact, new market units in Newton are always priced higher than the average prices, and thus INCREASE housing costs in Newton–not lower it.
Market lingo for small, expensive units like these is “boutique luxury apartments”.
Yes the apartments will be expensive because — breaking news — we have a severe shortage of housing. From 2010 to 2017, Massachusetts gained over 350,000 new jobs, primarily in Greater Boston. Housing is going continue to be expensive until we build a lot more housing or the economy tanks and everyone moves away. That’s how supply and demand works. (David M: Your suggestion that new units drives up the cost of old units defies logic and reality.)
Rather than find new excuses to obstruct every development, folks who are genuinely concerned about the lack of affordable housing, should join one of the many citizen organized groups like Engine 6 that fight every day to bring affordable housing in this market.
Conversely, you can buy yourself one of these for the next time you plan to stand out in front of Whole Foods.
I was a bit surprised when I read the minutes to see that there were going to be 26 apartments. I guess when I first heard about it I was picturing something with less units as I didn’t think the space was that big. It does however sounds promising. Hopefully the smaller units will lead to reasonable rents. My initial wariness is related to parking. Suggestions however were made that they should provide incentives the use public transportation with subsidizes passes etc which I think would be a phenomenal idea. I wonder a bit about parking for the retail component. Also a bit interesting was that the owner of the existing spa posted on the N.H. list serve that she just learned of this development through the list serve. Is there anyone who currently parks behind the building that would be displaced by this development? Looking forward to seeing more on this.
On a similar subject that minutes reference 24 residential units that were approved for Waban Center. Does anyone know exactly where that is proposed for?
@Greg, The usual ha ha ha .
@ Newton Highlands Mom.
You can expect luxury apartment prices. The developer has to pay for the affordable units. New construction is expensive, even the poorest quality which you can expect via a profit motivated developer. Witness Austin Street.
Re Parking , when each unit has its single car space any over night visitor will have to arrive by bicycle, train, Uber or on foot. The parking count doesn’t work. Overnight guest car parking will have to be accommodated off site.
@Bill do you want to raise money for the referendum now or wait until later? Asking for a friend.
@Newton Highlands Mom – The 24-unit Waban development referred to is at 20 Kinmonth Rd., the site of the former Waban Health Center. The special permit was granted in December. You can find more info here: http://wabanareacouncil.com/issue/20-kinmonth-rd
I look forward to seeing the renderings, but this sounds like a great use of a currently underused lot. I’m particularly hopeful for the potential cafe/restaurant with outdoor, sidewalk seating.
Greg, it’s just basic math: adding units that cost more than today’s average price results in the average cost INCREASING.
Per your “supply-demand” claim, what we’re supplying here is high priced corporate owned rentals and thus there is little impact on demand for moderately priced homes. So at best, this is good news for rich people looking to rent “boutique luxury apartments” but for the rest of us it has little impact except we’ll be paying more in taxes to offset infrastructure requirements for these new residents.
@David M: I heard from a guy who owns rental units in lower falls who is strongly opposed to the Nortland, not because he’s worried about traffic or school crowding but because he’s sure that once those 800 units are built he won’t be able to charge as much for his units.
That’s supply and demand.
It’s worked this way since the cavemen started trading fur pelts for tools made out of bone. If there was a glut of pelts, or tools, the trade price changed commensurately.
@Jim:
Nah. There’s a big difference here. I’m on record as saying I support A LOT more housing. Right Size is on record saying they support more housing but its actions consistently suggest otherwise.
Greg,
When you elect to strawman criticize others who you say find “excuses to obstruct every development” couldn’t a parallel criticism pertain to your “finding reasons to push every development.”
@jim Epstein, what could possibly move the discussion forward would be what your thoughts on what could or should be built on the site. Rather than criticize perceptions of straw men, grammar, the definition of is is, give me something substantial. What should be built in a village center 100 feet from the green line.
I did enjoy having a drink with you at the village 14 blog party
Jack L.,
Where on this thread have I conveyed any opposition whatsoever to this project? I have not.
(I enjoyed more than the drink w/you as well!)
@Greg,.. re Bananas,
I thought it was,.. Build Anything Newton Activists Now Approve Soon .
I’ll look for their yellow hats petitioning at Whole Foods. They’ll help staying warm .
Greg, I think you’re missing the point that real estate is not interchangeable. In fact, a fundamental tenet of real estate is that each unit is unique. So when Tom Brady slashes the price of his house from $40M to $35M, I don’t expect to value of my vernacular home to drop 12.5%!
Unless this person owns a large corporate apartment complex, it’s not in the same market as Northland–different supply, different demand. The Avalon’s of the world will likely feel the competition from Northland though–and that level of competition is good for the market. However, the typical landlord that owns and manages upwards of a dozen units is in a totally different league. And even less impacted are single family home prices and condos that get bought/sold, not rented.
The bottom line: adding boutique luxury apartments doesn’t impact market sales of moderate homes; we will pay more in taxes though.
Greg,
I have opposed recent projects, but this project has a lot of desirable aspects and my initial response is that the height and scale of the project are appropriate for the location and I love that there are smaller sized units. I hope that they get the aesthetics of the building right. I am keeping an open mind till we get more details, but this seems like something that I will be able to support.
I want to thank the development team for coming to the Newton Highlands Area Council and sharing their plans and I hope they will listen to the feedback they get and improve the project.
Agree with the positive sentiments. This feels like a well sized development in a nearly perfect location.
Devil’s in the details but 26 apartments is a far cry from 800.
Sure Matt, so the question is will you guys in Right Size stand up and endorse it or will you follow Banana Bill who is already dredging up reasons to oppose it?
@Greg Reibman – quit calling people names. You’re an owner/founder of this site. You (and your co-founders) should be above this. Be above it. Please and thank you.
The approved in project in Waban is a stones throw from the T station, is 24 homes, averages 1000 sq feet per home and room for one car per unit. These are condos.
The proposed project in Newton Highlands is a stones throw from T station, is 26 homes, average 1000 sq feet per unit and room for one car per unit. These are rentals.
I think these are the right direction.
If there is any downside, it is yet more volume on the green line
Only 26 units and three stories tall??? Folks we have a housing shortage in the greater Boston area!
As Greg, “build, build more, and build higher” Reibman usually argues, we need more density! Density is better for the environment! And we need housing!!!
I’m sure a developer like Korff could fit 100-150 units in this area at a minimum. We should be adding a building up to 6 stories high in Newton Highlands to maximize the transit oriented development opportunity here.
Come on housing and environmental advocates-make your voices heard!!! This project is way too small for this great location. We need more density! Let’s go!!!
@ANP,.. that’s all right, cut him some slack, he can’t help himself. He’s hurting these days and whenever he’s challenged and can’t come up with a cogent reply, his only recourse is to excrete an insult and dump it on whoever.
It’s Village 14. We shouldn’t expect more from such a biased site !
It’s Bananas! Build Anything Newton Activists Now Approve Soon !
The audio from the meeting is available at http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/100789. You can also find it, Srdj’s presentation slides, and John Pelletier’s images at http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/neighborhood/highlands/links.asp. I am still waiting for the images from Talanian Realty and will post them on the Area Council webpage and update here once I receive them.
Nathaniel Lichtin
President
Newton Highlands Neighborhood Area Council
thanks Nathaniel
Greg’s motto for the new year is Be Kind-Be Civil. If he operates true to this motto he will be much more effective.
Regarding Northland, I believe this project can be built but the 800 housing units needs to be scaled back from a small city to a realistic number that can accommodate the increased traffic and the overflow of kids into Countryside Elementary. Just think 800 housing units is huge, it is double the 423 units at the Chestnut Hill Towers.
I’m not a big fan of huge developments. Would I like to see Northland and Riverside developed? Sure. Do I think they are too big? Probably. Do I worry about the strain the will put on streets and the Green Line? Absolutely!
I am a big fan of leveraging smaller scale developments, which smaller units and fewer cars to help build some much needed vibrancy in our village centers.
I found myself in Waltham this morning and stopped in to check out Brother’s Marketplace, on the street level of a smallish scale apartment building across the street from a town square that puts anything we have in Newton to shame. We have to do SOMETHING to bring vitality back to our villages. The town square in Newton Center is a friggin parking lot!! We can do better
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Waltham_MA_Central_Square.jpg
https://www.bhdp.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Waltham-6.jpg
You all seem to know each other and I don’t know any of you, so I feel a bit presumptuous jumping into this exchange (but I will). What always strikes me when people talk about the Boston area’s housing crisis is that they seldom talk at the same time about the area’s transportation crisis. To me it seems clear that the housing crisis *is* a transportation crisis. If there were plenty of reliable, affordable, efficient public transit lines moving from Boston to surrounding communities there would be less need to force a dramatic increase in density in Newton because housing could be developed further out from the center of Boston. Why shouldn’t Wellesley, Dover, Weston and many other communities also respond to the ever increasing need for housing, since they unquestionaly benefit from Boston’s prosperity as much as Newton does? Although the Highlands project sounds like the kind of small-scale, neighborhood development I can get behind, there is no question that it will increase traffic on the already crowded and inadequate Green Line. I’m baffled as to why Gov. Baker and other officials seem to get a free pass on really dealing with transportation. The Globe’s recent series on traffic in Boston documents what’s obvious to anyone who lives in the area–that the crush of traffic is damaging the quality of life to the point of making Boston unliveable. Anyone who drives through Newton Centre village frequently, as I do, might say the same about Newton.
Thanks for joining the conversation Elizabeth. You’re right. Or really 2/3rds right.
We need to address three enormous, interconnected, challenges: housing, transportation and climate.
All need our urgent attention. All require change, money and sacrifices. Each one is too big to solve without addressing the other two.
@Eliabeth, welcome to the shark tank. 😉
My wife often asked why I get involved regarding Development, get into debates with our neighbors online, etc. The reason is this…
…the biggest supporters of density, large scale development, corporate developers, saying we have a housing crisis, environmental crisis, primarily….
1. Lives in single family homes
2. Lives in less dense villages
3. Do not take the T every day
4. Their kids have either aged out of NPS or sends their kids to private schools
This is why I comment. This is why I endure the name calling. This is why I signed the petition for referendum. This is why I cannot support the Northland proposal.
This is why 800 units at NND is even being considered, despite a highly flawed public transportation system, that can’t handle a 31 degree day, let alone an increase in ridership.
@greg, I don’t speak for Right Size, and despite future difficulty getting a bar seat at O’Hara’s, this 26 unit project feels like the RIGHT SIZE. 😉
Go Pats!
Yes the thumbs up function hasn’t been working for many folks for a while now. Not sure why.
@Matt: It’s too bad you don’t speak for Right Size. They would benefit from your willingness to engage and explain your position in a non confrontational, good-humored way. But I do disagree with the way you stereotyped a whole lot of folks for reasons Fig just articulated, that’s unlike you.
Thanks for being part of this virtual community.
Matt:
My friend, I take the T/express bus/commuter rail most days. My kids are in NPS and I’ve got about another 12 years to go before they age out. I live in Newtonville, which is where the density is most going. And while I live in a single family at the moment, I hope to put in an accessory apartment at some point. And I’m pretty vocal about increased density in our villages.
You basically just pulled that last statement out of your orifice. And even if you were right, why should it matter? Does Greg or Chuck love the city less if they don’t take the T? Do folks who don’t have kids in the school anymore simply stop caring about the schools? Some of us live in some very tiny single families worth less than the condos going up. You get all upset when folks make sweeping statement about Right Side and NIMBY, and then you basically do them one worse.
As for the name calling, that trope is a bit played out. This is one of the nicest forums out there. If the worst you are being called is a NIMBY or a BANANA and you are shocked, shocked I say, that there is such foul language on the internet, well, perhaps you aren’t being entirely honest about how much that language actually makes a difference.
And for folks crying about this being a biased site, lately I’d say the loudest posters in the room are Right sizers. Jim posts constantly, Blue you post all the time, Matt is basically on here multiple times a day. Pat Irwin and Bob J, and ANP and others. Jerry also instituted a guest posting system so folks could author posts and Jim and others have done that. Greg and Sean and Jerry and a few others keep the site running, it is a volunteer operation, and they don’t ban you or mess with your posts unless you violate site rules. Seems pretty fair to me, and pretty hard to do, since the other Newton site that tried this failed after a few months from complete boredom and lack of page views…
As for this project, 26 units is actually quite dense for that small a lot. I would bet that it would translate out to a very dense project if expanded to a similar land mass as Northland. It is certainly more dense than Austin St. or Washington Place.
But it does make sense to me to have this type of varied small unit housing available by our transportation nodes.
Ok, I’m going back into hibernation for a while. I’ll post more in a few weeks when life is less crazy.
Elizabeth, welcome, post often, and just jump right in with any opinions. New posters are what make this site interesting, I can only take the back and forth between the usual posters so much before my eyes glaze over, myself included!
Matt I have liked your comment a couple of times . I get a red box where the thumbs up icon is and it never registers as a like
Claire,
The “smallish scale apartment building” you visited in Waltham, across from their Village Green, is Northland’s latest project, The Merc. And while we at Northland are very proud of The Merc, Northland Newton Development (NND) will be more exceptional in every way.
By way of comparison, The Merc, at 60 units per acre, is much more dense than NND, which will have 35 units per acre. (The NND site is 5 times larger than The Merc but will have 3 times the number of units)
And while we love the landscaping and open space at The Merc, NND will have ten acres of 0pen space designed but the world renowned architecture firm, SOM. Because Newton does not currently have a true Village Green, NND is creating one that is similar is size to Waltham’s village green, that will be programmed with beautiful historic artifacts reclaimed from the mill. In addition to the Village Green, NND will have a community playground, a splash park, large and small dog parks, community gardens, and will restore the currently unhealthy South Meadow Brook and daylight the historic waterfall adjacent to the mill. All of the foregoing will be beautifully set against the newly exposed north side of the historic mill and adjacent to the 1700 foot boundary with the Upper Falls Greenway (which will be beautified with the adjacent open spaces).
Moreover, NND will set a new standard for sustainable development in the 21st century. In addition to under grounding 1.5 miles of unsightly and unhealthy utility lines, NND will create the largest Passive House community in the United States. NND will be solar ready and will use all of the latest environmental materials.
What truly sets The Merc apart is the way it “sits” in the neighborhood. We weaved the development into the community with openings on all four sides. Local Waltham residents walk through, not around The Merc, when going to Brothers or just cutting the corner from Main to Moody. We accomplished that by placing all of the parking underground (similar to NND).
So you are correct that there is nothing currently like The Merc in Newton. However NND will be an order of magnitude nicer in every way: truly a national model of affordable housing, sustainability, historic preservation, all age friendly living, architecture, open space, community amenities, traffic demand management, and accessibility.
Since this development appears to be on .28 acres (and the NND site is 80 times larger), the comparable density at NND would yield 2000+ units (80 x 26).
@Masterplanner, my point wasn’t about the building. I parked in the back and was unimpressed with the “architecture as it was the standard prefab box look we see all over Brighton, Alston, Watertown and Waltham. But I was glad to see that brick was used on the Moody Street facing side of the building giving an appearance of quality missing in the back.
My point was the need to revitalized our existing village centers. We don’t need a new faux village center. Epcot isn’t Europe.
I want to get off the T in the evening, walk through a lovely village green, pick up some groceries and perhaps a bottle of wine in a welcoming market. Or maybe grab a bite at an outdoor cafe. And that vision doesn’t include a shuttle van.
Masterplanner,
Sorry for beating a dead horse, but since you raise all the positives of Northland, how and why did you let the City of Newton let the project and the process get away from you, such that it is now doomed to failure by virtue of the referendum.
Before arguing that you did all you could do vis a vis Right Size, that won’t cut it. You could have and should have done the bit more to get the job done. Especially during the critical window between the City Council vote and the submission of referendum signatures. At the least, I’m thinking your lawyers let you down by not thinking outside the box to then meet with Right Size and reach an agreement, which most likely only would have entailed modest modification.
Two big assumptions there Jim.
* Why do assume it is “now doomed to failure”. We’ll only know that after the referendum.
* Why do you assume an agreement with Right Size would only entail “modest modification”. Right Size has never given any indication of what they would find acceptable.
… and yes, that poor horse is pretty beaten up 😉
Jerry,
As for the assumptions, judgment based on experience and observation.
I agree with poor horse/dead horse, but until now never specifically had presented in response to a Northland Developer’s commenting on the merits of the project.
Things that make you same HMMM! From a different thread I learned that some areas of Newton offer residential parking permits. Newton Highlands is one of those areas. Additionally, residents can get between
1-6 Non-Resident Visitor Permits. That begs the question: How would residents of this new proposed development be handled under this program. Because if they are eligible, the fact that only one car is less of a concession.
Can someone with direct knowledge of the Newton Highlands Parking District speak to this?
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/99215
Not a big thing in the scheme of things, but since we’re talking about new construction adjacent to the Stevens Building (corner of Lincoln and Walnut Streets), I feel that the large tan brick exterior inserts above the Stevens Building’s second story windows, is an abomination to the exterior facade. Could those bricks be painted some shade of red coupled with some, even slight, architectural relief. I don’t think this needs to be in any way expensive — but the large glaring tan inserts more than detract from the original architectural and historic aesthetics of the building.
Another thing, since we’re talking Newton Highlands Village Center, T and housing, seems that the former Sunoco Gas Station/subsequent Auto Mechanics Shop (now up for sale or lease) coupled with the ugly next door Liquor Store/Office Building — across the street from O’Hara’s etc. — would be prime for new aesthetically pleasing apartments.
Does anyone know of any plans there?
O’hara’s and also workers (I think from salons & the Chiropractor) currently benefit from using the lot associated with the former auto shop for parking. That place is listed for lease as Office or Retail:
https://www.128cre.com/commercial-property-detail.php?id=100
I don’t believe the liquor store building is for sale.
Claire,
Residents of the proposed apartments would not be eligible for parking stickers under the Newton Highlands Parking District program because the site is not in an area that is included in the parking district. I am not sure what would happen if the district was expanded to included that part of Walnut Street.
Thanks Nathan for the clarification. I would have just given you a thumbs up, but mine aren’t registering/showing
@Jim Epstein,
Agreed re the Stevens Block Bldg, having been cobbled with the tan brick inserts in the arched window openings.
One wonders is there isn’t a third attic level in the bldg that couldn’t creatively be utilized. A mezzanine level? A third floor with windows?
Re the Sunaco bldg site. I understand that the liquor store has been approached to sell, but they have refused. I’ve also heard that the 3rd property next to the Liquor store owned by Schlesinger and Bookbinder,.. the local development industry lawyers, is up for sale. The three properties here put together would produce even more Transit oriented development in this village center. Bananas !
The developer’s images for 1149 Walnut Street that were presentated at the Area Council meeting are now available at http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/100849.
Nathaniel Lichtin
President
Newton Highlands Neighborhood Area Council
@ Greg R,… “Yes the apartments will be expensive,…”
@ Nathaniel L. See “ The developer images,..”.
Huh,????
When I read the minute for the Area Council Meeting I took away that there would be a requirement that the building look attractive and not cheap. The rendering in slide 4 looks ugly and cheap. Not a fan
I agree with the size and scope of the project but agree that the rendering is atrocious.
I agree with Claire and Patrick both. That building design needs the help of a higher power.
I gather the developer got a strong message about how the building should look at the meeting, and that this sketch was mainly to show size rather than style.
There was talk about a mansard roof. Is THAT their interpretation on the left corner. This will never fly! But I still support the size and location.
It’s difficult as an Architect to be outwardly critical of a fellow professionals work. It’s sometimes hard to determine the constraints placed on them by their clients . I once had a boss who used to say,.. “ when you’re in the cage with the gorilla, you do what the gorilla want to do “.
I can / should only say that I find myself much in agreement with @Claire @Patrick, @ Fig, & @ Meredith.
Will wonders never cease !
Looking at the linked perspective drawing (maybe things have changed) the proposal is a 4 story building and would be a much better fit with Highlands as a 3 story or 3.5 max or step back the last story from the street edge.
Also with the roof eve on the street and a zero setback line there could be a potential problem with sliding snow/ice which is you usually don’t see this roof form so close to the sidewalk. Your milage may vary.