Many of us on Village 14 have been following the Northland project closely over the past three years and are quite familiar with the ways the project has changed over the years (for example, it shrunk from 2 million square feet to 1.1 million square feet and about a year ago Northland decided to place all the parking underground in order to create more parks and open space).
But as we get closer to the March 3 referendum, I’ve been running into a lot people who understandably are just beginning to learn about the project; including some who aren’t even that familiar with the location.
That was the case with a neighbor, who recently asked me how “800 apartments, as well as office, retail and parks could all fit into Marshalls Plaza?”
The answer is, it can’t. Marshalls Plaza is only a small portion of the three parcels making up the 22.7 acre project that a super majority of the Newton City Council has rezoned and approved, 17-7, for redevelopment.
If you want to better understand the pros and cons of this debate, check out the web sites for the Yes side or the No side. But if you’re just starting to learn about this and aren’t totally familiar with the location — or what it would be replacing — begin by watching this video tour created last year by Jenna Fisher at Newton Patch.
Disclosure: Greg Reibman is the President of the Newton-Needham Chamber of Commerce of which Northland Investment Corporation is a financial sponsor.
Newton-Needham Chamber of Commerce and Yes for Newton’s Future are tenants of Northland Investment Corporation at 281 Needham St., which is one of the parcels subject to the referendum question.
@David: Although I’m not sure what that has to do with a video showing what the site looks like, thanks for the plug for the chamber!
And the proper term is Northland is a “chamber member” along with 900 other area and businesses and nonprofits.
Yes Northland is also our landlord. And even though its going to be a pain in the butt to move if the “yes” vote prevails (I hate moving!), the chamber still supports this project because sometimes one has to endure inconveniences for the greater good. And we firmly believe this project is good for Newton.
@Greg – thank you for posting this. I found it very helpful for better understanding the site as it currently is and the proposal.
@David M – the video is by Jenna Fisher of the Patch. Neither is affiliated with the Chamber or Northland to my knowledge.
That area sure is a depressing dump, and always has been.
It must be polluted up the ying-yang – I remember when St. Regis Paper was in the factory buildings along Oak, and who knows what chemicals were being dumped on the other sites along the train tracks.
The Northland development would be a huge improvement.
If I were one of the project’s more vocal opponents – say, the people who moved into the neighborhood behind the explosion-prone sheet metal factory across the street, and who proceeded to perform their own “rightsizing” by tearing down the existing 70-year-old housing stock for the construction of their speculative McMansions – I would look at this project and say, my home value and overall neighborhood quality is going to greatly increase because of it.
Greg, as one of Northland Investment Corporations most vocal supporters I just presumed they’d find a spot for you in one of their many developments and then maybe in this new mall if it gets built.
If you do end up moving into the Northland Mall can you pledge to us you’ll take the free shuttle to work and never drive?
@David: I see what you’re trying to do here, which is to take this thread off topic because for some reason the photo and video here makes you uncomfortable.
But I will answer your question and hope we can then get back on topic.
Whether the chamber moves back onto Northland’s property in two or three years when it’s built, I’m absolutely going to ride these shuttles and so will the rest of my family.
Free service every ten minutes, sixteen hours a day, seven days a week. That’s transformative.
Greg, I don’t see how my comment is off-topic as I’m only responding to what you wrote. If you don’t want to continue this discussion then don’t. Your choice.
The photo is distressing. It’s a shame Northland has let its property fall into such disrepair and become a blight on the community. Their behaviour certainly doesn’t lead me to believe they should be rewarded with a waiver from City code.
The video of this property is EXACTLY WHY people should vote NO.
Northlad has let this vacant and in disrepair for the eventual pay day of mixed use. Equally telling is that they could afford to leave it as a ghost town for so many years. Mixed use is their unicorn.
To say a No vote on March 3rd will trigger Northland to abandon their strategy and to right to 40b is (as Right Size has been accused often), “FEAR MONGERING”. A shuttle bus to Newton Highlands and subsidized T passes is a value add, a hope, and a prayer, not a traffic mitigation strategy.
This is chess, not checkers….and I’m still voting no.
To @Michael’s point above, what if the site is polluted? Who will be responsible for the environmental clean up? With so much industrial use of the site in the past, it does make sense that there could be soil contamination that would have to be remediated (or possibly Northwood has already looked into it?). I am asking this question in search of an honest and straightforward answer — have not yet decided which way to vote.
@Matt when I listen to traffic engineers discuss changes that truly have an impact, the idea of “high occupancy vehicles” is front and center. In laymen’s terms, a “high occupancy vehicle” is a bus or a train. Cars — whether electric, self-driving or part of ride hailing — usually transport just one or two people in the same amount of physical space.
I would add that Needham Street is about to undergo a state-funded rebuilding program that would not only add better pedestrian access, but also aligns crossings to reduce left turns and curb cuts. The EXTENSIVE and NUMEROUS studies of Needham Stret have all pointed to curb cuts and left turns as key problems with traffic (moreso than pure volume).
So my question is: if a regular shuttle, as well as T-Passes designed to get people into and out of Boston, coupled with a walkable feel to the neighborhood on a street with existing life amenities (grocery, restaurants, takeout, dry cleaning, etc.), and reduced parking, all do not equate to traffic mitigation, then what would you say is missing from the strategy?