I spent Monday night in my kitchen watching the Washington Street presentation over Councilor Emily Norton’s shoulder.
Thanks to the Facebook feed of the live discussion, I had a chance to sit in even as I took care of dinner, and monitored homework while my wife headed off to her own meetings. I’m sure I’m not the only one who couldn’t make it thanks to family duties, but by the sounds of the clapping and cheering I heard during certain city council comments and questions, I could tell that the gallery was likely full. My guess (and if I’m wrong, someone please correct me) is that the audience skewed older and mostly white, as is borne out by broader statistical analysis of Boston-area public meetings.
I’m not going to comment on the proposal itself here, but the part that frightened me most was the same one that Bryan Barash noted on Twitter: “This is a city where people drive. It’s going to stay that way.”
“This is a city where people drive. It’s going to stay that way.” Heard from a #NewtonMA City Councilor at Zoning meeting tonight.
That’s not good enough for me. We can do much more to provide diverse transportation options for those who want them. #MApoli
— Bryan Barash (@bryanbarash) February 12, 2019
That came from Councilor Lisle Baker and was met with cheers from the gallery. Yes, people were cheering that they can drive their cars.
We don’t have Millennials in Newton, but Somerville does. That’s the group currently working their way up the economic ladder. Somerville is seeing a drop in cars per worker in households. It’s also looking forward to the day when the Green Line comes through and 85% of the population is within .5 miles of the T, today that number is 65%.
I was at a panel discussion on Wednesday night in Somerville in which business people, property owners, and planners talked about the future of Union Square. When asked the number one issue it was clear: non-car transportation. The person representing Greentown Labs said that hey simply can’t have more parking, even as they continue to grow. Both economic development and commercial tax revenue depends on finding a solution to that problem. Expecting that everyone will drive is not a tenable solution. Another panelist, who leads a major employer in the area, noted simply that she doesn’t own a car, which received as much cheering there as Baker’s comments did in the Newton gallery.
The future of Newton is the people who don’t necessarily WANT to own a car. If we do not build for them then our city has no future. FULL STOP.
The through-the-windshield view on life isn’t limited to Newton, of course. On a recent War on Cars podcast, the hosts pointed out how one Mercedes Super Bowl ad laid out the driver fantasy that everything just happens at their whim. Want the light to go your way? Just say it. How many of us have been in traffic and just wished that everyone would go away, leaving us a clear, clean ride to our destination. This is what Councilor Baker described on Monday as he protested against a road diet. He wants the road from his house in Chestnut Hill to the stores in West Newton to be wide open for his personal convenience.
This isn’t reality, and creating roads that speed us through with as many lanes as possible doesn’t make for a pleasant way of life. Councilor Baker suggested that the solution for Washington Street may be to make it more like Route 9, pointing to the success of Chestnut Hill Square. I’m sure that many people find that area to be a compelling shopping experience, but it’s very different than, say, West Newton or Newtonville. From my perspective, the saddest thing about the Chestnut Hill shopping areas, in general, is that they turn their back on the T. Instead of creating walkable villages built around a nearby MBTA station (as is the case a single stop away in Newton Centre) they are car-based shopping concepts that create horrible walking experiences to and from the MBTA stop. This is especially upsetting when you realize how close “The Street” is to Boston College and the student population there. Instead of creating the vibrancy of Davis Square, we built a suburban shopping experience straight out of Paramus, New Jersey.
What happens when cars become more important than people? On Tuesday a student crossing at the corner of Albermarle and Crafts was hit by a slow-moving car, then the car left. A woman (who posted the story on Facebook) stopped to check on the kid who said he was OK, if a bit shaken. Later in the same comment thread the kids’ mom noted that this is the third time one of her children has been struck by a car while walking. This is not something we should accept. We owe our children more than that.
With Hello Washington Street we have a chance to build for the future. And while it’s true that we cannot rely on the MBTA to fix our public transportation woes, we will need Newton and the real estate developers to make transportation happen.
We need to plan on it.
If you love Somerville so much, why don’t you move there, instead of trying to bring it here?
“We don’t have Millennials in Newton, but Somerville does.”
Surely you realize that the oldest Millennials are pushing 40, right?
Just want to clarify: Nobody is getting rid of cars. But we can make it easier for less people to use them for less of their daily needs and commutes. It’s not all or nothing, it’s all about incentives.
Also, to Mary’s point, I am a millennial.
Given the demographics of Newton(families, seniors), why is this so surprising?
If I have an infant and a toddler, I’m going to drive to the grocery store. If its raining or cold, 100% I’m going to drive to the destination unless I want to risk them getting sick
If I’m a senior and its cold, I’m going to drive unless I want to risk getting sick. Which I DO NOT at this age.
In the 3 -4 months of nice weather, I would definitely walk short distances (1-2 mile), but the majority of time families and seniors need a car to get to their destination. Most ppl are not rich enough to Uber everywhere… Until there is a grocery store within 1 mile walk of most residents, car will be needed by families and seniors
I assume Somerville skews much younger with a smaller children population?
Development is coming whether we like it or not. This is an opportunity to plan for a better future for the city and its residents. We all seem to want walkable villages, as long as it includes the ability to walk within 100 feet of our destination while driving on traffic free roads. Those desires are mutually exclusive.
Also want to add, I believe we can encourage or trend Newton Families towards only having a single car:
– property tax discount for single car families
– shuttle bus to Cambridge. Needs to run frequently off hours too
– enter contractual obligations to MBTA to run more frequent express bus, commuter rail in exchange for more housing near stations
– bus only lane on the freeway to Boston during peak hours
Most residents don’t WANT a second car, they NEED it because of the poor public transportation which we should be negotiating with the MBTA and not just “hoping” they will do the right thing if we increase density. Spending their budget on an affluent white suburb is the last thing on their list politically (they can’t even maintain the tracks they currently have)
Newton should subsidize a private shuttle company as part of the density growth. Every % of new units require % of shuttle bus… actually put this as a zoning requirement so it doesn’t go away..
If we have most of these things, most families would only need 1 car. The shuttle bus to Cambridge is probably the only thing Newton could have full control of. The rest requires too much red tape
I agree with you @bugek. We need to take care of transportation as a city and not wait for the MBTA to fix it for us. As for parents of toddlers and cars, I’ve spoken to several families who have moved here or thought of moving here with young children. Many WANT to have a cargo bike to get around with their kids, but the infrastructure here makes that difficult at best.
And yes, many young families remain in Somerville. Bow Market, which is located in Union Square, programs itself specifically for young families. Even at the speaking event I attended last night, several parents brought their young kids.
When I say that we are missing Millennials this isn’t to say that none live here, but statistically, that is an age group that shows a significant dip as compared with others, even as the rest of metro Boston seems to engage with that group. The oldest are in their 30s, not yet 40.
Washington Street is such an ugly and archaic roadway. That anyone wants to preserve its current configuration is mind-boggling. Really? Do we want a mini-highway going through West Newton and Newtonville? People get so hung up about the lane reduction, as if crossing the city at 50MPH is the ultimate nirvana. Fortunately, a majority in out city government seems to understand that times are changing in Newton and priorities are shifting.
p.s.: If you run a live feed of a presentation, it would be nice to point your camera at the slides, for God’s sake.
Yes, I said pushing 40. The start of the millennial generation is usually considered 1981 and turning 38 this year. Go to any preschool or elementary school right now in Newton and many of the parents are in their 30s.
Enough about that. I hope that with all of this proposed development there could be a bus that goes up and down Washington Street from Woodland to Newton Corner. It would hit a green line station, the businesses on Washington Street like supermarket and restaurants, the commuter rail, the YMCA, the 57 bus, and could terminate close enough to Watertown Yard. People could get rid of a car if they can easily access the necessities like groceries, gym, swim lessons for kids. The express bus does travel down Washington but it isn’t good enough.
At the urging of the governor, 15 suburban mayors, including ours, signed a commitment a few months ago to add 185,000 housing units, much of it affordable, by 2030 in order to solve the regional “housing crisis.” If Newton is to contribute to this massive expansion of housing, which is largely caused by Boston’s restrictive land use policies, it should come with state aid to help finance the additional transit, schools and other infrastructure that will be required.
It would be great if the development is a net positive to our quality of life rather than a net negative, but it won’t happen unless we demand it. I doubt that extracting contributions from developers will be enough. We will have to see other funding sources and creative financing that I haven’t seen discussed to date. Perhaps it is in the works.
I went to most of the meeting, and in general I found comments by the City Councilors to be thoughtful. Hopefully that means they will begin asking for actual numbers that will be required to make this vision a reality. They should not rush into this until that happens.
I think the reason for the applause is that the people ( like me ) who live a block or so from Washington Street feel not listened too. The rest of the town wants more density, and one councilor wrote on this site ” I suppose it makes sense to more density where it already exists…”. To that I say oh, WHY? You want to make an already dense area more dense. Why does that make more sense? Especially when the only train is the commuter rail? I work in Southborough. Many people drive into newton center from elsewhere in Newton and beyond and park in the 12 hour meters to take the train downtown. People don’t have the luxury to choose where they work, they have to take a job where it is. At least that’s my experience. Especially in the software business where it’s discrimination means I’m not gonna be working at the start at least that’s my experience. Especially in the software business where it’s discrimination means I’m not gonna be working at start up ( nor would I want to ).
Lastly, some of us live in the present. The future looks rosy, with everyone riding bikes everywhere along tree lined streets. But that’s not here now. It’s probably not here in 10 years. People are not going to bike more than a few weeks a year. I did it many days a week all year for a few years when I worked on western Ave down near Harvard stadium. Then we had kids, and then came picking up from day care. Taking to music lessons. Taking to sports practice ( also carpooling the other kids). You cannot do this and bike to work, unless you have a stay at home partner with a car. And, employers are still not very forgiving. I remember rushing out of work to go pick up one of the kids to take them somewhere. So I just don’t understand how people can think that this is practical. It’s just not. More likely will be the switch to electric cars, so that people can do the kinds of errands that young families need to do. Those of us who remember how hectic life was when the kids were young – not to say that it wasn’t fun sometimes, at least speaking for myself I think it’s nuts to put that many resources into bikes as the future transportation. it’s just plain nuts. It doesn’t take into account the realities and near future lifestyles. Electric cars will do just as much climate change as a few people with no kids biking.
What are ‘Boston’s restrictive land use policies’? When I drive through Boston, I’m always struck by the amount of housing I see going up.
@Lucia, a variety of land use restrictions and other policies drive up the price of development in Boston so high that developers can only afford to build luxury and super-luxury housing, much of it sold to foreign investors as a place to park their money without occupying it. Some of the taxes on these high-end properties are used to pay for affordable housing, but not enough to meet demand, which is why Newton and other towns are being asked to pick up the slack.
@Laurie yes, you’re right that Boston is building too much luxury housing and not enough on the affordable side. You’re also right that foreign money is being parked here (that comes up frequently).
But it’s also true that most of the housing in the last decade has been built in Boston and not in the surrounding suburbs. It’s not that we’re being asked to pick up the slack, but to actually do our share. The goal, however, is to not just bring in housing, but to also attract commercial development along with it.
@Chuck, you are right that the commercial piece will be key in providing the necessary tax base to meet all, or at least some, of our city-wide goals for affordable housing, sustainability, and transportation. The city is going to have to do a big job in educating the public on this because right now, the piece that seems to be getting the most push-back is the 10-story office complexes that are proposed near the West Newton and Newtonville commuter stations. Without those, it’s hard to see where the money will come from to pursue these other goals.
Rick Frank, parents with young children in Newton often do need cars to get around. And I agree, bikes will likely never represent a big change in mode of travel for this specific task, or for a bunch of different kinds of commuter travel in Newton. Hats off to those who make it work.
I will extend your example, though, to show where bikes can make a difference. Kids. Those same kids that need to be driven to their preschool doctor’s appointments grow up. We can live in a City where parents drive their kids everywhere, then pass on their vehicles to them so that they can drive everywhere. Or we can build infrastructure and interesting places that allow them to walk or bike safely where they need, and where they want, to go.
Our neighborhood schools are built around this concept. We talk about the value of independence and confidence and fitness but we don’t make roads compatible with kids safely being kids. And school traffic and kid errand traffic has a huge impact on local traffic in Newton.
And this isn’t some pipe dream. Kids walk and ride their bikes on the narrow neglected sidewalks of Washington St every day. But we could do so much better. And walkers and bikers bring more walkers and bikers because people see what’s possible. Plus, Washington St is flat as a pancake. E-bikes and e-scooters will make the same facilities useful to more people.
And yes, that needs to be duplicated and integrated with mass transit options, but that’s further from our direct control.
Commuters are not the only traffic, especially in Newton.
I was there in the Galley.
People were not cheering that they can drive cars. People were cheering because Lisle Baker was talking common sense. Something I would ague is lacking around here. Whilst I did not partake in the clapping, I’m glad people did. These big rezoning proposals are not popular.
@Simon, I agree that Councilor Baker shouldn’t be publicly chastised for stating the truth that we are a car-oriented town. If people are not allowed to tell the truth, then we’re never going to come up with transportation solutions that will actually be used by people.
Planning for better transit options is a great idea, but in order to plan options that people will actually use, we need to listen to them honestly when they say what they will and will not do. Otherwise we’re planning transit options for these mythical people that are going to load their toddlers on a lime bike, take it to the nearest transit hub to get on a bus to go somewhere else to run errands. I think the number of Newtonians who will be signing up for that will be modest .
For me, the operative slogan is “No development without infrastructure.” Whether that involves better maintained and more extensive drainage and sewage systems, more local and regional public transportation, or safer roads for pedestrians and cyclists, the infrastructure must improve for development to proceed.
These days, more than ever, both ends of a couple must work to afford to live in a community like Newton. Hence, if our dream be to encourage single-car families, then these largely professional young people need a way to get to their workplaces, which may be in Boston, Cambridge, or out along 95 and even 495. Going west via public transportation, unfortunately, is quite a challenge. The problems are extensive.
I myself bike with some frequency eight months of the year and occasionally the other four months, when conditions allow it. For most residents of Newton, it’s just too dangerous under current conditions to hop on your bike and pedal to Trader Joe’s or Whole Foods to shop. As a member of Bike Newton, I and my compatriots would like to see a plan to eliminate the danger insofar as it is possible.
Infrastructure, alas, comes with a steep price tag. To me, Newton, whose median income approaches $110,000 per year, has a modest tax rate that ought to climb. But my voice will be drowned out by the majority that believes that we are taxed too much. So it goes…
You can bike to Whole Foods, but anything more than a bag of groceries is going to be hard to fit in your backpack.
It’s actually more efficient to have everyone have their groceries delivered by one delivery vehicle.
Maybe we were bad role models, but the first thing my kids wanted to do after getting their drivers license was drive the car….
Install a basket on the bike. I can get all my groceries home that way.
http://blogs.harvard.edu/lamont/2019/01/14/riverside-mbta-developers-korff-normandy-negotiating-bad-faith/
@colleen see the comment from your self-herald charrette. is this part of the smoke screen or is it the problem?
from your Area Council survey
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/91118
“I think people work very hard to afford newton and we already support Metco with education so I do not think we are obligated to add more affordable housing as it will change the entire community and make newton less desirable”
“Change the entire community” comments like these are why this article and view from a sitting councilor is so important.
Lets just call it what it is shall we..
Don’t understand where people are getting this idea of a utopian society where no one drives is possible? We live in New England where it’s freezing (literally) 25% of the time, if not periods of rain and snow; with weeks of blistering heat and humidity in the Summer.
As a dual working household, we go grocery shopping once per week – too many bags and weigh to fit on the basket of a bike (sorry Chuck). And affordable housing? Aspirationally ideal, but the Developers are planning for luxury, market rate apartments and “affordable” is relative. Pretty certain anyone who can afford those rates would prefer the perks of that income bracket – including the freedom and convenience of a (nice) car.
Newton is a very nice walk in the Spring and Fall, but let’s not confuse New England with San Diego. All for reducing our carbon footprint wherever we can, but let’s not assuming flooding our neighborhoods with luxury apartments will make cars go away.
Matt,
A more realistic goal is to reduce 2 car families to 1 car. Removing the need for an extra car to drive to work to boston, cambridge is doable I think with a uber-like shuttle bus with bus only lanes.
In 10 years, it may even be possible with self driving cars (you drive to nearest express bus or T, CR and the car drives itself back home)
And this whole…”let’s add more density where density exists” argument doesn’t make sense either, nor is it fair. But how about this….
Newton has a large parcel of land on Tyler Terrace – a hilly green space primarily used as a cut thru between Mason Rice, the Newton Center playground and Newton Center itself. YES, NEWTON CENTER.
Putting a 300-400 apartments make a whole lot of sense at that location. It’s right next door to Mason Rice, so families with young kids can simply roll them out of bed into the school. A huge playground is already there so the Developer would have one less thing to build. MBTA busses traverse Center Street and the T stop is a short walk away. And for all who have lamented about all the banks going into Newton Center, what better way to support a more traditional retail base with 300-400 apartments right in Newton Center?
And lest not forget affordable housing. Clearly the Developers can only be profitable building luxury apartments, so why not the city, State or Feds build this project instead so “affordable” doesn’t end up being $2,500/mo for a 1 bdrm unit.
Can everyone get on board with this? Or does NIMBY (as folks in the some of the more “dense” villages in Newton are often accused) exist in Newton Center as well? Or do we just wave the hypocrisy flag and call it a day?
@bugek, totally down with trying to reduce from 2 (or 3) cars to 1. Just frustrated at the notion that these large developments is the way to get there. With you 100%.
Matt, large mixed use developments allow simultaneous development of housing and useful services such as grocery/convenience, recreation, and in some cases medical/pharmacy. All of these account for new convenient walkable trips in a city where that hasn’t always been possible.
Agreed that isn’t the only way to do things.
Mike, take out the word “large” and I’m right there with you!
Defining “large enough” really gets to the heart of things. The project and its neighbors (existing businesses and residents as well as other developments) need to have their own minimal “center of gravity” to keep local errands walkable and to build a sense of community.
Too small or too disconnected and they either don’t offer residents the adjacent businesses and services they need; not the right mix and they don’t offer the resident customers that businesses need. In either case, that means avoidable inbound or outbound trips.
Too big and they again fail in self-subsistence (the “exceptional” trips overwhelm the local infrastructure), or they don’t integrate well into the larger neighborhood fabric.
This thought process could be the criteria for multi-use projects: provide a minimal level of self-sufficiency on-premises. Developers can’t dictate tenants, I guess, though.
Matt, instead of building on a playground build on the parking lot in the Centre of Newton Centre.