Loading Glossary… Bryan Barash Dec 3 2018 at 12:35AM on page 7
Jane - Completely agree. Moving towards more energy efficient living needs to be a core element of future zoning.
Public Document Comments
×
Warning message
The installed version of the browser you are using is outdated and no longer supported by Konveio. Please upgrade your browser to the latest release.Washington Street Vision Plan, Part 1
Leave your comments by Dec 2, 2018
Start here! This section includes: Critical introductions to the project and process; Instructions for the community on how to use this document; Scenarios to help visualize which zoning tools are preferred
Commenting is closed for this document.
in reply to TamaraBliss's comment
Bryan Barash Dec 3 2018 at 12:34AM on page 7
Single family living for seniors and others with mobility issues is key, I agree Ross!
in reply to geoffrey sherwood's comment
Bryan Barash Dec 3 2018 at 12:24AM on page 7
Tarik - That's why we have inclusionary zoning, and our new ordinance we're working on will hopefully increase it and expand it to wider income levels. We need housing options for all income levels.
in reply to Auburndalian's comment
Bryan Barash Dec 3 2018 at 12:20AM on page 7
There are some great techniques to reduce parking without reducing the availability of parking. We need to pursue these options!
in reply to Newtonian Person 1's comment
Bryan Barash Dec 3 2018 at 12:18AM on page 7
John has a good point, parking spaces are so valuable here, the more we can reduce them the more we can free up capital for other infrastructure improvements.
in reply to Tarik Lucas's comment
Bryan Barash Dec 3 2018 at 12:14AM on page 9
I'm not sure the fact that's it's city DPW now means that's the best use of the space long term.
in reply to Tarik Lucas's comment
Bryan Barash Dec 3 2018 at 12:09AM on page 12
Yeah, I agree, the movie theater is key.
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:59PM on page 39
Newton zoning should address architectural appropriateness -- building materials, scale, density for a single structure. Is there anything that would currently prevent the entirety of Washington Street from become a wall of mirrored glass buildings like downtown Boston? If we want to keep our city as a place that's a collection of varied and inviting small villages, built to human scale, the city needs to implement aesthetic guidelines. A single developer with a misguided vision could permanently change the character of our town and the residents would have no recourse.
in reply to fred@onthelane.com's comment
fred@onthelane.com Dec 2 2018 at 11:55PM on page 5
Responding to ward2voter643: I didn’t have cows and village greens in mind when I used the world “village.” However, it’s an idea worth considering. I asked Robert Korff the other day what he planned to do with the N’ville Post Office plot that he’s just purchased. He didn’t say, but he asked me what I thought he should do. At the time I had no answer, though the obvious answer is to leave the Post Office there. But since that’s not realistic, maybe a good use of the land would be for a mini-common. We could indeed put cows there if we wanted and get communal milk. You think I’m just fooling around, but really, some creative village-oriented thinking might be just what’s needed. The only thing that might not fit is stickball, which was not a village sport, I don’t think. It was played in very dense urban neighborhoods, far removed from any commons.
in reply to Jane Hanser's comment
Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 11:54PM on page 8
68% of the city's rentals were priced below $1900/mo. a few years ago. This according to the Mayor's housing strategy report. i.e. RKG report “Housing Needs Analysis and Strategic Recommendations,” prepared for Newton’s Planning Department. P. 41. Market rate 2 bedrooms in upscale complexes like the Avalon and Woodland Station then were renting for about $3500/mo. They have recently fallen back to that level. Such complexes are probably the best comparison for what new market rate apartments will rent for.
in reply to ciaofpk's comment
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:51PM on page 38
Agreed. There's little precedence for 6 stories. Three or four stories would be better suited. And there should be variety of height and limits on the mass/length of a single structure.
in reply to Leewarren1@gmail.com's comment
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:48PM on page 36
Those of us who live on the wider and connecting streets in the neighborhood will be deluged with traffic. I already have a line of cars on my street at rush hour waiting to turn onto Waltham Street. Can't bear to imagine what will happen with this development and narrowing of Washington St.
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:36PM on page 27
Nice inclusion of friendly materials - brick, large windows with varying details, public space and greenery. Still feels like West Newton.
KMKausch Dec 2 2018 at 11:36PM on page 29
Yes
KMKausch Dec 2 2018 at 11:35PM on page 29
Yes
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:33PM on page 26
This looks reasonable as compared with 6 story buildings, but there are few places in Newton with this scale of building aside from Newton Corner & Needham St. These are both forbidding city-like centers, and not at all the vibe of West Newton.
1 & 2 story buildings are more suitable.
1 & 2 story buildings are more suitable.
dianep Dec 2 2018 at 11:32PM on page 6
How can we preserve existing character, if we are doubling the height of the buildings?
When they refer to courtyards and parks, how large are they. Are they large enough to accommodate people who don't live in the building where the park is located? I doubt it.
When they refer to courtyards and parks, how large are they. Are they large enough to accommodate people who don't live in the building where the park is located? I doubt it.
KMKausch Dec 2 2018 at 11:30PM on page 27
Really like this approach!
in reply to Tarik Lucas's comment
Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 11:29PM on page 8
The Principle Group's survey had a similar finding in its only question about density. 65% thought it was (somewhat to very) important to minimize development on Wash. St. What's your evidence to the contrary?
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:28PM on page 24
Why would 6-stories even be considered for this village? Currently the majority of buildings are 1-story. ONE. The village is personable, walkable, and consistent in scale with Newton Highlands, Newton Center, Waban, etc. This change would be a poor choice. Shadows would reach across the street. You may as well move to any other city.
in reply to Auburndalian's comment
Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 11:20PM on page 7
The lack of parking also hurts are local businesses. With Governor Baker in charge, major improvements in mass transit seem unlikely. And not that many additional people are going to bike to work, especially in the colder half of the year, even with protected bike lanes. For now we need as much or more parking than we now have.
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:19PM on page 20
Incremental building has the great advantage of diversity over time. That is consistent with Newton's current building style. We are not a community of homogeneity. But, it's clear from this drawing (is it any different from the previous option?) -- zoning for height and mass will be important. Incremental doesn't mean human scale unless it's in the zoning code. This looks like a city, not Newton.
in reply to Newton 2's comment
dianep Dec 2 2018 at 11:18PM on page 5
I don't think anyone is proposing one story buildings in the village. We want to maintain the 2-3 story buildings
dianep Dec 2 2018 at 11:14PM on page 5
These buildings are mostly residential. They will not bring in enough taxes to pay for themselves let alone anything in additional like infrastructure.
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:13PM on page 18
Question
A courtyard is really advantageous to the residents of the building, but are largely hidden from view and use by the community. How could they be zoned to break up the building mass from the street? And to increase the appearance of green space and accessibility by non-residents?
in reply to Hattie Gawande's comment
Lori Green Dec 2 2018 at 11:12PM on page 38
Will they actually be affordable?
in reply to natekauf's comment
Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 11:07PM on page 7
I'd rather ride on the paths along the Charles. Too much pollution and noise by the PIKE. Even with protected bike lanes.
in reply to Jay Walter's comment
Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 11:04PM on page 7
If Newton could charge impact fees like Somerville, we'd likely be able to derive better bargains from developers. Somerville got $112 million in community benefits for its Union Square developments. I don't think we got a million for Washington Place. Impact fees require home rule petitioning. Lots of the major California cities have them
in reply to Beth Smith's comment
Lori Green Dec 2 2018 at 11:03PM on page 31
That would be an improvement.
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 11:02PM on page 9
Question
Isn't this the location of the Masonic building? A lovely iconic building in Newtonville. Why is this colored for improvement rather than retaining historic quality? I see several other significant buildings in grey which I'd be certain the community would want to see 'green'. Who was consulted to prior to making these choices?
These maps are super hard to follow without the main roads labeled.
These maps are super hard to follow without the main roads labeled.
KMKausch Dec 2 2018 at 11:01PM on page 7
Greater housing diversity off Washington Street will bring increased residents, yes, but with thoughtful planning that makes accessibility a priority, the impact can be a positive one.
in reply to mhalle's comment
mhalle Dec 2 2018 at 10:59PM on page 23
My comment isn't about L'Aroma itself, it's about its surround. My point is that it survives in spite of about every disadvantage thrown at it. We should be doing everything we can to help places like this survive. This picture says it all. How many other neighborhood treasures, points of civic interaction and enjoyment, could exist in the right environment?
Lori Green Dec 2 2018 at 10:56PM on page 29
Six stories is still too high - these building would be too massive for the area. Doesn't seem incremental to me.
in reply to Tarik Lucas's comment
ward2voter543 Dec 2 2018 at 10:56PM on page 19
Fiorella's (sp?) in Newtonville has a great outdoor area, wish it were bigger. We ate out there a couple of weeks ago and it was lovely.
John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:56PM on page 39
Smaller lots are a big deal and pretty important to mirror the types of development that fit better together vs large block sized units.
John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:55PM on page 38
I understand what is trying to happen here, larger massing to block the pike/train where it comes up close to the grade of Washington but I would prefer something a bit less as toward this end of the square. You still have bus service but its now quite a bit more of a walk to any rail option...
in reply to Beth Smith's comment
Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 10:53PM on page 7
A large minority, according to the NAC survey, is also positive about rent controls.
People are very worried about gentrification.
People are very worried about gentrification.
in reply to ctema's comment
John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:53PM on page 38
No its not, its all ground floor commercial...see note "E"
KMKausch Dec 2 2018 at 10:52PM on page 6
More civic spaces will lead to more community engagement. This is a need that this project could fulfill. I say move ahead because Washington street needs it.
in reply to DavidL's comment
dianep Dec 2 2018 at 10:52PM on page 4
The Affordable housing will not be for just Newton residents, but it will be for anyone in the area. The rent will be too high for the workforce contingent.
in reply to sarlenshep's comment
ward2voter543 Dec 2 2018 at 10:51PM on page 18
I have some news for you: if you live in Newton, you live in a city. Now, what kind of a city would you prefer it to be?
in reply to Bob Kavanagh's comment
John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:51PM on page 36
Ever been to Portland, ME? Lots of restaurants still have outdoor seating areas in the winter, but they are enclosed sometimes with a temporary front, include heating elements etc. You might be surprised that some folks will do it even on cold days! Somebody eating at a table in a courtyard with an umbrella in the winter, no not gonna happen you need something more :D
in reply to Beth Smith's comment
Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 10:51PM on page 7
Building by non-profits is a popular alternative.
Lori Green Dec 2 2018 at 10:50PM on page 27
No! That would destroy the village.
John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:48PM on page 36
Yes please! Protected bike lanes are critical!
EliotAve Dec 2 2018 at 10:48PM on page 7
Great idea to ensure historically significant buildings are protected. Even better – to increase community knowledge about the village history by celebrating it, renovating, referencing it, versus losing it. West Newton's center has quite a few architectural gems. The building that houses Sweet Tomatoes was The Railroad Hotel / Seth Davis Tavern from 1831 and provided lodging for Stagecoach travelers. Look above the nondescript CVS storefront and the 1875 brick building has charming arched window and decorative detail that reduces the buildings bulk. If we loose this visual history, our city will loose its heritage, charm, and sense of place.
in reply to luciec@comcast.net's comment
Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 10:48PM on page 7
A majority of respondents to the Newtonville Area Council Survey on Washington Street said they would like more housing built by non-profits. This could help fulfill what you'd like to see.
in reply to jim d's comment
John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:47PM on page 36
Agree! really valuable community asset
John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:46PM on page 34
certainly seems a bit much!
Hattie Gawande Dec 2 2018 at 10:46PM on page 38
Yay! Love more housing with affordable options.
View all
Comments
Close