×

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
File name:

-

File size:

-

Title:

-

Author:

-

Subject:

-

Keywords:

-

Creation Date:

-

Modification Date:

-

Creator:

-

PDF Producer:

-

PDF Version:

-

Page Count:

-

Page Size:

-

Fast Web View:

-
Choose an option Alt text (alternative text) helps when people can’t see the image or when it doesn’t load.
Aim for 1-2 sentences that describe the subject, setting, or actions.
This is used for ornamental images, like borders or watermarks.
Preparing document for printing…
0%
Document is loading Loading Glossary…
Powered by Konveio
View all

Comments

Close

Commenting is closed for this document.

in reply to Jane Hanser's comment

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.
0 replies
in reply to Ross'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!
0 replies
in reply to Tarik Lucas'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.
0 replies
in reply to Tarik Lucas'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!
0 replies
in reply to John Pelletier'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.
0 replies
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.
0 replies
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.
0 replies

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.
0 replies
in reply to ward2voter543'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.
0 replies
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.
0 replies
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.
0 replies
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.
0 replies

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.
0 replies

KMKausch Dec 2 2018 at 11:36PM on page 29

Yes
0 replies

KMKausch Dec 2 2018 at 11:35PM on page 29

Yes
0 replies

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.
0 replies

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.
0 replies

KMKausch Dec 2 2018 at 11:30PM on page 27

Really like this approach!
0 replies
in reply to John Pelletier'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?
0 replies

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.
0 replies
in reply to Tarik Lucas'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.
0 replies

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.
0 replies
in reply to Kathleen Hobson'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
0 replies

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.
0 replies

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?
0 replies
in reply to Hattie Gawande's comment

Lori Green Dec 2 2018 at 11:12PM on page 38

Will they actually be affordable?
0 replies
in reply to Nathan G Phillips'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.
0 replies
in reply to Newtonian Person 1'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
0 replies
in reply to Beth Smith's comment

Lori Green Dec 2 2018 at 11:03PM on page 31

That would be an improvement.
0 replies

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.
0 replies

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.
0 replies
in reply to janepipik'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?
0 replies

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.
0 replies
in reply to Jane Hanser'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.
0 replies

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.
0 replies

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...
0 replies
in reply to Newtonresident'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.
0 replies
in reply to Tarik Lucas's comment

John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:53PM on page 38

No its not, its all ground floor commercial...see note "E"
0 replies

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.
0 replies
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.
0 replies
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?
0 replies
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
0 replies
in reply to Newtonresident's comment

Peter Bruce Dec 2 2018 at 10:51PM on page 7

Building by non-profits is a popular alternative.
0 replies

Lori Green Dec 2 2018 at 10:50PM on page 27

No! That would destroy the village.
0 replies

John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:48PM on page 36

Yes please! Protected bike lanes are critical!
0 replies

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.
0 replies
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.
0 replies
in reply to jim d's comment

John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:47PM on page 36

Agree! really valuable community asset
0 replies

John Pelletier Dec 2 2018 at 10:46PM on page 34

certainly seems a bit much!
0 replies

Hattie Gawande Dec 2 2018 at 10:46PM on page 38

Yay! Love more housing with affordable options.
1 reply
View all