Washington Street Zoning Toolkit

EliotAve Dec 3 2018 at 12:17AM on page 1

Suggestion

For those of us not familiar with zoning codes, I'd like to see a series of Washington St Vision Plan teaching sessions to help the community learn about building codes - past, present, future options. I've been at public events where the industry attendees can confidently provide input (pro-development from past experience) but the average homeowner is not able to contribute. We all live here, pay taxes, and should be brought up to speed on this complex topic.

aconant Dec 2 2018 at 11:18PM on page 3

Suggestion

Residents never asked the city to increase the density and height of buildings nor the population. Residents did not request that the City change the villages into urban enclaves and intersperse apartment buildings next to our homes. We want to preserve our properties as is and preserve our community and villages. The Mayor never mentioned in her campaign for office that she would transform the city and add thousands to our population. I will not vote for the Mayor if this plan is approved.

aconant Dec 2 2018 at 11:17PM on page 3

Suggestion

Residents never asked the city to increase the density and height of buildings nor the population. Residents did not request that the City change the villages into urban enclaves and intersperse apartment buildings next to our homes. We want to preserve our properties as is and preserve our community and villages. The Mayor never mentioned in her campaign for office that she would transform the city and add thousands to our population. I will not vote for the Mayor if this plan is approved.

aconant Dec 2 2018 at 11:17PM on page 3

Suggestion

Residents never asked the city to increase the density and height of buildings nor the population. Residents did not request that the City change the villages into urban enclaves and intersperse apartment buildings next to our homes. We want to preserve our properties as is and preserve our community and villages. The Mayor never mentioned in her campaign for office that she would transform the city and add thousands to our population. I will not vote for the Mayor if this plan is approved.

aconant Dec 2 2018 at 11:06PM on page 3

Suggestion

Residents never indicated an interest in increasing the density or height of our villages or of the city. Mayor Fuller never said anything about changing the city's character or adding thousands of residents when she was running for office. I will not vote for the Mayor again if these proposals pass.

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 11:05PM on page 3

Suggestion

This does not look like a 'village' center. It looks more urban and dense than the village architecture and scale exemplified in most of Newton's villages. Why encourage dramatic changes/increases to the village scale which exists and has been successful for many years?

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 11:01PM on page 3

Some of these structures look like large single units. Should show more varied examples of single unit structures.

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 10:57PM on page 2

Suggestion

Parking minimums should be maintained. South Boston had reduced parking requirements in recent years, and found the parking space shortage had dramatic consequences increased parking on neighborhood streets. They have since required more parking from developers. We should learn from other communities to avoid similar issues.

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 10:53PM on page 2

Suggestion

Newton would benefit from continuing to prioritize village/human scale in Newton. Varied building heights and roof lines for buildings from 1-3 stories with a historic flavor would be more palatable to most residents than drastic change to zoning to allow larger and higher buildings.

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 10:47PM on page 2

Suggestion

Not in favor of allowing buildings 3 or fewer stories in height to be approved by right. This does not take into account potential density which may be associated with these buildings which would still warrant a special permit.

Pizd@Newton Dec 2 2018 at 10:47PM on page 1

Question

Will this be high reasonable quality construction or will this be more of the all wood tall death building construction one can see in Watertown? With the more narrowed streets and stressed infrastructure it will be terrible life safety and future upkeep problems. Who is getting paid off here? Making the streets narrow is a bad idea given the population density, but not a surprise since it seems the traffic engineer in Newton should have chosen another line of work.

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 10:45PM on page 2

Suggestion

Rather than emphasizing the importance of stepping down height when located near residential neighborhoods, I think we should prioritize the importance of keeping zoning compatible with existing neighborhoods. The BU1 zone is worth maintaining as the predominent zone in or near village centers and residential areas. (building heights of 1, 2 , or in some cases 3 stories could be appropriate near residential neighborhoods.

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 10:31PM on page 2

Suggestion

This document presumes zoning should be changed to allow for larger scale buildings. Many residents do not support changing from village scale to city scale zoning on Washington St.

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 10:28PM on page 2

Suggestion

I think Newton should offer incentives to preserve historic buildings, not just their facades. Newburyport could be an inspiration. They worked to restore historic buildings in their downtown, rather than razing them in the 80s. Their downtown is now a destination which people value because it is historic. If there has to be development on Washington St, incentives for keeping historic buildings should be a priority.

Seth1 Dec 2 2018 at 10:17PM on page 1

Suggestion

This document is cumbersome and time consuming to review and comment on in a restricted timeframe. I also think this format is not inclusive to people who are not as comfortable using technology, as well as those with work and family responsibilities who may not have sufficient time to provide feedback using this type of platform. Since Newton emphasizes the importance of inclusiveness and diversity, I would encourage city staff and govt to offer more equitable means of providing feedback through other channels. For example, sending a short word document and posting it on the city website with drawings of a few potential scenarios, and allowing people to reply by email would be a good alternative way of providing feedback. Shorter different documents sent or posted at spaced intervals would give people more opportunity to digest material and comment in a more manageable way. This platform excludes and limits people, as evidenced by the low participation rate.

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:16PM on page 38

4 to 6 stories too large for village centers

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:15PM on page 37

4 stories is OK with set back on upper story. Anything larger is will change and in my opinion destroy the village centers

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:14PM on page 36

4 stories is OK but anything over that is too tall for the town centers

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:13PM on page 35

4 stories MAX - no "up to 12 stories"

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:12PM on page 33

5-12 stories will destroy the fabric of the town center. It is totally out of place here.

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:08PM on page 15

But most of these bordering neighborhoods are now in the proposed zoned R3 and the maximum height is 4.5 stories for a civic building. This means the "step down" building could be 5.5 stories tall. I think it should not be more than 1 story above what is presently there or 3 stories maximum - which ever is taller.

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:07PM on page 14

5 to 12 stories are not appropriate

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:06PM on page 12

6 stories too tall. If you allow 6 the developers will build 6 not 2!

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:03PM on page 10

This looks OK but not the 5, 6 10 or even 12 story buildings in the earlier drawings!

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:00PM on page 6

this is too big for this neighborhood

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 10:00PM on page 7

no

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 9:56PM on page 2

good idea but only allow 4 stories

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 9:53PM on page 2

They should not be allowed more than 1 story higher than what is there now or 3 stories maximum. The new proposed rules allow for much higher buildings than there are now in R3 districts. R3 allows 4.5 story civic buildings and therefore these other buildings could be 5.5 stories in the "step down" areas. This is not a step down to a 2 story building!!!

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 9:50PM on page 2

The plan should not allow higher than 4 stories

Pam Dec 2 2018 at 9:49PM on page 2

I think you need to add max 15' to the mix

Linda Fritz Dec 2 2018 at 9:03PM on page 35

Ah, but this needs to be filled in with a definite maximum limit and let's not make it too large.

Kathy Pillsbury Dec 2 2018 at 8:52PM on page 14

Suggestion

Glad there will be some taller options especially near train stations but not necessarily near highway entrances. Near train stops encourages more walkability and public transit. Near highways may encourage more cars -- which we do not need.

Linda Fritz Dec 2 2018 at 8:52PM on page 24

5 units on a single lot seems like a lot of units on single lot. Are these to be located in current two-family lots? If so, I would not like to see this change. It seems like a recipe for congestion.

EdDailey Dec 2 2018 at 8:47PM on page 12

If mixed use development is confined to an edge of an historic village, might the new development draw uses away from the historic village, thus depriving the historic village of its commercial uses?

Kathy Pillsbury Dec 2 2018 at 8:46PM on page 9

Glad to see this size multi unit included. Options for areas with well-designed and landscaped multi units is needed in Newton.

EdDailey Dec 2 2018 at 8:34PM on page 16

Suggestion