West Newton Village Center Zoning Input Session draws over 120+ participants

The fifth Village Center Zoning Input Session focused on the village of West Newton. The meeting was held on Wednesday, December 7 with over 120 participants attending the discussion Unlike previous presentations, Planning Department staff attempted to show three examples of VC 1: 110-112 Webster Street (3 units, 3900 sq. ft.); 56-66 Webster Street (6 townhouses, 5000 sq. ft.); and 66-68 Highland Avenue (2 units, 4400 sq. ft).

Speaking in favor

Fordham Street resident John Dundan, attends church and spends time in West Newton Square. He thinks it is worth taking a step back. He said the idea of changing zoning so there are more by-right choices for builders, reduces cost and increases the variety of housing choices. He relayed that his parents needed an apartment building with elevators and wanted to stay in the community and said that the elevator piece and accessibility piece are something we desperately need. He sees that existing zoning does not allow for economically feasible development.

Damien Croteau-Chonka, a 30-something renter, is fully in favor of the proposed density and believes it is appropriate for Newton. He believes it will provide more opportunities for a car-free lifestyle and having lived in a walkable city, he is not worried about tall buildings.

Vice Chair of the Planning Board and Waltham Street resident, Kelly Brown, is more supportive of the kind of density we are talking about. He said his kids can’t live here. Only if more housing is built will it bring down market rates and provide more affordable units.

Julia Houston, a Fordham Road resident, wants to support small businesses, vibrancy, and vitality. She believes we need to do it by having very dense housing in village centers. She believes we are destroying the earth by the way we live, by not having dense housing more available and smaller footprints. She said we need to make dense housing available with little shops on the bottom and green spaces. She said she “passionately feels this is [the’] right direction. [There is] not enough housing in Newton. People [are] crying for these units.”

David Stewart found the presentation helpful and informative. He is excited, adding that we need more housing and housing choice for younger families. He is appalled by the lack of housing in Greater Boston and admits that if he were to move here now, he could not afford it. He believes VC3 zones should be placed near the commuter rail and has a lot of faith the MBTA will restore train service. Disheartened by comments from neighbors, he thinks West Newton can take a lot of this and believes it is totally appropriate.

West Newton Resident and 28 Austin Street Developer Scott Oran is a frequent walker and cyclist. He had this to say to neighbors: “…can’t build a wall around Newton and around West Newton Square. The square we see is not a historical square but one that was torn down and rebuilt.” He added that Congressman Auchincloss is working with State Representative Kay Khan to have a $180 million upgrade to commuter rail stations. He sees a failure in the proposal and that zoning should reflect values and what we want to see. He believes we should rezone new developments and that the zones as drawn do not go far enough, pointing to the MBTA Parking Lot and Rowe Street as not being included and are currently underutilized. He also suggested that future maps depict parking areas in green rather than grey.

Newton Centre resident Sean Roche echoed the sentiments of an earlier speaker about climate urgency saying the “planet is on fire” and “this is a step we can take.” He is in favor of more development on the south side of the city. He believes it will bring down the cost of housing and that new “stuff” is expensive because it is new.

Concern about rezoning and gentrification

The first person to weigh in was Newton resident and Border Street property owner, Scott Scarpato, Jr. He stated that Border Street is zoned for manufacturing and he is concerned that if someone buys up these properties and builds condos, there is not enough infrastructure to support this, and this will squeeze out all manufacturing businesses and the middle class. His concern was gentrification, and he asked if anyone has talked to business owners on Border Street and asked what is the plan when tax revenues are lost. Barney Heath responded that the goal is to create housing not to support gentrification.

Scott Scarpato, Sr., who owns 35, 45, 55 Border,, and 963 Watertown Street, also weighed in. He said that this is reminiscent of the battle in the 1980s with the City. He employs Newton residents, mostly blue-collar workers, and is concerned about what will happen if they are forced out of the city. He understands the need for housing and density, but he also understands the demands such development will have on the infrastructure of the City — as he has been trying to deal with the city regarding the need for drainage improvements on Border Street.

Concern about height, bulk, density, canyon effect, infrastructure, and too many VC3 Districts

Former City Councilor Barbara Brousal Glaser, a West Newton resident, remembers discussing this five years ago and how the people of West Newton strongly liked the village feel. She said what is proposed does not sound walkable, and she reported that Robert Korff bought the whole block. She says she treasures the little shops and the need to maintain small businesses for the people who live here. She referred to the condos on Webster Street — that the Planning Department pointed out as an example of VC1 — and pointed out that it is a whole block and that the idea of walkability is not a whole block. She believes the footprint is too big.

Jim Eckenrode pointed to the total area proposed in West Newton: about 31 acres and of that, 60% are currently designated at VC3, 20% for VC2, and 20% for VC1, with all concentrated for Washington Street. He suggested that if you look at the two developments already in the pipeline for Washington Street — Dunstan East and the Santander project — that will be about 350 apartments on just about 4 acres, and he suggested that we could end up with 1300 additional apartments. He argued that even if stepped down with the 4.5 story cap, we are still looking at over 1000 apartments and the built-out environment would be a strain on the commuter rail and roads. He asked how did the Planning Department get to designate so much of that as VC3? Barney Heath said that they mainly concentrated along Washington Street with a preference for where the Turnpike was located.

West Newton resident Jane Rosenof said there is way too much VC3 and the amount is not reasonable. She suggested that the feedback supported large-scale buildings in Newton Corner and that the basic points from the original vision have been ignored. She assumes that 6 stories would be used sparingly. She urged for the protection of iconic buildings in West Newton and Historic Register buildings, suggesting that two landmarks would be surrounded by much taller buildings. She referenced attending a meeting for Newton Highlands where one business owner said they were prevented from opening a business because of high rents, and another mentioned the inadequate schedule of commuter rail. She said that Trio’s subsidized T passes are hardly used and does not think transit justifies all the density being proposed. She urged more VC2 districts where it still allows density. Director Heath responded to the comment on the vision plan, saying she is right, there was a mix in the core: The principal was 1 – 4 stories, on edges 3-6 and near the Turnpike 3-6, adding that there is a real mix — absolute height on VC 3 – 4 stories setback with pitch roof — not far off from the vision plan.

Lowell Sherman said he sees no strong rationale for why we are taking this on. He is in favor of revitalizing villages but is very concerned with the higher density that is being proposed. There is no determination on how they will deal with traffic, and he does not want to see traffic pushed onto other residential areas. He is in favor of more VC 1 and VC2 and believes VC3 is contrary to the aesthetic appeal.

Larry Alberts, an Exeter Street resident since 1966, is concerned that the VC3 designations on both sides of Washington Street would create a canyon-like border with the only interruption being city property. He questioned how does the Zoning plan create an opportunity for people to congregate and enjoy the village? Barney Heath noted the improvements in West Newton Square to create wider sidewalks and plazas. He said 88 street trees were planted in West Newton Square, and the City is dealing with traffic issues everywhere, which is a challenge.

Nancy Solari, a West Newton resident, said that West Newton is disproportionately impacted with VC3 zones compared to Waban, but she does not want to pit one neighborhood against another. She believes there is room for improvement and hates to see 4-6 story buildings. She is concerned for the loss of treasured businesses and historic buildings that will be displaced. She emphasized the parking needs for customers and vendors for businesses to survive and suggested that 3D models are necessary to clearly see what is proposed.

Anita Lichtblau, who lives off of Watertown Street, believes it makes sense to bring more people into the area and use businesses. She agrees with earlier comments regarding the concern with VC3s as encouraging too many tall bulky buildings and impinging on the historic nature of the Square for small businesses like Paper Mouse.

Annica Blake agrees that a corridor of VC3 is not reasonable. She asked if the 30-year-old (who commented earlier) would be happy with 35 kids in the classroom. She asked if there would be a special committee to approve special permits and is worried about 6-story buildings. Barney Heath responded by saying that special permits would still be voted on by the City Council and would not be allowed to increase height. The Planning Board is just another set of eyes, and he added that no 6-story building would be allowed under this zoning.

Chestnut Street resident Laurie Palepu is excited about more development in the village center but expressed concerns about 5-story buildings up and down Washington Street. She prefers it further down where there is nothing on the other side to avoid having a canyon feel. She added that it should be designated where the road is very wide. She said that an approximate calculation based on 1000 units with the current plan could mean 13K more housing units across Newton. She would like to see what that means for schools, roads, and taxes.

Shari Goldin, a resident of Waltham Street, will be abutter to an abutter and will be close to a VC2 district. She lives in a small two-family house and her views will be blocked and her sense of space will be lost. She is opposed to VC3 and the proposed height.

Lorenz Glaser reiterated what has been said. He appreciates the hard work but does not think we can bring in more pedestrians, cars, and bike traffic and that there should be more traffic calming, like traffic circles and one-way streets that route traffic around. e also does not believe that the housing piece will bring down the cost of anything at all.

Richard Brunell is very concerned about the canyon effect of tall buildings.

Felix Toronto is for the development of properties but does not want to see anything rushed. He is concerned about the sewer system, as it is old. He said, “[Newton was] always considered bedroom of Boston – not become Boston.”

Concern about Green Space

Warwick Road resident Mary O’Brien Harte, has three concerns. 1) Transportation/Parking/Assembly Space: She said we do not really have transportation in Newton. She grew up in a city and cannot imagine that accessibility here. 2) Greenspace: She said we do not see that here. Wide sidewalks and benches are nice but [we] need more. 3) Type of housing: She said we are talking about a lot of rental properties and what she has seen are very expensive, and she is not convinced [they will be] affordable. She added that she would like to see the ability for people to own homes.

Eileen O’Brien agrees with sentiments expressed by the majority and wishes the City would listen more to the people who live here, adding that there is not a lot of green space on the North side and that more green space should be mandated.

Concern about Historic Preservation

West Newton resident Laura Foote, raised concern about historic preservation – not only for West Newton but also other village centers and pointed to Newton Corner as having no historic character anymore. She asked if the City will make sure that historic buildings are not demolished. She also stated that we know there are 400+ apartments in the pipeline for Washington Street and that there will be a lot more dwellings and families in West Newton. What are the thoughts on the pace of change – while hard to predict, under this zoning and current zoning? Planning Director Heath responded, stating that the new zoning doesn’t overcome historic requirements for landmark buildings – the same requirements remain to make the case for a demo delay and would still have to go through the local historic body to request a change. He added that they are trying to get out in front of development to create zoning so it will all create different levels of development.

Gisela Morales-Barreto said she knows the history and has been here since 1979. She asked that more thought be given to preserving the history of this village and that her “heart bleeds when she sees what has happened in Newtonville with enormous buildings there and what they have destroyed. ” She acknowledged the need for affordable housing but said, “Don’t destroy what we have.”

Concern about Parking, Traffic, Congestion

Newtonville resident Peter Harrington has owned a business in West Newton Square for 60 years. He raised concerns about businesses that have on-site client services and are dependent upon adequate parking. He is against the plan to unbundle parking and residential parking requirements referring to other small entrepreneurs in the Square that will be replaced by regional and national chains. He asked if there was a plan to rezone the South side. He also stated that City Hall employees line Homer Street, yet they want to limit new residences and said the plan is discriminatory.

Former Newton Historic Commissioner Peter Diamond has lived in the area for a long time and would like to see parking bundled with building height. He has no problem with the building heights that have been suggested but believes there needs to be a solid parking plan. He raised concerns that the map shows VC3 for two landmarked buildings and suggested that in the next plan, they take away the VC3. Thinks municipal buildings should be included in that plan and we should all know what could go there. Barney Heath said the issue has come up in other villages and that anything that happens on City property has a separate process (the reuse process). He acknowledged the point that landmarked properties should be identified. Jen Caira commented on parking, stating that the proposal still requires parking at one space/unit and that is more than what they are seeing and exempting ground floor businesses.

Annie Raines, a Newtonville resident, expressed concern about congestion, stating that we are changing from an already congested village to an even more congested village.

Concern about neighborhoods impacted by the development of the Pike and what is meant that “each village is different”

Two questions were raised by fourth-generation Newton resident Amanda Caruso. She asked about the three residential lots on Davis Street next to the Santander Bank, adding concern about the neighborhoods that were wiped out by the Pike, and she asked for clarification on what is meant that each village is different (racial or economic), noting that she believes that is discriminatory.

Sean Roche of Newton Center spoke in favor of the proposed maps and said he is concerned about the comment made about the historical development of Pike and believes it merits reconsideration of Davis Street if it was part of the neighborhood that was destroyed. With regard to the comment about differences among villages, he does not believe it is about race or religion but thinks the two points merit a public response.

Councilor Crossley closed up the meeting and recommended participants look at what was discussed in other villages and hear the diversity of comments.

See these materials for the session: video recording, information packet, and notes taken by Planning Department.