Let’s start with 4 values propositions on which I hope most agree:
- Newton would benefit from having more diverse, affordable housing options so that people who want to move to Newton, as well as people who want to age in place and remain in Newton as their households downsize, can do so.
- Newton’s local businesses should be supported to continue to thrive.
- Newton should balance development with environmental considerations.
- Newton’s suburban character should be preserved while achieving all of the above.
Unfortunately, it seems that some people either do not share the 4th value in this list or are readily willing to sacrifice it with the massive village centers upzoning proposal that the Zoning & Planning Committee (ZAP) is formulating.
After maintaining for months that it was neither necessary nor within its timeframe or budget to provide 3D modeling of the potential impact of the upzoning proposal for our village centers, the Planning & Development Department (PDD) was finally goaded by residents’ grassroots imaging efforts into agreeing to provide “visualizations” of the upzoning proposals.
Sadly, the long-awaited “visualizations” that Utile (PDD’s outside consultant) unveiled at the February 13th ZAP meeting were highly idealized and seriously incomplete:
- There were no massing studies;
- There were no shadow studies; and
- There was no imaging of what a full, or near full, buildout under the proposed By Right upzoning might look like.
These are all basic planning building blocks that presumably a consulting company like Utile is fully capable of producing. The grassroots imaging may have had various shortcomings (such as an insufficient doors or windows or questions about façades that can always be nit-picked), but they still fairly represented the massing of the proposed upzoning.
Instead, we were again given “visualizations” that were not much better than the lone street screen sketch PPD had been displaying and that Councilor Wright rightly called out as misleading. In some ways the new “visualizations” are even worse and more misleading.
Each of the new drawings employs subliminal messaging though the use of wide angle, distortive perspectives that make Newton streets look like broad and open boulevards rather than conveying the reality of much narrower streets. For instance, one would never know from the new drawing that traffic must stop and backup whenever a car parks or pulls away from the curb on Walnut Street. The image of Newton Corner shows a broad, open and un-trafficked avenue. It bears little resemblance to the reality of the “Circle of Death.” Even Councilors who tend to support the upzoning proposal asked Utile how they managed to devise that surprising view. Using pastel colors, suggestions of non-existent green and open spaces, and drawing white buildings (themselves quite “matchy-matchy,” as Utile characterized the NAC’s images) that do not resemble any structure that has been built in Newton for decades (if ever), Utile created artistic renderings that are truly seductive, but unfortunately unrealistic.
The new “visualizations” simply are incomplete idealizations. They do not even attempt to show residents what the impact of the full buildout that developers would be entitled to do By Right under the proposed upzoning code to remake – and urbanize — our suburban community.
Why do the PDD and certain Councilor advocates of dramatically upzoning the village centers insist on offering “visualizations” that mislead rather than elucidate? This is as inappropriate as the PDD denigrating residents’ efforts to fill the void created by the PPD’s abdication of its responsibility to provide 3D imaging so residents can understand the full impact the proposals could have on their homes and their community. (The PPD characterized those grassroots efforts as the work of “outside parties.” See February 10, 2023 memorandum from Barney Heath and Jennifer Caira to ZAP Chair Deborah Crossley and committee members.)
Another argument the PDD and others have repeatedly recited without any factual basis is that it is “unlikely” that upzoning will result in anything resembling full build out. How can they say this when we all know that in a contest between that kind of speculation and profit-driven real estate speculation, development wins every time.
The Fenway area is a case study in point, as Newton Highlands Neighborhood Area Council Secretary Srdjan Nedeljkovic pointed out at a recent NHNAC meeting. When that locale was upzoned, full build out predictably ensued, thoroughly transforming the area. This is not to say that it was a bad result for that urban sector of Boston, but simply to say that if an area is upzoned — especially for By Right construction — developers will do a full build out.
Why does the PDD think that Newton will not be built out when upzoned when we know better just by looking at what is already happening all along Washington Street — even before developers are issued an upzoning invitation to build By Right? This is simply illogical given that the Councilors leading the upzoning push ardently argue that there is an urgent need for more development projects.
Some critics of the grassroots buildout imaging suggest that if the village centers are upzoned developers would not undertake traditional parcel assembly (and subdivision) to maximize their return on investment. Instead, they say we should expect that smaller property owners and smaller developers will somehow outmaneuver the same large developers who have routinely offered to pay multiples of fair market value for the properties they need to assemble parcel blocks and construct these types of projects under the existing zoning code. Meaning no disrespect to Mark Development in particular, the fact is that they acquired lots from 7 different owners for the Dunstan East project, the lots for Trio were assembled from more than 6 different owners, the Crafts Street senior housing project involved lot assembly from among 3 owners, and Mark Development is now working on the Santander block and throughout West Newton Square.
Even small developers are no exception to the desire to “max out” the build. The owner of the former CVS site on Walnut Street came to the NAC with a proposal to “spot” rezone that parcel and, by adding a special permit, construct a 5-story building. The project stalled after encountering pushback from neighbors with whom the developer had never even discussed the proposal. Now that developer only needs to await approval of the village center upzoning to proceed By Right to do what the neighborhood opposed. In fact, word on the street is that the balance of the block on Walnut Street from the former CVS site all the way to the intersection with Madison Avenue will be coming to market soon, presenting a perfect opportunity for a developer to build essentially the type of building pictured there in the NAC’s photorealistic imaging.
Councilor Crossley came to the January NAC meeting late, missing much of the presentation and explanation of its images, as well as the information about the vitality of Newtonville’s village center with its broad array of local businesses. Businesses on Walnut Street have expanded, new ones have relocated to our village center and business have opened added branches on Walnut Street, which now has bounced back strongly from the pandemic. Only a handful of store fronts here are still seeking tenants. Nevertheless, Councilor Crossley took the opportunity to characterize our village center as “withering” and village center upzoning is vital to save it.
Those who say that a full buildout of our village center could take 3, 5, or 10 years are probably correct. A decade of constant construction projects on, for example, Walnut Street will be no boon to local businesses, many or most of which will not be able to withstand the disruption. And if they have to relocate during construction, they are unlikely to return to the community, either because they cannot afford the inevitably higher rents in the newly constructed buildings or because they simply cannot afford to relocate twice — assuming they are successful in relocating in the first place as neighborhood icon Newtonville Camera (now of Waltham) was. Question: How many of the original local businesses that operated in the buildings demolished to make way for Trio have returned? Answer: None.
