At its April 10 meeting, the Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed changes to plans for a large residential development at 528 Boylston Street (Route 9) and accepted public comment. The changes were in response to concerns raised by a neighborhood group, Newton Impact, which has organized opposition to the project.
The original plan presented two years ago by Toll Brothers, a luxury multi-family housing developer, was for a Chapter 40B, seven-story, 244-unit luxury apartment house with 61 affordable units for tenants earning up to 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) to be built on property currently owned by Sam White Landscaping on Boylston Street (Route 9).
Neighborhood concerns
Over nearly eighteen months, the neighborhood group Newton Impact circulated a petition opposing the proposed development, paid for a comprehensive hydrologic study of the site, put up lawn signs, and sent letters and testimony to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Newton Impact members previously met six times with Toll Brothers representatives and contractors to ask questions and make suggestions. In addition to the to the scale of the project, local residents raised concerns about:
- Increased flooding risk to local basements, because much of the 5.82-acre site is wetlands and rocky ledge and the development will be on approximately two of those acres
- Traffic and safety issues because of the project’s size and proximity to Route 9 and the likelihood that the project will increase traffic on local streets
- Increase in cars parking on local streets because of insufficient onsite parking places
- Lack of public transportation to mitigate the increased volume of cars
- Potential hazard for children going to the three local schools;
- Increases in air and noise pollution
- Creation of heat islands because of tree removal and concrete paving
Revised proposal
At its April 10th meeting – the seventh and possibly the last at which the public was permitted to comment – the Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed the Planning Department memo regarding changes to the project and also heard testimony from representatives of the City’s peer review consultants.
The revised proposal is for 184 units, of which thirty-seven units will be for people earning up to 80% of AMI and nine units offered at 50% of AMI. The roofline has been modified to include some variation in style, and the top floor has been set back to reduce the massing. Both front and rear building setbacks have been increased. Plans call for a 600-foot acceleration/deceleration lane on Route 9 leading into the development, as well as traffic and safety mitigation measures on Olde Field, Dudley, and Hagen Roads. Toll Brothers will be responsible for monitoring blasting of the site’s rock ledge as well. The 528 Boylston project will be built to meet Passive House standards.
In its April 3 memo to the ZBA in preparation for the April 10 meeting, the Planning Department noted that, “(A)fter an extensive review by City Staff and stormwater consultation from [peer reviewers] Horsley Witten Group, the Planning Department believes the project is on track to meet or exceed what is required of drainage and stormwater management.” By contrast, Scott Horsley, Newton Impact’s Water Resources consultant, sent a memo to the Planning Department expressing concern that there had not been adequate testing on the actual development site to detect the extent of the flooding hazard to neighbors. He raised concerns about seasonal variation in groundwater levels and the need for more detailed studies. (Mr. Horsley was a founder of Horsley Witten Group but is no longer associated with the firm.) Janet Bernardo, from Horsley Witten Group, who was at the meeting, suggested that the groundwater potential should be measured by a hydrologist, to which Toll Brothers has agreed.
April 10 comments by ZBA and public
Both Brooke Lipsitt and Stuart Snyder, ZBA members, said that the groundwater matter needed to be addressed before any vote on the project. Ward 8 City Councilor David Kalis commented that the ZBA has been responsive to local traffic, lighting, size, and landscaping matters, but no one has talked about the potential water damage to hundreds of homes. He, too, voiced strong support for a hydrologist, noting that the Conservation Commission will issue a report on the wetlands, but only in the conservation area of the property, not on the building site.
Most of the members of the public who spoke at the April 10 meeting criticized the size of the building, saying that it will tower over the smaller one-family houses typical of the neighborhood. Margaret Zaleski said that the development will make Route 9 less safe; that the building materials will increase noise levels; and that there should be really affordable housing on the site — a view repeated many times during the hearing. A new driver and junior at Newton South High School said she constantly sees close calls and risks to walkers and is concerned that the project will increase those risks. Many talked of the heavier traffic on local streets because of the increased use of the Parker Street bridge as a means of connecting with the building’s driveway off Route 9.
One speaker credited Toll Brothers with making concessions, predicting that people will continue to be opposed because they do not want the project. He hoped the ZBA would consider the concessions offered by the Toll Brothers.
Marie Frederick, a leader of Newton Impact, lives less than 150 feet from the proposed development (and was even closer before the building footprint was reduced). In her view, the risks from flooding and negative environmental impacts outweigh any rewards implied in the project. She dismissed the argument that the planned addition of 23 trees would offset the size of the building since the trees are ten-feet tall and the building is 80 feet. She shared the view that the neighborhood would have welcomed an all-affordable development or an affordable 75-unit townhouse project. ”We are not having a luxury housing crisis. We are having an affordable housing crisis,” she said.
Longtime Ward 8 City Councilor Rick Lipof told Fig City News that there is a reason this site has not been developed in all this time. He noted that the buildable portion of the property is really only two acres. Moreover, the entrance to the property is at the lowest part of Route 9 and floods when it rains. Councilor Lipof underscored the idea that a smaller development would have been more appropriate.
Newly elected Ward 8 Councilor Stephen Farrell echoed neighborhood concerns about the development’s size, flooding potential, and inadequate parking. He has been involved with Newton Impact and recommends that there be more and ongoing discussion with abutters and neighbors before developers submit plans.
Toll Brothers’ responses
Stephen Buchbinder, the attorney representing the Toll Brothers 528 Boylston Street project, and Will Adams, the general director of a number of Toll Brothers developments, met with Fig City News to respond to neighborhood issues. According to Mr. Adams, Toll Brothers representatives have had thirty meetings with the neighbors. Among the accommodations offered, he noted that the project size has been reduced by 30% in units and footprint. In addition, the development includes increased landscaping and open space. Mr. Buchbinder pointed to the increase in distance between the project and Marie Frederick’s property, and he said that the company has hired a hydrologist to address the matters raised by Janet Bernardo and Scott Horsley.
Responding to the size of the development and the fact that the majority of the units are market rate, Mr. Buchbinder said, “It’s the nature of the beast.” Sellers set the price, he explained. Development is expensive because of the price of the land and the building costs. As to the possibility of constructing 75 townhouses on the property, Mr. Adams said the site would be wall-to-wall development, with no space between buildings. But he understands that people do not want large developments “literally in their backyard.” In answer to the project’s size, he said, “these days, most 40Bs are large projects.” Mr. Buchbinder, who has represented a number of developers, said that developers engage with community because, “most developers would rather have people mildly annoyed than furious.”
Next steps
Mr. Buchbinder is hoping that the ZBA will vote on the proposal at its May 1 meeting. According to Jen Caira, Deputy Planning Department director, “The applicant has granted an extension until May 1st. The ZBA has 180 days to close the public hearing unless granted an extension. To keep the public hearing open after May 1st would require the applicant agree to another extension. Once the public hearing is closed, the ZBA has 40 days to render a decision and file the written decision with the City Clerk.”
The ZBA will meet again on May 1 and may vote to approve the proposal at that time. The ZBA is still accepting email comments (to bbelsanti@newtonma.gov) and letters (to ZBA Chair Mike Rossi, Newton Zoning Board of Appeals, Newton City Hall, 1000 Commonwealth Avenue, Newton, MA 02459).
