Ken Stern
Tom Gagon believes 'the new housing will not directly affect either Lower Falls or Auburndale". This is pure fantasy. Creating an entire new 'village' between Auburndale and Lower Falls, on a road which cannot handle more traffic than it already does, will be incredibly disruptive. (I call it a new village, because some of the proposals are to add MORE housing units than presently exist in Lower Falls. The traffic increase will cut Lower Falls off from Auburndale almost completely.. I expect the traffic increase will cause me to shift my shopping and errands to other locations.
The impact on schools will be more than just on Williams, which is already overcrowded. The new kids will certainly go to Williams, but to make room, kids will be shifted from WIlliams to other schools, with the effect rippling across Newton.

Nancy Finn
Ian I agree that the 2013 plan should be used.

Yes. And I'd like to ask, If the city, pols, residents, and the developer deemed the 2013 plan of 580,000 square feet to the be the right size, why are we even going through this exercise again? We know what the right size is, the developer agreed to it, and they should be held to it. No backsliding, excuses, or demands for scads more profit at our expense.

Debra Ruder
I appreciate all the hard work that went into the March 28 presentation, but I was shocked by the market context section, which sounded like an ad for Mark Development's proposal. This is supposed to be an independent visioning process. Also ... Newton Lower Falls as a gateway to the city?!? Please. An appropriately sized/scaled mixed-use development that benefits the city without causing horrible traffic is fine. But just because Riverside sits near Route 128 does not = "gateway."

coUrbanizer via Text
Do not destroy the quality of life of the two nearby neighborhoods- with traffic and something that feels like it belongs at the Natick Mall and not here

That's right. The focus is often on schools and traffic. There are other significant infrastructure costs that residents will have to pay for, for decades into the future.

Larry Rosenberg
Fully vet the impact to city services. Fire Dept, Police trash collection traffic and more. We are proposing 3 huge projects all at the same time. This will be a city people who want the "charm" will NOT want to live.

Nancy Finn
Ian Lamont I agree with you. The developer will offer market rate apartments. We need to use the 2013 approved plan or it should be out to bid again.

First, the 2013 agreement for Riverside outlined 300 new housing units at that site. EVERYONE AGREED TO THIS, including residents, local politicians, the city, and BH Normandy. Why aren't we using this agreement, which embodies the vision for that site? Second, we have enough high-end housing in Newton, and not enough for seniors, middle class families, our public workers, and people in need of affordable housing. Let's end this exercise of granting developers the right to build hundreds of units of luxury/"market rate" condos in return for a sliver of affordable housing.

"The previous design included a public space for community engagement and recreation."

That's right. And local residents, politicians, and the representatives of BH Normandy agreed on this. Why isn't BH Normandy and its Riverside development partner Mark Development being held to the existing agreement when it comes to community space?

Ted Chapman
The design must feel integrated into the community, not a walled off citadel looking inward. How will the residents of 675 new housing units be integrated into the surrounding communities? Most will be rentals without a long-term stake in these neighborhoods. How will this change the political and social fabric of Newton? The previous design included a public space for community engagement and recreation. This needs to be included in the design, not left up to the whims of coffee shops, restaurants, commercial gyms, and sidewalks. Where will children of all ages play go to day care or after-school programs, and adult exercise activities. There is not even a basketball court or a place to kick or throw a ball. I Iive in Lower Falls across from the community center fields and basketball courts, which are vibrant places day and night.

Exactly.

There's already an agreement, finalized in 2013, that determined that the right size for Riverside was 580,000 square feet, including nearly 300 hundred new housing units. EVERYONE AGREED TO THIS.

It’s not local residents who want to go through this visioning process all over again. It’s being driven by developer Robert Korff and his business partner BH Normandy (who negotiated the 2013 agreement). Instead of the agreed-upon 580,000 square feet, they are demanding 1.5 million square feet, including two 200+ foot tall towers, and many hundreds of additional units of luxury housing. They stand to add hundreds of millions of dollars in additional value to their project, while residents of Auburndale, Newton Lower Falls, and other parts of Newton are saddled with massive costs related to traffic, schools, infrastructure, planning, and more.

Kathleen Kouril Grieser
Newton Corner at the "Circle of Death" is an example of what happens when people who think they know better than the existing residents try to impose their utopian planning ideas on a village. Don't let that happen to the rest of our villages. Elect people who care about the residents, not property speculators. Vote against the pro-developer Charter Commission recommendations. Demand the repeal of MU4 zoning. Don't let "Zoning Reform" turn into the densification, gentrification and urbanization of our beautiful community.

Kathleen Kouril Grieser
Thank you for bringing this up, Anne. When the blasting was happening at that site, houses in my neighborhood in Newtonville, many blocks away, suffered cracks in the plaster - that's how bad the vibrations were. And the noise! I have yet to meet anyone who can explain how the City could have allowed the blasting out of a small mountain of solid rock to cram in two oversized sideways houses. It was an environmental travesty, resulting in the loss of a bit of neighborhood green space that was a haven for birds and wildlife, and pleasant spot for people walking on the carriage way to rest for a moment in the shade.

Kathleen Kouril Grieser
Go further. Deck the Pike and create a village green, Victorian-style station house entrance with elevator to improved access commuter rail below, plus "new land" for playground, 1-to-3-story buildings for offices, retail, senior/affordable housing, parking and trees. A bridge doesn't cut it.

Ethan Solomon
I think the city should explore with Mass DOT an opportunity to expand the Walnut Street Bridge, gain air rights for development over the Mass Pike, and undergo traffic calming at the intersection of Washington and Walnut Streets.

Given the increase of activity proposed on both sides of the Mass Pike, and the historic connection as one interconnected village center, I think the opportunity to develop retail, civic and or open space over the Pike while undergoing traffic calming on Washington Street would be transformative and re-integrate Newtonville into one cohesive, walkable village.

Kathleen Kouril Grieser
With respect, Andrew, that's not correct. As the Mayor's own housing strategy report confirms, Newton cannot build its way to affordability. Allowing higher density residential builds just pushes up land prices, as speculators are willing to pay more for the land. New construction costs more than existing units. The new units are always more expensive that what they replace. The costs of providing public services (especially public school education) is always higher than the property tax yield from the additional units - leading to school overcrowding and overrides. Increasing taxes and rising housing prices and rents push out existing residents and local businesses (including those literally evicted to make way for new projects), often displacing commercially-zoned properties in village centers. With more than $1 billion in debt, Newton cannot afford to lose any commercial property or commercial tax revenue. Although new residential units are usually touted as being for down-sizing seniors and childless Millennials, the market rate rents are too high for many in those groups, and they don't qualify for the subsidized units (senior assets and Millennial incomes are too high). Instead families, eager to get their kids into Newton schools, will cram themselves into one and two bedroom market-rate apartments if that's all that's available. Don't conflate density with affordability. If adding density to desirable areas brought housing prices down, Manhattan and San Francisco would be some of the most affordable places to live in the country. Don't be duped by developer/planner "growth machine" profiteering spin.

Thanks Kathleen for providing a cost estimate ($60M for one section of the Pike from Walnut to Lowell). Considering the high price developers are willing to pay for land in Newton ($27 million for the Orr block) why aren't comparably priced air rights being actively considered? I hope Newton's new administration doesn't dismiss this idea ... it holds a lot of potential not only to increase housing stock, but also provide green space and other uses.

Kathleen Kouril Grieser
Dear "City of Newton",

In reply to Ian, you wrote the following:

"Thanks for your thoughts Ian! Our zoning team is taking a look at what options are for air rights today. One consideration is that the state typically has jurisdiction over air rights, not the municipal level. Another consideration, as Kelley points out, is that the economics of building over the Turnpike would influence what type of development would be feasible."

Can you update us on what you have learned since you've been taking a look at the options for air rights?.

Kathleen Kouril Grieser
Ian, I agree with you. It's actually not that expensive to deck over parts of the Pike. The person who supervised air rights deals over the Pike for the state under the last governor told me that to deck over the Pike from Walnut St to Lowell Ave would cost about $60 million (not much more than a new elementary school). That would allow for a new and expansive village green for Newtonville, with space for 1 to 3-story buildings for commercial space, retail and senior and/or affordable housing, parking, and a new commuter rail station. The price of the decking depends on the weight of what's above it. It is very expensive if you want to put high-rises on it. But people who want high-rises don't come to Newton. They go to an urban area like Boston. The price of decking over the Pike for a "Ted Kennedy Greenway" and buildings in scale with out existing villages and neighborhoods is not that high, and goes down per mile if more of the Pike is decked over. Land is scarce in Newton, and here we have the chance to create new "land", but no leaders willing to do it. I presented this idea to Mayor Warren several years ago. He had no interest in it, but many residents do. Imagine Newtonville without a highway slashing it in two. Imagine fixing the "Circle of Death" and restoring Newton Corner's village center? And so on...

Julia Malakie
Kelley asks, won't more homes limit prices? No. We're not on an island in the middle of the ocean. Any price effect would be short term, as increased supply would cause more people to choose to live in Newton instead of Waltham or Brookline or Natick or somewhere else. What people are willing to pay to live in Newton is based on factors like our school system's reputation, our proximity to Boston, and other amenities. Not on supply of housing. Even the city's housing consultant said we'll never build our way to affordability. If adding units and density made cities affordable, NYC and Seattle would be bargains.

Tara Wilstein
I think what I and other neighbors are concerned about is why this area is being changed to a residential area and whether residents had any input into that. Is there a meeting or more formal forum to discuss whether the neighborhood actually supports the idea of a transition at all?

Mary Lou Sabbag
With Auburndale already being overrun with condominiums taking the place of a single family home, adding a huge project to the Turtle Lane Playhouse location is overkill. A bucolic place in a family home neighborhood is a gem. Adding over 20 more condominiums and stores on once acre of land is a very bad idea.

Reply to the City Planning Office's reply to my original suggestion: I think now is the time to initiate discussions with the state, or form a coalition with other communities facing a space crunch to see how air rights can be developed over state-owned highways.

coUrbanizer via Text
And if we do need more parking in West Newton we could build out over the highway similar to Star Market in Newtonville. Two-story deck over the highway to hold hundreds of cars and inconvenience nobody

coUrbanizer via Text
This village center is a small village it does not need another bank or coffee shop A deli for sandwiches by day and a family friendly pub restaurant that all can walk to would be fabulous We do not need more cars and traffic at this corner!!!

There is a sign at Comm and Lex claiming this area is "transition zone" from village center to residential area. Did local residents and businesses and councilors in Auburndale have any input into this supposed zoning policy change?

coUrbanizer via Text
As an Auburndale resident, I think it's vitally important that this location remain a village center with shops and restaurants to service the neighborhood. I would be extremely upset if we did not have useful shops and restaurants in this location and I know my neighbors would agree.

Pamela Geib
Keep single family housing zoning and add more green space. Support local business - meaning to NOT develop big box stores nearby.

A problem facing Newton and other communities around Boston is the lack of space that can be developed, which contributes to the teardown phenomenon and developer gold rush to build luxury condos, high-end retail, and McMansions. I would like the city to explore how "air rights" can be sensibly developed over the Mass Pike, like they did back in the 60s for the Star Market and Newton Corner hotel. I believe this huge mass of underutilized land next to and over the Pike can provide an opportunity to add housing, retail space, and even green space.

Julia Malakie
This is my neighborhood of bungalows and Capes. These are smaller houses practical for singles and relatively affordable for families. They have yards for kids to play in. This neighborhood needs to be preserved, not allowed to be torn down by developers, which has already started with one house on Larkin Road.