Tara Wilstein
I share the concern Ian mentions about the sign and implied change. I don't believe residents were aware or involved in this decision and I think a lot of us would want to have input into this decision and maintain the center as a place for restaurants and stores.

I know you got the pin in the wrong place, but completely agree about Oak Hill Park. Only wish someone in city government cared.

Lisa Thorson
This development, built as a private public partnership for returning WWII veterans has been decimated by teardowns and overbuilt replacement homes. We need to preserve some of the small single level homes to preserve affordability, universal design for the lifespan and open space; all in Newton's housing vision statement. Stop teardowns and allow 'reasonable' sized additions that do not dwarf the original structures or the integrity of the parklike pathway setting. If this doesn't happen in this and other neihborhoods, affordable housing will mean studio, 1 , 2 bedroom apartments; no green space. Might as well live in Boston.

Michael W

Rowe St Commercial District is cut-off from Auburndale Village & West Newton by the Mass Pike and associated Road Cuts/Relocations due to highway and will never be a contiguous area to any of our villages. Rowe St has a thriving commercial businesses and job creators in the City of Newton, it should remain a commercial district as the area is not suitable for the masssive >160 unit appartment complex proposals that have been submittted in the past and ultimately not moved forward with.

See my comment to Will on Emmons St. I worry about our street, too. Though with houses on two sides of me already super sized, I feel fortunate that the owners of the other two will probably not be going anywhere in my lifetime.

Susan Cassidy
Our neighborhood has smaller homes and modest yards. There's a lot to value in keeping things small. One house on our street has already been torn down and replaced with quite a large home. I worry that our smaller home will be overshadowed by more big homes.

I'm sorry you have no berm. We have planted "off-berm" Newton Tree Conservancy trees when it makes more sense than planting on a less-than-ideal berm, if homeowners desire. And similarly the city will plant off-berm. But then it is the property owner's tree, and not everyone wants the responsibility of long-term maintenance. Some years ago when there was money for trees as part of the Winchester Street road reconstruction, a letter was sent to anyone with room for a tree, explaining the benefits of off-berm, and there were no takers.
I think the only mention of trees in our current zoning ordinance is in the landscaping requirements for parking lots, 1 tree for every ten spaces, but this only applies to new or major reconstructions of parking lots, so you don't see many that satisfy the requirement. The only one I can think of that's close is the Library parking lot, where the city wanted to cut down most of them to put up solar carports. A plan which I was relieved to see voted down.
Some cities do have canopy coverage standards, but I don;t recall if they're in zoning or in separate tree ordinances.

Anne Alvarado
This is one of the areas in Newton where there is no median/berm. As a consequence there are no trees in the (non-existant) berm, but the trees on private property are mature and taller than the city trees in the berm (not competing with/clipped to accommodate power lines) - revised zoning should consider how to encourage urban trees ... even (or especially) if they need to be (or could preferentially be, for the health of the tree) planted on private property.

Unfortunately there is very little backbone among the City Council to do anything about this, and it's not a priority for the Planning Dept, which is preoccupied with adding units anywhere and any way they can think of. Amy Sangiolo's proposal for a one-year moratorium on teardowns a couple of years ago to try to make changes got nowhere. And the City Council just caved on snout houses, postponing for another year the effective date of the ordinance they passed last fall..

Will B
The Mosman - Maynard neighborhood (perhaps we could call it Quabeca - the Quadrilateral below Calvary Cemetery) is under siege as these lovely, smaller, and relatively affordable homes are being torn down for monsters three times the size. The FAR allows for homes of over 4,000 square feet in an area of homes that were originally build to about 1,200 square feet. Adjusting the FAR to perhaps double the size of the original home might help save this wonderful neighborhood from becoming full of over-sized, slapped-up McMansions built on spec.

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

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?

Three teardowns already have replaced Capes with huge new houses, resulting in loss of green space and relatively affordable houses.

Just lost a great little bungalow here on Jerome Ave.

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.