Rose D
Rose D's projects
Recent Activity
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 7 months ago
There is a commuter rail line that goes from Brandeis to porter square. Parking at Brandeis costs $4/day and then CR cost but then you can walk to Harvard square or take the red line to Kendall. A long costly trip. But it works and still requires a car and lots of time
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 7 months ago
Also incorporate the view of the people who may one day live in this Riverside development. How would they feel when they are unable to get out of this development to go somewhere because the one or two roads in and out of the development are completely blocked up with traffic, especially of baseball game days or rally days or sport championship parade days. It's already not working. How would adding 1000 new Riverside development residents to the mix? Yikes!
Supported a comment by Vin Shelton on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 7 months ago
Vin Shelton
The "mitigation plan" involves getting cars *into* the site, NOT out of the site
The "mitigation plan" involves getting cars *into* the site, NOT out of the site
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 7 months ago
Nancy Finn
Hi folks who cares if other towns have developments, we are talking about Newton. As a resident of the Lower Falls village, I care what happens to it.
Comparing Newton to other towns along rte95/128 is not ideal.
There is no development in Waban, Newton Center or Chestnut Hill or West Newton Hill. Why? Because people involved with this proposal live there.
There are a few streets on the east side: Belmore Park and Longfellow road that are in Lower Falls. Also lower falls goes up to the woodland station including Newton Wellesley hospital that are in Lower Falls. So there are residents that live on the other side of the highway. Some of the woodland golf course is in Lower Falls. too. If you do not live in lower falls and Auburndale then you should not be involved in this vision process.
Most developments in Needham industrial park are zoned commercial and do not have residential neighborhoods right next to them.
We need to Rightsize Riverside as we only get one chance to develop it.
Sadly I find this visioning process seems to ignores the village concept and is more toward the developer Mark Development. A sad day for all villages in Newton.
Hi folks who cares if other towns have developments, we are talking about Newton. As a resident of the Lower Falls village, I care what happens to it.
Comparing Newton to other towns along rte95/128 is not ideal.
There is no development in Waban, Newton Center or Chestnut Hill or West Newton Hill. Why? Because people involved with this proposal live there.
There are a few streets on the east side: Belmore Park and Longfellow road that are in Lower Falls. Also lower falls goes up to the woodland station including Newton Wellesley hospital that are in Lower Falls. So there are residents that live on the other side of the highway. Some of the woodland golf course is in Lower Falls. too. If you do not live in lower falls and Auburndale then you should not be involved in this vision process.
Most developments in Needham industrial park are zoned commercial and do not have residential neighborhoods right next to them.
We need to Rightsize Riverside as we only get one chance to develop it.
Sadly I find this visioning process seems to ignores the village concept and is more toward the developer Mark Development. A sad day for all villages in Newton.
Supported a comment by Ken Stern on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 7 months ago
Ken Stern
Yes, Waltham, Wellesley, Needham & Weston do all have large commercial developments along the highway. In all cases, the residential sections of the town ends where the commercial section begins, and there is no further residential section on the other side. Needham and Wellesley have parts of their town on the opposite side of the highway than where most of their town is located, but that portion is entirely commercial.
In Newton, Lower Falls was already somewhat cut off from the rest of Newton by the highway. Whats left of the connection will be virtually severed by putting an enormous commercial development
Yes, Waltham, Wellesley, Needham & Weston do all have large commercial developments along the highway. In all cases, the residential sections of the town ends where the commercial section begins, and there is no further residential section on the other side. Needham and Wellesley have parts of their town on the opposite side of the highway than where most of their town is located, but that portion is entirely commercial.
In Newton, Lower Falls was already somewhat cut off from the rest of Newton by the highway. Whats left of the connection will be virtually severed by putting an enormous commercial development
Supported a comment by David DD on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 7 months ago
David DD
Infrastructure first! Embellishments later!
Infrastructure first! Embellishments later!
Supported a comment by Betsy Hewitt on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Betsy Hewitt
Riverside Visioning is currently pretending Riverside will have direct access to the I 90 & Rt 30 exit off 128/95 north...A big assumption in that Mass DOT needs to come up with plans, approved by Fed. Dept. of Transportation at a time when Feds are becoming more strict about access points (for vehicles) due to safety issues + come up with $$ & conservation commission approvals. There seems to be an assumption Mass Dept. of Conservation & Recreation would allow a major roadway across the Charles River & across their parkland cutting the parkland in two. Before we submit our visioning lets invite Herb Nolan from Solomon Foundation, Dan Driscoll MA Dept. of Conservation & Recreation, & Emily Norton from Charles River Watershed Association to come speak about the Greenways along the Charles River including the one abutting Riverside. Lets hear about the efforts to increase kinds of connectivity not just vehicles and public transportation. Much more beneficial than getting a real estate pitch. Make a buffer zone near parkland so that it is not ruined by shadows, extreme wind buffering from tall buildings, noise pollution etc. Our vision also needs to include some scale models or examples of what we do want. The audience at Lasell near where I was sitting almost gasped when the realtor started saying we want to be like Waltham and Lexington. Our vision should not be to try to hide the buildings behind a rock outcropping to make it "seem" smaller
Riverside Visioning is currently pretending Riverside will have direct access to the I 90 & Rt 30 exit off 128/95 north...A big assumption in that Mass DOT needs to come up with plans, approved by Fed. Dept. of Transportation at a time when Feds are becoming more strict about access points (for vehicles) due to safety issues + come up with $$ & conservation commission approvals. There seems to be an assumption Mass Dept. of Conservation & Recreation would allow a major roadway across the Charles River & across their parkland cutting the parkland in two. Before we submit our visioning lets invite Herb Nolan from Solomon Foundation, Dan Driscoll MA Dept. of Conservation & Recreation, & Emily Norton from Charles River Watershed Association to come speak about the Greenways along the Charles River including the one abutting Riverside. Lets hear about the efforts to increase kinds of connectivity not just vehicles and public transportation. Much more beneficial than getting a real estate pitch. Make a buffer zone near parkland so that it is not ruined by shadows, extreme wind buffering from tall buildings, noise pollution etc. Our vision also needs to include some scale models or examples of what we do want. The audience at Lasell near where I was sitting almost gasped when the realtor started saying we want to be like Waltham and Lexington. Our vision should not be to try to hide the buildings behind a rock outcropping to make it "seem" smaller
Supported a comment by Betsy Hewitt on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Betsy Hewitt
Transportation, Traffic, Connectivity, and Shared Infrastructure Riverside is a prefect site to increase connectivity with the Commuter Rail nearby. Let us dream big and vision quality bus connections north, south, east & west not just to Boston. Plan this connectivity taking into account the nearby demographics. Don't forget the low income, or non-driver and do a study of who currently passes through Riverside MBTA site. The audience at Lasell College reacted to this being called Newton's Gateway because the real question is who gets to define Newton's Gateway? Is it CivicMoxie, is it a Real Estate broker, is it the Newton Planning Department of us it the people who live, work, play and love Newton? When discussing Riverside in the context of what currently exists or what we really want to see built or changed in the future we need to have a whole discussion about what are the best current practices & built projects to model this by? Let's use all the work done on the old Riverside Plan (the one we spent countless hours on) and glean the wisdom of so many. In that this entire visioning process is being done in a few months. When I heard there was proposal to revive the rotary on Grove St. Newton Lower Falls it made me realize we are in trouble with visioning. People walking, biking, with strollers, walkers or wheel chairs etc. would take their life in their hands going across a rotary.
Transportation, Traffic, Connectivity, and Shared Infrastructure Riverside is a prefect site to increase connectivity with the Commuter Rail nearby. Let us dream big and vision quality bus connections north, south, east & west not just to Boston. Plan this connectivity taking into account the nearby demographics. Don't forget the low income, or non-driver and do a study of who currently passes through Riverside MBTA site. The audience at Lasell College reacted to this being called Newton's Gateway because the real question is who gets to define Newton's Gateway? Is it CivicMoxie, is it a Real Estate broker, is it the Newton Planning Department of us it the people who live, work, play and love Newton? When discussing Riverside in the context of what currently exists or what we really want to see built or changed in the future we need to have a whole discussion about what are the best current practices & built projects to model this by? Let's use all the work done on the old Riverside Plan (the one we spent countless hours on) and glean the wisdom of so many. In that this entire visioning process is being done in a few months. When I heard there was proposal to revive the rotary on Grove St. Newton Lower Falls it made me realize we are in trouble with visioning. People walking, biking, with strollers, walkers or wheel chairs etc. would take their life in their hands going across a rotary.
Supported a comment by Betsy Hewitt on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Betsy Hewitt
Housing: in that we were told the Newton Housing Authority has a 3-6 year waiting list. I would like to see the vision include permanently affordable in the Housing Authority definition or this. Not just the very minimal 15% but maybe a 25% integrated into the condos to be sold and all the housing that is approved. Include people who have a current MASS rental vouchers.
Housing: in that we were told the Newton Housing Authority has a 3-6 year waiting list. I would like to see the vision include permanently affordable in the Housing Authority definition or this. Not just the very minimal 15% but maybe a 25% integrated into the condos to be sold and all the housing that is approved. Include people who have a current MASS rental vouchers.
Supported a comment by Jennifer S on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Jennifer S
If this project were being managed in any corporations where I have worked, it would have failed miserably.There is a disingenuous sentiment cascaded down to all participants in discussions that begin with, essentially, "We are not going to talk about traffic or the environment" as part of this conversation. To pass off these two issues that are of paramount importance to our community as "not part of our scope" is the quickest way to say one is not interested in listening to what matters to the people. DID ANYONE SPEND A MINUTE IN LOWER FALLS DURING THE RECENT PATRIOTS PARADE CELEBRATING THE SUPERBOWL? We have had several Boston sports Team parades since the last Riverside project was submitted. I would guess that no one showed up on any of these parade days to see how the Lower Falls Community is affected by the cars and the massive amount of traffic. A school bus could not get kids to school because the bus could not turn a corner, A UPS driver had tremendous challenges trying to deliver packages on the day of the recent parade. I was present for all of the screaming and honking that took place next to illegally parked cars. NLF is the greatest neighborhood because the people are caring -- of the community and of others. None of my NLF/Auburndale friends believe anyone outside of these residents actually care what happens. I grew up in Newton and am beyond disappointed.
If this project were being managed in any corporations where I have worked, it would have failed miserably.There is a disingenuous sentiment cascaded down to all participants in discussions that begin with, essentially, "We are not going to talk about traffic or the environment" as part of this conversation. To pass off these two issues that are of paramount importance to our community as "not part of our scope" is the quickest way to say one is not interested in listening to what matters to the people. DID ANYONE SPEND A MINUTE IN LOWER FALLS DURING THE RECENT PATRIOTS PARADE CELEBRATING THE SUPERBOWL? We have had several Boston sports Team parades since the last Riverside project was submitted. I would guess that no one showed up on any of these parade days to see how the Lower Falls Community is affected by the cars and the massive amount of traffic. A school bus could not get kids to school because the bus could not turn a corner, A UPS driver had tremendous challenges trying to deliver packages on the day of the recent parade. I was present for all of the screaming and honking that took place next to illegally parked cars. NLF is the greatest neighborhood because the people are caring -- of the community and of others. None of my NLF/Auburndale friends believe anyone outside of these residents actually care what happens. I grew up in Newton and am beyond disappointed.
Supported a comment by Ken Stern on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ken Stern
The infrastructure costs, immediate and future, of any development must be realistically assessed. The school impact will not be just to WIlliams, which is already at (beyond?) capacity. If a large number of residential units are added, the kids in those units (and there will be lots of them, as people want to access the Newton schools) will indeed go to Williams. To make room, kids from Auburndale and Lower Falls will be shifted to other schools, which will cause additional kids to be shifted. The effect will ripple through the entire town. What is the total excess capacity of the schools right now? Because if it is insufficient toi absorb REALISTIC estimates of the students who will be added by Riverside AND Northland AND Washington Street (?), then additional schools will need to be built. The city must factor in the cost of these new schools, including purchase/acquisition of the land needed, into the equation when determining if there is even net benefit of additional fees and taxes which the proponents of a large development like.
The infrastructure costs, immediate and future, of any development must be realistically assessed. The school impact will not be just to WIlliams, which is already at (beyond?) capacity. If a large number of residential units are added, the kids in those units (and there will be lots of them, as people want to access the Newton schools) will indeed go to Williams. To make room, kids from Auburndale and Lower Falls will be shifted to other schools, which will cause additional kids to be shifted. The effect will ripple through the entire town. What is the total excess capacity of the schools right now? Because if it is insufficient toi absorb REALISTIC estimates of the students who will be added by Riverside AND Northland AND Washington Street (?), then additional schools will need to be built. The city must factor in the cost of these new schools, including purchase/acquisition of the land needed, into the equation when determining if there is even net benefit of additional fees and taxes which the proponents of a large development like.
Supported a comment by Ken Stern on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ken Stern
Lots of great sounding goals on the draft principles, but I am deeply concerned that the presentation of so many wonderful goals will result in the developer saying "I can give you many if not most of those amenities, but I can only afford to do so if you will approve an enormous development." The benefits of these goals do not outweigh the negative impact on the community of an enormous development in our side yard. I would happily scale back on everything on the wishlist if it meant that the development is right-sized for the site - in scale to the residential neighbors to the east and west.
Lots of great sounding goals on the draft principles, but I am deeply concerned that the presentation of so many wonderful goals will result in the developer saying "I can give you many if not most of those amenities, but I can only afford to do so if you will approve an enormous development." The benefits of these goals do not outweigh the negative impact on the community of an enormous development in our side yard. I would happily scale back on everything on the wishlist if it meant that the development is right-sized for the site - in scale to the residential neighbors to the east and west.
Supported a comment by Ken Stern on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
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.
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.
Supported a comment by Jeff Hecht on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Jeff Hecht
Agreed Riverside is not much of a transit hub now, but it could become one if it is not overbuilt, and if the MBTA, Newton, and nearby towns are willing to invest in desperately needed additional transit. Without more transit, the Riverside area will choke on traffic.
Agreed Riverside is not much of a transit hub now, but it could become one if it is not overbuilt, and if the MBTA, Newton, and nearby towns are willing to invest in desperately needed additional transit. Without more transit, the Riverside area will choke on traffic.
Supported a comment by Shawna Slack on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Shawna Slack
I stopped reading after I saw Table D, Population Impacts -- Students, and how its data was applied to Table E-1, Projected Fiscal Impacts (Full Build-Out) because the cost per student is not a relevant figure with large numbers of students where the city will be required to invest in additional classrooms and additional school buildings (to be put on land that the city does not yet own). Major increases in student population need to be looked at based on the impact they will have in reality, not in concept. These numbers would require additional classrooms and additional teachers and staff in the schools beyond the $15,937 impact per student cost indicated. New schools cost $40 million each. Table D assumes an impact of $1.5 - $2.6 million. This does not reflect the cost of pre-fab classrooms, new schools and the impact on overcapacity at our middle and high schools. Maybe Riverside should be a very large project and include a new school as part of its design. That way the real cost of a massive increase in school-aged population would be born by the developers.
I stopped reading after I saw Table D, Population Impacts -- Students, and how its data was applied to Table E-1, Projected Fiscal Impacts (Full Build-Out) because the cost per student is not a relevant figure with large numbers of students where the city will be required to invest in additional classrooms and additional school buildings (to be put on land that the city does not yet own). Major increases in student population need to be looked at based on the impact they will have in reality, not in concept. These numbers would require additional classrooms and additional teachers and staff in the schools beyond the $15,937 impact per student cost indicated. New schools cost $40 million each. Table D assumes an impact of $1.5 - $2.6 million. This does not reflect the cost of pre-fab classrooms, new schools and the impact on overcapacity at our middle and high schools. Maybe Riverside should be a very large project and include a new school as part of its design. That way the real cost of a massive increase in school-aged population would be born by the developers.
Supported a comment by Jeff Hecht on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Jeff Hecht
Agreed - Riverside's transit capacity should not be choked off by overdevelopment.
Agreed - Riverside's transit capacity should not be choked off by overdevelopment.
Supported a comment by Jeff Hecht on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Jeff Hecht
Sitting close to the junction of route 128/95 and the Mass Turnpike, Riverside has the potential to expand into a regional transportation hub serving the Metro West area with badly needed mass transit. Surrounding it with a massive development would block the future growth of transit capacity needed to realize that potential.
Sitting close to the junction of route 128/95 and the Mass Turnpike, Riverside has the potential to expand into a regional transportation hub serving the Metro West area with badly needed mass transit. Surrounding it with a massive development would block the future growth of transit capacity needed to realize that potential.
Supported a comment by Randall Block on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Randall Block
Riverside will be an auto-oriented development. The only reason it makes economic sense is proximity to I-95 and the Mass Pike. Proximity to an unreliable trolley line is a minor positive factor.
Riverside will be an auto-oriented development. The only reason it makes economic sense is proximity to I-95 and the Mass Pike. Proximity to an unreliable trolley line is a minor positive factor.
Supported a comment by Ian Lamont on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ian Lamont
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.
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.
Supported a comment by Tim M. on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Tim M.
I'd like to see 100% affordable housing. There's a desperate need for it in Newton for it and it's always listed as a top reason for building. Why limit it to 10 or 15 percent? I believe that there are developers who would would be happy to do it. Boston recently completed 'The Beverly' by North Station; New York City has done many of their own. It could provide a real benefit to and reflect the progressive beliefs of our community.
I'd like to see 100% affordable housing. There's a desperate need for it in Newton for it and it's always listed as a top reason for building. Why limit it to 10 or 15 percent? I believe that there are developers who would would be happy to do it. Boston recently completed 'The Beverly' by North Station; New York City has done many of their own. It could provide a real benefit to and reflect the progressive beliefs of our community.
Supported a comment by Eric Campbell on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Eric Campbell
Historically, traffic studies by developers in Auburndale have grossly underestimated the traffic and the rate of increase of the traffic their developments will generate.
Historically, traffic studies by developers in Auburndale have grossly underestimated the traffic and the rate of increase of the traffic their developments will generate.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
The Developer proposed 15% green space which includes the river - not sufficient.
Supported a comment by Ian Lamont on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ian Lamont
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.
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.
Supported a comment by Alison Bassett on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Alison Bassett
Please Newton, state, & MBTA officials do this the right way & the right size. I agree with the comment above.
Please Newton, state, & MBTA officials do this the right way & the right size. I agree with the comment above.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Love this plan. If Newton was serious about providing affordable housing and helping it’s older residents and employees this is a way to meet that goal. Also if Avalon could make it work for them as the develop perhaps Newton should entertain other proposals.
Supported a comment by Liz M on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Liz M
Riverside offers a once in a lifetime development opportunity. My aspiration is that the city and state governments will step up and commit to making it possible to create a development that won't overwhelm the neighborhoods around it. It could be a model for how cities can grow responsibly and thoughtfully with some public funding. There are no simple solutions to the problems we face (housing shortage, not enough commercial development, climate change, income inequality, etc.) and one parcel of land can't solve all of them. But it can be a start if it's done right. Doing it right will take planning and commitment of time and money. For example, for Riverside to be a good TOD, the MBTA needs improve the D line, bring back the express bus, and add the Indigo line in the future. To reduce the carbon footprint, services need to be walkable from the development. This means the City should commit to enlarging Williams to accommodate the school children that will come from the development. Finding room "in the system" isn't sufficient - it will add buses and parents in cars to the equation. These are just a couple of examples of the type of planning that needs to be done and the public funds that need to be committed. Visioning is a good first step. I hope that the city will continue to step up and the state will contribute as well. Both need to invite input and act on what they hear.
Riverside offers a once in a lifetime development opportunity. My aspiration is that the city and state governments will step up and commit to making it possible to create a development that won't overwhelm the neighborhoods around it. It could be a model for how cities can grow responsibly and thoughtfully with some public funding. There are no simple solutions to the problems we face (housing shortage, not enough commercial development, climate change, income inequality, etc.) and one parcel of land can't solve all of them. But it can be a start if it's done right. Doing it right will take planning and commitment of time and money. For example, for Riverside to be a good TOD, the MBTA needs improve the D line, bring back the express bus, and add the Indigo line in the future. To reduce the carbon footprint, services need to be walkable from the development. This means the City should commit to enlarging Williams to accommodate the school children that will come from the development. Finding room "in the system" isn't sufficient - it will add buses and parents in cars to the equation. These are just a couple of examples of the type of planning that needs to be done and the public funds that need to be committed. Visioning is a good first step. I hope that the city will continue to step up and the state will contribute as well. Both need to invite input and act on what they hear.
Supported a comment by Ted Chapman on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ted Chapman
Everyday there is an article on how unaffordable housing in the Boston area is becoming. What mechanisms other than inclusionary zoning are available to the city council to increase the percentage of affordable housing without boosting the market-rate rental numbers. Is rent control a consideration? Negotiating with the MBTA to subdivide the lease, to provide a space for a building to be constructed with a lower "land cost", and using MassHousing WorkForce Housing programs to provide housing for sectors like Newton teachers and municipal employees who cannot afford to live in Newton. Without creative solutions the cost of housing will continue to rise a rate that will cause Newton to loose it diversity.
Everyday there is an article on how unaffordable housing in the Boston area is becoming. What mechanisms other than inclusionary zoning are available to the city council to increase the percentage of affordable housing without boosting the market-rate rental numbers. Is rent control a consideration? Negotiating with the MBTA to subdivide the lease, to provide a space for a building to be constructed with a lower "land cost", and using MassHousing WorkForce Housing programs to provide housing for sectors like Newton teachers and municipal employees who cannot afford to live in Newton. Without creative solutions the cost of housing will continue to rise a rate that will cause Newton to loose it diversity.
Supported a comment by Ted Chapman on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ted Chapman
Connections to the multi-use trail system is essential to meet this goal.
Connections to the multi-use trail system is essential to meet this goal.
Supported a comment by Ted Chapman on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ted Chapman
I remains unclear to me whether the MBTA has actually modeled the future needs for this site to expand its capacity as a train and bus hub. It is imperative that the city and state politicians, insist this is done before it is too late. The design for Riverside development must accommodate this enhanced capacity, which may include increased commuter parking. The footings of the garage must design to support adding this capacity.
I remains unclear to me whether the MBTA has actually modeled the future needs for this site to expand its capacity as a train and bus hub. It is imperative that the city and state politicians, insist this is done before it is too late. The design for Riverside development must accommodate this enhanced capacity, which may include increased commuter parking. The footings of the garage must design to support adding this capacity.
Supported a comment by Ted Chapman on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
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.
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.
Supported a comment by Ted Chapman on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ted Chapman
Grove Street connects the existing communities of Lower Falls and Auburndale. To most residents this road is already at or beyond capacity. An independent study of the capacity of Grove Street to handle additional traffic, with or without direct access from I-95, must precede any approvals. The size and density of development must be predicated on this understanding. Development cannot make existing communities live in gridlock, which is the current state of Rt 16 and Auburndale Square, and Woodland St during rush hour.
Grove Street connects the existing communities of Lower Falls and Auburndale. To most residents this road is already at or beyond capacity. An independent study of the capacity of Grove Street to handle additional traffic, with or without direct access from I-95, must precede any approvals. The size and density of development must be predicated on this understanding. Development cannot make existing communities live in gridlock, which is the current state of Rt 16 and Auburndale Square, and Woodland St during rush hour.
Supported a comment by Ted Chapman on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ted Chapman
Direct access from I-95 has an economic cost and a potential traffic benefit. Does the increased size of the development to pay for this access, mean that the resulting traffic generated by this increased size, nullify the benefits. This question must be evaluated independently. Maybe it will be a wash and it would be best to accept a smaller development with the traffic modifications approved in 2013.
Direct access from I-95 has an economic cost and a potential traffic benefit. Does the increased size of the development to pay for this access, mean that the resulting traffic generated by this increased size, nullify the benefits. This question must be evaluated independently. Maybe it will be a wash and it would be best to accept a smaller development with the traffic modifications approved in 2013.
Supported a comment by Philip Wallas on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Philip Wallas
In Woburn, just off 128, the existing mall is being redeveloped. Perhaps the plans there are a good indication of what developers are able to do. Partnering with Avalon Bay for 400 units, 25% affordable and 70% to be provided to residents who are local – Woburn residents, municipal employees, and business owners. https://www.northsuburbannews.org/2018/11/02/182653/woburn-mall-to-get-a-new-look Riverside should reach at least this standard
In Woburn, just off 128, the existing mall is being redeveloped. Perhaps the plans there are a good indication of what developers are able to do. Partnering with Avalon Bay for 400 units, 25% affordable and 70% to be provided to residents who are local – Woburn residents, municipal employees, and business owners. https://www.northsuburbannews.org/2018/11/02/182653/woburn-mall-to-get-a-new-look Riverside should reach at least this standard
Supported a comment by Ted Chapman on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ted Chapman
Whatever development happens on the site, the developer must pay to make the connections to the proposed Greenway as a way to achieve the 5 principles articulated in this section - specifically the Two Bridges Trail, the Riverside Depot Tunnel, the multi use-trail across the Charles River to Riverside Park and the the existing DCR trails, to extend both the transportation and recreational opportunities.
Whatever development happens on the site, the developer must pay to make the connections to the proposed Greenway as a way to achieve the 5 principles articulated in this section - specifically the Two Bridges Trail, the Riverside Depot Tunnel, the multi use-trail across the Charles River to Riverside Park and the the existing DCR trails, to extend both the transportation and recreational opportunities.
Supported a comment by Ted Chapman on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Ted Chapman
Having graphic illustrations of the best practices regarding how to limit the perception of height on a site by massing tall building away for edges and providing adequate, vegetated setbacks from Grove St (such as was done at the abutting Riverside Center- 90 ft setback minimum), including stepping buildings; will be fundamental to the design, taking advantage of the topography of the site.
Having graphic illustrations of the best practices regarding how to limit the perception of height on a site by massing tall building away for edges and providing adequate, vegetated setbacks from Grove St (such as was done at the abutting Riverside Center- 90 ft setback minimum), including stepping buildings; will be fundamental to the design, taking advantage of the topography of the site.
Supported a comment by Philip Wallas on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Philip Wallas
If partial direct access is a key cost driver and desired benefit for Riverside, then the City should be party to all discussions involving the T and Mass DOT and Federal Highway so it is clear that critical aspect of the project has written approval. Otherwise the City and its residents risk spending several more years negotiating a project with a potential single point of failure. If the MBTA's lease payments are not current, then the developer's control of most of the site is under cloud. The City should not proceed with a special permit until the lease payments are current.
If partial direct access is a key cost driver and desired benefit for Riverside, then the City should be party to all discussions involving the T and Mass DOT and Federal Highway so it is clear that critical aspect of the project has written approval. Otherwise the City and its residents risk spending several more years negotiating a project with a potential single point of failure. If the MBTA's lease payments are not current, then the developer's control of most of the site is under cloud. The City should not proceed with a special permit until the lease payments are current.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
The site is 12 acres. Perhaps they can build 48 quarter acre highly energy efficient single family residences.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Survey of Newton elderly population found that most Newton elders prefer to stay in their own homes. If large developments like this one are approved by City Council, especially without any provisions for new schools, in time, when inevitably the schools become even more overcrowded, the City will then propose a tax override which will increase our taxes and make it more difficult for these elders to remain in their homes.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Can this visioning process include in its guiding principles a section on Neighborhood Impact?
Supported a comment by Lynn Slobodin on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Lynn Slobodin
I was on the small team of residents representing Auburndale and Lower Falls that met with the developer and city officials regularly for years in order to come up with the previous plans. It was apparent to everyone in those meetings that the developer would be responsible for the garage. In my opinion, the developer was hoping to get federal funding to cover the garage. When that didn’t happen, all of a sudden they said that the responsibility for the garage was unclear, and abandoned that plan.
I was on the small team of residents representing Auburndale and Lower Falls that met with the developer and city officials regularly for years in order to come up with the previous plans. It was apparent to everyone in those meetings that the developer would be responsible for the garage. In my opinion, the developer was hoping to get federal funding to cover the garage. When that didn’t happen, all of a sudden they said that the responsibility for the garage was unclear, and abandoned that plan.
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
Note, the T cut the down town Boston bus from Riverside several years ago due to ridership.
Note, the T cut the down town Boston bus from Riverside several years ago due to ridership.
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
Vacancies are available for office space at Wells Ave.
Vacancies are available for office space at Wells Ave.
Supported a comment by Michael Musen on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Michael Musen
My aspiration is that the development enhances existing neighborhoods and does not destroy them with traffic and congestion.
My aspiration is that the development enhances existing neighborhoods and does not destroy them with traffic and congestion.
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
I do not want to look at an 18 story or 14 story building out my window...
I do not want to look at an 18 story or 14 story building out my window...
Supported a comment by Liz M on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Liz M
Rehab the 2 bridges bike path/walkway to allow access into the site
Rehab the 2 bridges bike path/walkway to allow access into the site
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
Really ....do you know when Riverside was first opened. Do you know what it was before it opened?
Really ....do you know when Riverside was first opened. Do you know what it was before it opened?
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
Future generations still want to drive and so do I.
Future generations still want to drive and so do I.
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
The river access borders the town of Weston too.
The river access borders the town of Weston too.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Some of those towns do have large scale developments but they do not abut residential neighborhoods. And the commercial space in those towns have significant vacancies.
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
Some people who are commenting may not live in Newton. and probably work fin real estate or for the developer. The project was approved in 2013 but the developer wanted the state to pay for the garage with our tax money. Kelly we are not Cambridge or Boston, The only thing at
Riverside is the D line. A few bus companies pick up and drop off passengers.
Riverside has a big maintenance facility for the green line cars. The T is getting new cars and will need more room to store them.
Some people who are commenting may not live in Newton. and probably work fin real estate or for the developer. The project was approved in 2013 but the developer wanted the state to pay for the garage with our tax money. Kelly we are not Cambridge or Boston, The only thing at
Riverside is the D line. A few bus companies pick up and drop off passengers.
Riverside has a big maintenance facility for the green line cars. The T is getting new cars and will need more room to store them.
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
Well I guess you do not live in Lower Falls. Grove Street is a 2 lane road, classified as a scenic roadway. The pavement going down to the Riverside is in sad shape with potholes and big holes. Over 15,000 vehicles travel it every day. The proposed project will cause a big divide between the villages of lower falls and Auburndale. The access road has not been approved by the Federal Transporation Department...When there are big sporting championship events the traffic on Grove is backed up on both sides of Lower Falls, Auburndale and rte 95. CArs park in both neighbor hoods when the Riverside lot gets full. Kiss shared parking goodby as there will still not be enough spaces. Also this project will be a private development, so the general public will not be allowed in there. Futher the project is being rushed through,,,it can be only developed once so lets not screw it up. Your taxes will be going up to support the big impact on city services by this development. Newton Center will be next as there is a great shopping area. I see the parking lot on Beacon and the lot on Center being the next big development! Cheers.
Well I guess you do not live in Lower Falls. Grove Street is a 2 lane road, classified as a scenic roadway. The pavement going down to the Riverside is in sad shape with potholes and big holes. Over 15,000 vehicles travel it every day. The proposed project will cause a big divide between the villages of lower falls and Auburndale. The access road has not been approved by the Federal Transporation Department...When there are big sporting championship events the traffic on Grove is backed up on both sides of Lower Falls, Auburndale and rte 95. CArs park in both neighbor hoods when the Riverside lot gets full. Kiss shared parking goodby as there will still not be enough spaces. Also this project will be a private development, so the general public will not be allowed in there. Futher the project is being rushed through,,,it can be only developed once so lets not screw it up. Your taxes will be going up to support the big impact on city services by this development. Newton Center will be next as there is a great shopping area. I see the parking lot on Beacon and the lot on Center being the next big development! Cheers.
Supported a comment by Nancy Finn on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Nancy Finn
Nothing as each village is all set.
Nothing as each village is all set.
Supported a comment by Kay Khan on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Kay Khan
Easy access to Riverside for Lower Falls residents and possibly Wellesley folks to use the public transportation or other amenities being considered by the developer without having to get in a car. DCR is interested as well as developer and yes this will provide additional recreational opportunities to connect with the River, and trails behind Riverside that are being considered
Easy access to Riverside for Lower Falls residents and possibly Wellesley folks to use the public transportation or other amenities being considered by the developer without having to get in a car. DCR is interested as well as developer and yes this will provide additional recreational opportunities to connect with the River, and trails behind Riverside that are being considered
Supported a comment by Debra Ruder on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
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."
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."
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
and on the other side through to the Cove.
Supported a comment by Kay Khan on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Kay Khan
Completion of off street bike and pedestrian access to Riverside Station from Concord Street In Newton Lower Falls along the old rail trail that begins on Washington Street in Wellesley Lower Falls.
Completion of off street bike and pedestrian access to Riverside Station from Concord Street In Newton Lower Falls along the old rail trail that begins on Washington Street in Wellesley Lower Falls.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
https://rwholmes.com/2019/01/2018-quarter-4-market-report/
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
For example, PTC is moving out of Needham to the Seaport area. Their young employees don't want to work in Needham, they prefer the Seaport area.
https://www.ptc.com/en/news/2017/ptc-to-move-global-headquarters-to-boston-seaport
https://www.ptc.com/en/news/2017/ptc-to-move-global-headquarters-to-boston-seaport
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Exactly. No 14 or 18 story office towers there.
Supported a comment by Liz M on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Liz M
The Woodland T stop development added needed housing and has had a minimal impact on the surrounding area. It’s size and scale fits with the surrounding neighborhood.
The Woodland T stop development added needed housing and has had a minimal impact on the surrounding area. It’s size and scale fits with the surrounding neighborhood.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
My question is why anyone thinks that building office space st Riverside is going to be desirable? I understand that Boston office space has a 1% vacancy rate -obviously very desirable. However has anyone looked at the office space vacancy rates in both Needham and Waltham? Right now much of that new office space is vacant. Young people don’t want to live in suburbia. They want to live in Somerville. The people who want to live out here are people who want to own single family homes, not micro apartments 1000sq ft at high cost - $3-4000/ month. That’s Manhattan pricing. The developers will be rather disappointed when they realize that they will build office space and it will not ever get leased.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Why are we waiting for the proposal to go through the City Council process before the results of this visioning process will be incorporated into their plan for this site . Too far down that road.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Exactly. Developers can attempt to put in all kinds of retail stores and apartment buildings but people aren't going to shop or live there if traffic and transport is not exceedingly convenient and cheap. People work too hard and have too little time to spend it on inefficient public transportation or crowded expensive parking lots when there are more affordable hassle-free options available.
Supported a comment by Herbie Robinson on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Herbie Robinson
How does the developer plan on doing this without losing their shirt because all of the existing transportation to/from the site is already overloaded? Rt. 128 is essentially a parking lot for 4-6 hours a day and the Green Line is nearly that saturated. People need to understand that growth isn't possible unless that state gets serious about dealing with regional transportation. Developers see the wealthy community and get $$ in their eyes, but then they don't get enough business to survive. Like that new mall they put into Chestnut Hill 10 years ago. Really slick place, but it was easier to get to Natick and that's where everyone went.
How does the developer plan on doing this without losing their shirt because all of the existing transportation to/from the site is already overloaded? Rt. 128 is essentially a parking lot for 4-6 hours a day and the Green Line is nearly that saturated. People need to understand that growth isn't possible unless that state gets serious about dealing with regional transportation. Developers see the wealthy community and get $$ in their eyes, but then they don't get enough business to survive. Like that new mall they put into Chestnut Hill 10 years ago. Really slick place, but it was easier to get to Natick and that's where everyone went.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Let's be clear, the market rate housing market in Newton is not by any means 'pressured'. There are plenty of available market rate apartments and condos that are looking for renters or buyers. The affordable rate market in Newton is the one that needs to be built up. The Riverside proposal with 15% affordable apartments will hardly help that need for housing in Newton.
Supported a comment by Tim M. on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Tim M.
The presentation at city hall touted 'fixing' the Grove Street traffic problems as a major benefit. When I get off northbound 95 I simply take the off ramp, yield onto Grove and continue. The proposal will use a much longer off-ramp and add 3 traffic lights. How is this an improvement for Auburndale residents?
The presentation at city hall touted 'fixing' the Grove Street traffic problems as a major benefit. When I get off northbound 95 I simply take the off ramp, yield onto Grove and continue. The proposal will use a much longer off-ramp and add 3 traffic lights. How is this an improvement for Auburndale residents?
Supported a comment by Margaret Crook on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Margaret Crook
I’m surprised at the willingness to accept the huge scale of this project by demanding N/S 95 access. Is that what we really want in Newton? A geographically isolated city in a city totally out of keeping with the rest of Newton? We can do better AND DESERVE better!
I’m surprised at the willingness to accept the huge scale of this project by demanding N/S 95 access. Is that what we really want in Newton? A geographically isolated city in a city totally out of keeping with the rest of Newton? We can do better AND DESERVE better!
Supported a comment by Kathy Pillsbury on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Kathy Pillsbury
Access to walking along the Charles. Access to paddling along the Charles.
Access to walking along the Charles. Access to paddling along the Charles.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
Join up with the Charles River Pathway that runs through much of Newton and Waltham.
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 8 months ago
A coffee shop near the train/bus station would be nice as would public bathrooms. Otherwise our local Auburndale businesses are just fine.
Supported a comment by Brian Burba on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Brian Burba
Project is a great opportunity for improved river access ... maybe a public boat house 😁
Project is a great opportunity for improved river access ... maybe a public boat house 😁
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
I wouldn't like to see a tower or big housing complex because if I liked that I would be living in the city, traffic is sometimes bad already on grove st
I wouldn't like to see a tower or big housing complex because if I liked that I would be living in the city, traffic is sometimes bad already on grove st
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Bingo!
Supported a comment by Jack Synnott on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Jack Synnott
The answer to the first statement is that they couldn't agree who would pay for the garage. New parameters are one rich new guy partners with and old rich guy and the process content is to make more profit.
The answer to the first statement is that they couldn't agree who would pay for the garage. New parameters are one rich new guy partners with and old rich guy and the process content is to make more profit.
Supported a comment by Nathaniel Lichtin on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Nathaniel Lichtin
Why are we waiting for a project to be proposed to figure out how much traffic the area can handle and the capacity of other transportation infrastructure. Knowing what amount of traffic the area can handle is critical to figuring out what should be built there. My vision for the site will depend on how the site will impact the traffic and transportation in the area. Without this information it is impossible to have an accurate vision of what is desired or acceptable for the site.
Why are we waiting for a project to be proposed to figure out how much traffic the area can handle and the capacity of other transportation infrastructure. Knowing what amount of traffic the area can handle is critical to figuring out what should be built there. My vision for the site will depend on how the site will impact the traffic and transportation in the area. Without this information it is impossible to have an accurate vision of what is desired or acceptable for the site.
Supported a comment by William E. Roesner on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
William E. Roesner
The expense of new construction mitigates against building housing that is “affordable”. Housing that is “affordable”, has always been older, depreciated, used housing and we are doing very little to conserve what little we have. The motive of developers, is to make money, not to provide any amenity to the community. It is the existing community, those people who have the real investment in the city, and to whom the political community, and the cities planning department should be listening and acting in behalf of , that should be the driving “vision” that any “development” that occurs in Riverside should be responsive to. As a 50 year resident of various villages of Newton, an architect, and 24 year former member of the cities Historical Commission, I will personally be fighting for grass roots input into any changes to this area.
The expense of new construction mitigates against building housing that is “affordable”. Housing that is “affordable”, has always been older, depreciated, used housing and we are doing very little to conserve what little we have. The motive of developers, is to make money, not to provide any amenity to the community. It is the existing community, those people who have the real investment in the city, and to whom the political community, and the cities planning department should be listening and acting in behalf of , that should be the driving “vision” that any “development” that occurs in Riverside should be responsive to. As a 50 year resident of various villages of Newton, an architect, and 24 year former member of the cities Historical Commission, I will personally be fighting for grass roots input into any changes to this area.
Supported a comment by Mary Elizabeth Patti on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Mary Elizabeth Patti
Bald eagles!!! We need to maintain green space and avoid disruption of the environment. I was walking behind Riverside last weekend and saw a bald eagle. High rise buildings do not fit with the quiet riverside green space we currently have which is such an awesome resource. We need to maintain and protect this!
Bald eagles!!! We need to maintain green space and avoid disruption of the environment. I was walking behind Riverside last weekend and saw a bald eagle. High rise buildings do not fit with the quiet riverside green space we currently have which is such an awesome resource. We need to maintain and protect this!
Supported a comment by Mary Elizabeth Patti on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Mary Elizabeth Patti
It is critical to improve pedestrian safety in the Grove Street / Riverside corridor. Reducing traffic, improving speed mitigation and adding pedestrian-controlled traffic lights at designated crosswalks would be essential. If we are to truly embrace the importance of the public transportation hub at riverside we need to make sure that safety of neighborhood pedestrians trying to reach the hub is not further compromised -!but rather enhanced.
It is critical to improve pedestrian safety in the Grove Street / Riverside corridor. Reducing traffic, improving speed mitigation and adding pedestrian-controlled traffic lights at designated crosswalks would be essential. If we are to truly embrace the importance of the public transportation hub at riverside we need to make sure that safety of neighborhood pedestrians trying to reach the hub is not further compromised -!but rather enhanced.
Supported a comment by Sheila Doyle on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Sheila Doyle
I would like to see a reasonably-sized development that includes a small grocery store and/or drug store, small coffee shop, publicly-accessible bathrooms, plenty of green space without sacrificing trees, affordable housing, parking, more than one entrance, and connection/improvement of the walkway/path behind Riverside to connect with other walking paths and/or bikeways. I think Newton needs more affordable housing options, and I also think some thought should be put into how many apartments we can reasonably add without overwhelming the school, area, and public services. I agree with Liz's comment that the development should be set back from Grove St, because a wall of buildings right on that hilly street would be terrible. Traffic is already a problem in Lower Falls, especially when folks are trying to find parking during Red Sox games or days with large marches downtown, so careful planning should be put into making sure there is plenty of parking and keeping in mind how traffic tends to back up on Grove St especially when the parking lot gets full at Riverside. It would be phenomenal to have a Commuter Rail option at Riverside, and a direct route in to Cambridge without having to switch trolleys/buses multiple times. I would like to see the new plan be pedestrian-friendly; I like the path between Riverside and Norumbega Ct, it's nice to walk on and there is nice landscaping and lighting there and it feels safe from nearby cars.
I would like to see a reasonably-sized development that includes a small grocery store and/or drug store, small coffee shop, publicly-accessible bathrooms, plenty of green space without sacrificing trees, affordable housing, parking, more than one entrance, and connection/improvement of the walkway/path behind Riverside to connect with other walking paths and/or bikeways. I think Newton needs more affordable housing options, and I also think some thought should be put into how many apartments we can reasonably add without overwhelming the school, area, and public services. I agree with Liz's comment that the development should be set back from Grove St, because a wall of buildings right on that hilly street would be terrible. Traffic is already a problem in Lower Falls, especially when folks are trying to find parking during Red Sox games or days with large marches downtown, so careful planning should be put into making sure there is plenty of parking and keeping in mind how traffic tends to back up on Grove St especially when the parking lot gets full at Riverside. It would be phenomenal to have a Commuter Rail option at Riverside, and a direct route in to Cambridge without having to switch trolleys/buses multiple times. I would like to see the new plan be pedestrian-friendly; I like the path between Riverside and Norumbega Ct, it's nice to walk on and there is nice landscaping and lighting there and it feels safe from nearby cars.
Supported a comment by Patricia McCaffrey on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Patricia McCaffrey
Better public transportation options: direct access for commuters to 128N/S and the Pike, more commuter parking, more frequent green line service, a commuter rail station. Then, add a few restaurants, a coffee shop and open space.
Better public transportation options: direct access for commuters to 128N/S and the Pike, more commuter parking, more frequent green line service, a commuter rail station. Then, add a few restaurants, a coffee shop and open space.
Supported a comment by Patricia McCaffrey on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Patricia McCaffrey
Why is the city doing a visioning process on this site when a development plan was already signed in 2013 after extensive negotiation with residents and city?
Why is the city doing a visioning process on this site when a development plan was already signed in 2013 after extensive negotiation with residents and city?
Supported a comment by J Bartholomew on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
J Bartholomew
Something very much smaller. This is ridiculous. The impact on Auburndale would be profound, in a bad way.
Something very much smaller. This is ridiculous. The impact on Auburndale would be profound, in a bad way.
Supported a comment by Mike Nogrady on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Mike Nogrady
Restore the Riverside stop on the Worcester/Natick commuter rail line
Restore the Riverside stop on the Worcester/Natick commuter rail line
Supported a comment by Matt Rayel on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Matt Rayel
Add a Starbucks - done! :) But a cafe and a few merchants would be nice. How about starting with improved service and then expanding the pickup/drop-off by consolidating both parking lots into 1 parking garage on the west side of the property. It’s always a cluster when I pickup my wife at the train.
Add a Starbucks - done! :) But a cafe and a few merchants would be nice. How about starting with improved service and then expanding the pickup/drop-off by consolidating both parking lots into 1 parking garage on the west side of the property. It’s always a cluster when I pickup my wife at the train.
Supported a comment by Kathy Pillsbury on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Kathy Pillsbury
All the long term parking areas -- for residents or employees -- should be EV ready. It would be expensive to have to install extra wiring later.
All the long term parking areas -- for residents or employees -- should be EV ready. It would be expensive to have to install extra wiring later.
Supported a comment by Debra Ruder on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Debra Ruder
The development should be only as large/dense/tall as the site and city's schools, roads, infrastructure, environment, social and emergency services, and surrounding villages can bear. In 2013, when it approved the "Station at Riverside" plan after years of public meetings and negotiations, the City of Newton deemed that to be roughly 580,000 square feet. There is so much at stake. Let's take the time to get it right!
The development should be only as large/dense/tall as the site and city's schools, roads, infrastructure, environment, social and emergency services, and surrounding villages can bear. In 2013, when it approved the "Station at Riverside" plan after years of public meetings and negotiations, the City of Newton deemed that to be roughly 580,000 square feet. There is so much at stake. Let's take the time to get it right!
Supported a comment by john stewart on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
john stewart
what happens if the overwhelming consensus is that there is almost nothing of conceivable benefit to Lower Falls and Auburndale that might come from this development, and that there is no chance whatsoever of "integrating" the development with the community life of either neighborhood?
what happens if the overwhelming consensus is that there is almost nothing of conceivable benefit to Lower Falls and Auburndale that might come from this development, and that there is no chance whatsoever of "integrating" the development with the community life of either neighborhood?
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Transportation hub with adequate parking. The reason the new indigo line including riverside stop on Framingham Worcester commuter rail line is so important is that the parking for the Auburndale CR stop already spills over to the Auburndale neighboring streets. People come from further west and park at Auburndale CR stop. There is some parking there but clearly not enough. The Williams School drop off pick up also spills over to the Auburndale neighborhood streets. If the Auburndale stop CR parking moved over to Riverside the neighborhood streets wouldn’t be all parked up all day.
Supported a comment by Erin Giesser on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Erin Giesser
Traffic will back up through here and cars will stream through our small neighborhood and narrow streets to avoid lights at Grove. What will be done to prevent this?
Traffic will back up through here and cars will stream through our small neighborhood and narrow streets to avoid lights at Grove. What will be done to prevent this?
Supported a comment by David D on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
David D
I would like to see a smaller useful development. Publicly accessible bathrooms, a place to eat at reasonable rates and interesting shops. I would also like to see this development turned into a true transportation hub by connecting the end of the D line to the Framingham commuter rail line in both directions.
I would like to see a smaller useful development. Publicly accessible bathrooms, a place to eat at reasonable rates and interesting shops. I would also like to see this development turned into a true transportation hub by connecting the end of the D line to the Framingham commuter rail line in both directions.
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
What did we miss? Stormwater infiltration, greenspace, open areas, play areas, shade
What did we miss? Stormwater infiltration, greenspace, open areas, play areas, shade
Supported a comment by Christine Lacey on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Christine Lacey
I would like to see river access for the residents of the new apartments, and for residents of the existing neighborhood. Also, link it up to other river paths. People who live at the Comm Ave apartments, people who live on Charles Street, people who use the canoe and kayak rental, etc., should NOT have to walk all the way around. They should be able to walk along the river to get to Riverside station. I doubt people even know they can take the green line to Riverside and walk over to the canoe and kayak rentals. Many cities and towns, Waltham included, have made sure to utilize the space along the Charles River for recreation. Why can't we do the same?
I would like to see river access for the residents of the new apartments, and for residents of the existing neighborhood. Also, link it up to other river paths. People who live at the Comm Ave apartments, people who live on Charles Street, people who use the canoe and kayak rental, etc., should NOT have to walk all the way around. They should be able to walk along the river to get to Riverside station. I doubt people even know they can take the green line to Riverside and walk over to the canoe and kayak rentals. Many cities and towns, Waltham included, have made sure to utilize the space along the Charles River for recreation. Why can't we do the same?
Supported a comment by Randall Block on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 9 months ago
Randall Block
Direct connection from I-95/128 should be in BOTH directions, not just northbound as Mark Development proposes Even then, there will be plenty of additional traffic heading to Riverside on Grove Street from the rest of Newton and adjacent towns.
Direct connection from I-95/128 should be in BOTH directions, not just northbound as Mark Development proposes Even then, there will be plenty of additional traffic heading to Riverside on Grove Street from the rest of Newton and adjacent towns.
Supported a comment by Christopher Allen on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
Christopher Allen
It is very important to drive this green space initiative so that future generations have multiple transportation options other than driving
It is very important to drive this green space initiative so that future generations have multiple transportation options other than driving
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
Except the Street has had considerable retail turnover since it was built. Can the area support the retail proposed?
Commented on Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
Condos not apartment buildings.
Supported a comment by Liz M on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
Liz M
Make sure there isn’t a wall of buildings along Grove St. Any development should be set back from the road and stepped back too.
Make sure there isn’t a wall of buildings along Grove St. Any development should be set back from the road and stepped back too.
Supported a comment by Liz M on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
Liz M
Create a connection to the Auburndale commuter rail that could bring commuters to Kendall Sq. (the Indigo line).
Create a connection to the Auburndale commuter rail that could bring commuters to Kendall Sq. (the Indigo line).
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
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
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
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
The Framingham Worcester commuter rail connection to riverside as a transportation hub needs to be planned out before any mixed use development proposal at riverside is approved. Anything else is shortsighted.
The Framingham Worcester commuter rail connection to riverside as a transportation hub needs to be planned out before any mixed use development proposal at riverside is approved. Anything else is shortsighted.
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
My aspiration for the riverside site is that my special lower falls neighborhood is not destroyed by traffic. The exit off 95 in either direction should not turn into the same situation as exit 17 off the Pike.
My aspiration for the riverside site is that my special lower falls neighborhood is not destroyed by traffic. The exit off 95 in either direction should not turn into the same situation as exit 17 off the Pike.
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
We need a Low impact community plan. No one in the community wants an oversized develop that just adds to the developers bottom line.
We need a Low impact community plan. No one in the community wants an oversized develop that just adds to the developers bottom line.
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
Connection to Lower Falls. Some amenities for that village.
Connection to Lower Falls. Some amenities for that village.
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
A greatly improved experience for those who take trains and buses out of the site.
A greatly improved experience for those who take trains and buses out of the site.
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
Transportation Hub first
Transportation Hub first
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
Developer needs less priority
Developer needs less priority
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
I would very much like to see expanded public transportation options, and expanded frequency of transportation. I am also interested in more open space for public use. Some housing would be great, but it should be of similar density to the surrounding villages.
I would very much like to see expanded public transportation options, and expanded frequency of transportation. I am also interested in more open space for public use. Some housing would be great, but it should be of similar density to the surrounding villages.
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
New recreational connections ( to path on charles river to golf course to canoe rental etc) and new commuter connections (short walk to commuter rail stop in back)
New recreational connections ( to path on charles river to golf course to canoe rental etc) and new commuter connections (short walk to commuter rail stop in back)
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
A coffee shop and public restrooms!
A coffee shop and public restrooms!
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
I am against any large development that changes the character or out Auburndale neighborhood. We don't need more traffic or congestion. I can imagine some kind of rehabilitation of the existing T station and surrounds but not one that brings in more foot and car traffic. Park land and green space would be ideal
I am against any large development that changes the character or out Auburndale neighborhood. We don't need more traffic or congestion. I can imagine some kind of rehabilitation of the existing T station and surrounds but not one that brings in more foot and car traffic. Park land and green space would be ideal
Supported a comment by Larry Rosenberg on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
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.
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.
Supported a comment by coUrbanizer via Text on
Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago
coUrbanizer via Text
My aspirations for the riverside site is that it's size and density is scaled to what matches the surrounding residential areas.
My aspirations for the riverside site is that it's size and density is scaled to what matches the surrounding residential areas.
Followed Newton Riverside Visioning Process
4 years, 10 months ago