Some comments on Andy Levin’s December 1st Editorial in the Tab: “Time to Build on Austin St.,” with the editorial in bold:
Plans to redevelop the underused and unsightly Austin Street municipal parking lot have been in the works for the better part of a decade.
Some residents are concerned by the appearances created by earlier involvement by some players in the process including:
- …ever since a Citizens Advisory Group that included Dinosaur Capital Partners recommended in its final report to declare the lot surplus and develop it.
- …initiated during a recession in part brought on by the finance practices by AIG, whose subsequent real estate CEO is now called on to assess the project finances in the Tab.
- …in a year that Dinosaur Capital Partners was part of a group of financial executives contributing $45,000 to the city’s override campaign, chaired by the AIG Real Estate CEO assessing the project.
- Note: The developer’s and other players city activities reflect good civic involvement and commitment to the city, but in context of for-profit role in project now to some citizens create appearances of conflict of interest.
Now it’s time for the Board of Aldermen to approve a special permit allowing construction of a moderately sized mixed-use development that will help ensure the future vitality of Newtonville and meet essential housing needs.
- “Moderately sized,” being twice the size of adjacent buildings on Austin Street and Walnut St.
- “Mixed use,” originally intended to be retail/residential, but which now can be up to 40% office space (referred to as “innovation” space)
- Retail use, intended to “complement, but not compete” with existing Newtonville businesses, but that will include up to 40% restaurant space that will somehow not compete with existing Walnut St. restaurants.
Make no mistake about it: Newtonville needs the Austin Street project. The 68 one- and two-bedroom apartments, plus 5,000 square feet of commercial space would create a new hub and an essential infusion of foot traffic that will benefit businesses along Walnut and Washington streets for decades.
- As confirm by 34 Newtonville businesses signing a petition , 68 units constitute only 2% of the 31,800 housing units in walkable range of the village center. Its marginal foot traffic contribution will be more than offset by the errand visits by drivers turned away by inconvenient (and likely metered 7 day a week) parking.
Without the development, many Newtonville businesses could eventually wither on the vine, negatively impacted by online competition and more-dynamic shopping areas.
- Online competition is not new. The local businesses thriving now will be significantly impacted when they lose convenient parking. That is their judgment. Does government know better?
It is important to note that the development would not reduce public parking capacity in Newtonville, as 124 spaces have been preserved,
- Parking area will be reduced by 30% and will be largely pushed to the far western side of the lot, away from Walnut St. businesses. Current capacity is 159 spaces 9′ wide. These will be replaced by 124 spaces 8’4” wide with tight radius turns and support beam obstructions.
about half of them under the building (similar to the Chestnut Hill Star Market).
- Where tight turns, support columns, and narrow 8’4” spaces will lead to double space utilization by SUVs, dinged doors, and an inability for shoppers to see from the street if there is available space.
Residents would park in an underground garage.
- True, unless the residents choose to park in the main lot during peak weekend demand while coming and going during the day, rather than dealing with underground narrow spaces, tight turn, and dead-ends requiring quadruple k-turns to get out of. That is unless spaces are not free as they are now on weekends. Even a few quarters might be worth the hassle of avoiding fighting neighbors for limited underground garage space.
As much as Newtonville needs the project, so does all of Newton. In a city where a single-family “starter home” costs close to $700,000, and where rents are high, it only makes sense to diversify the housing stock.
- ASP projects collecting rents of $3255/month for two bedroom units overlooking the pike and Star Market lot. Perhaps this is more affordable than a $600,000 mortgage on a house with a yard, trees, and a driveway, but not by much.
- In their limited-school-impact calculations, ASP projects the development will predominately not serve families with children.
The introduction of more apartments into a market puts downward pressure on existing rental prices by increasing supply.
- Fluid regional housing demand required by Boston will not be affected by 68 units to create downward pressure. What will be affected will be Zillow-like location-based $/sq ft. rent estimates, which will biased upward by upscale rents.
Many young professionals as well as financially comfortable senior citizens may find apartment living in a downtown area preferable, but their choices here now are quite limited.
- Newtonville is a village, not a “downtown.” There is no transit access to downtown Boston in late evening from the site. Transit serves 9-5 commuters to South Station and Back Bay.
Critically, a quarter of the units at Austin Street would meet affordable housing standards,
- But the affordable units will still be relatively expensive by Newtonville norms.
allowing folks with moderate incomes to either stay here or join us.
- Accommodating 16-24 people with moderate incomes (how many total bedrooms in 16 units?).
Empowering more people to call Newton home (perhaps including some who already work here) should be viewed as a great opportunity, not a liability. The region’s housing stock doesn’t come close to meeting its needs.
- The free market will play the largest role in this, with regard to private development choices and where businesses choose to locate or grow. Creating a one time transfer of a $20 million taxpayer asset to venture capitalists is not the best way for Newton to address this issue.
This is undeniable fact. The turn of the 20th century saw the rise of three-deckers to accommodate the great wave of European immigration. After World War II, single-family homes were built to meet the needs of the baby boom (including in Oak Hill Park and throughout south Newton).
- The market responded to the needs of the time.
Now there is a growing demand for multi-unit housing — smaller residences for growing numbers of seniors, who are living much longer, and so-called millennials, who marry later and eventually have smaller families than their parents and grandparents did. Austin Street, and other similar projects, seeks to correct this housing mismatch.
- ASP’s lawyer stated at a public hearing that the likely target market-rate units was divorced fathers wanting to stay near their children. An unfortunate but real market need, but not mentioned in promotional materials.
Opponents of the plan — a vociferous and well-organized minority in the community — have expressed legitimate concerns,
- Opponents of the plan consist mainly of Newtonville residents and small business owners who have learned of the plan late in the game, and who show up at public hearings in a mostly disorganized way and speak to their concerns.
- A majority of Newton residents have voted that city property should not be surplused without voter consent.
- Proponents of the plan are quite well organized, with full time interns and public hearing speakers who appeared to be choreographed from pre-established speaker lists. May of the speakers have ties to the developer and housing development in Newton.
- While many respected Newtonville friends and neighbors have spoken in favor of the project, the typical supporter at the public hearings often seemed to begin with “I live [anywhere but Newtonville] and in my day job I am a [developer/architect/politician/housing advocate/person-who-has-been-convinced-they-will-get-a-unit] and I have driven across town to state that fully support this project.”
resulting in the project being scaled down from its original size.
- The fact that Dinosaur Capital Partners proposed an outrageously-sized original project size with New York City style car lifts and parking attendants to negotiate down from does not make the reduction meaningful.
- The project is not in line with what the city originally stated as their interest (18 units, 10,000 sq ft retail, 10% public space, multiple small mass buildings).
However, rather than play a constructive role since the special permit application was docketed this past spring, the opposition has demonstrated its answer all along was going to be “No way, not here, never.”
- Many opponents strongly object to giving away a ~$20 million dollar asset that is key to the current vitality of Walnut St businesses.
- Many would fully support the same project on the private Orr building lot to be redeveloped.
- Many would support a small project focused entirely on providing low-income housing rather than 50+ market rate units making a loop-hole contribution to a 40B quota.
Persuading some Newtonville business owners that their shops and eateries wouldn’t survive the construction period was particularly objectionable, considering the city and the developer have developed a plan to mitigate what will no doubt be a challenging time.
- “Some” = 34 businesses, a good proportion of the retail store fronts on Walnut and Austin St.
- The business concern extends beyond the construction mitgation plan, which includes needing to shuttle their employees across town.
- Many businesses have not been cited as changing their mind despite communication of mitigation and lobbying by the Mayor (well documented on twitter).
Moreover, it is difficult to comprehend why the project’s leading adversary on the board,
- The alderwoman representing the impacted community, and most in touch with their concerns.
Ward 2 Alderwoman Emily Norton, director of the Massachusetts Sierra Club, can fight so hard against a project that would serve as a model for
- An Alderwoman who stands out by taking her role seriously, representing the interests of the city, rather than seeing her role as a means to act out her personal mission, which is aligned with…
energy-efficient, environmentally friendly, transit-oriented development.
- Newton residents who have thriving businesses they can walk or drive to for a variety of errands and good meals, within minutes of their homes, may need to travel much father when these businesses are lost, or resort to circling nearly full lots for several minutes searching for parking on the far side of the lot under a building.
- Newtonville is not served by a subway or significant bus service. The Commuter rail serves a narrow type of downtown commuter. It has a very low walk score.
As the results of November’s election clearly demonstrate,
- One of the leading proponents of the development and long-time incumbent on the board, was defeated by not one, but two challengers in Ward 2.
Newton residents who understand the city’s housing needs far outnumber those opposed to almost any type of multi-unit residential development.
- Most Newton residents are not tuned into the issues, and could not name more than three or so Alderman without a ballot in front of them. In Newtonville where the residents are paying attention, one of the two incumbent supporter lost. This supporter will now vote in the board’s lame duck sessions this month.
This is heartening, because Newton is a special community that has traditionally led, not reacted. We have never been paralyzed by fear of change, but instead sought to be bold in the face of it. Some would seemingly build a figurative wall around the Garden City, in order to “preserve its character” — but only for those fortunate enough or wealthy enough to enjoy living here.
- Newtonville is one of the most economically diverse villages in the city. Adding 50 units with rents up to $3255/month will not diversify it.
Rejecting the special permit application for the Austin Street project next week would indeed seem a most “un-Newton” thing to do. We hope aldermen who have not yet decided how to vote will at least give this notion some thought.
- Opponents hope the alderman will recognize that the project does not meet many of the stated special permit criteria and appropriately vote against it.