Selling Smart Growth
Someone with credentials came to Natick with a plan for “smart growth”. It’s the latest trend in community development, placing high density living in the midst of a thriving community, close to public transportation, and shopping. Density of building will leave more land available as open space. There should be transportation into the city within walking distance, and places to buy your food, restaurants, and various other sundries within a short walk. Investors could purchase units in order to rent to lower income people, satisfying a need for affordable housing in the town. Natick officials hailed the project as an important step forward, as they would benefit from the increased tax revenue that residential brings.
Was that last year when they found out the Paperboard Company was leaving town? No.
Was that thought in play when the South St. residential project was in the planning stages? No.
I think the year was 1974, and the result was Natick Village at Kendall Crossing. Or was it 2000 with the Cloverleaf tower proposal? Or 2005 at the Mall? Or maybe any one of dozens of other proposals which saw completion over the past twenty or so years all over town? For the case can be made for all of them.
I thought about this last night, as I sat in traffic for what seemed like hours on my way home from work.
Seems like the Planners have twisted the meaning of smart growth to suit the needs for increased tax revenue. All of the development in Natick is better described as sprawl. The only smart growth I know of might have succeeded if the residential plan for downtown where the new fire station and police complex had proceeded as planned in 1987. I understand the town took the land by eminent domain in order to build a municipal complex.
Comment by Christopher M. | December 29, 2006
I’m not sure why the avalanche of nastiness on this topic. (it seems to have bothered a member of the School Committee, and the Conservation Commission, and I’ve had to remove some rude comments) However, think about the implications to traffic. Natick officials have courted the developer on this one as no other. And yet, never once having done traffic studies nor talked about school implications! The brand new middle school which these children will attend, is already bursting at the seams for space. Imagine the controversy when the residents find out they need an addition there.
Comment by Dave | December 30, 2006
The reason for the opposition to your position is the insider interest in the CRT through downtown Natick, and the plan for open space money to help purchase the property for same from CSX. People who are active in town government are hoping to gain advantage for the project. In light of projected budget shortfalls, and a possibility of an operational override, to suggest at this time, that the town should spend millions of dollars on a walking trail would doom the idea.
Comment by Mr Reed | January 17, 2007
Unfortunately there is no smart growth plan for Natick. The Village at Kendal Crossing, Cloverleaf and the Mall all have components of smart growth, mostly density, but lack even more important components like connectivity and scale. If we want a good model of smart growth then we need to look no further than downtown.
Downtown has the essential like scale, mixed use, walkability, connected street pattern, public buildings (i.e. post office, library, churches, town hall), public spaces, relative density, mass transit. Compare these characteristics to the forementioned projects and all they have is density, (Kendall Crossing has mass transit, too). The next time a smart growth project is proposed, don’t just look at the density, look for all characteristics that will make the project a true Traditional Neighborhood Development that goes beyond a few keywords like smart growth and sustainable living.
Comment by Displaced | January 23, 2007
Missing in every one of these dense developments, is a local grocery, and local transit. A train into Boston isn’t the local bus nor trolley that takes a shopper around town with adequate frequency. Natick is a suburb, with necessities available by automobile. The salesmen who propose places like Paperboard, use a yardstick and urban cliche, in order to sell their projects.
Comment by dave | January 23, 2007
I can not argue that public transportation is adequate or that grocery stores are within walking distance. Defineitely two areas that could need improvement. I think that the downtown area may soon be able to support a small grocery store as it once did. As housing and people moved away from the core center of town so did things like grocery stores. Natick is fortunate in that it is older, developed before the modern form of suburbs with dependance on auto life style. With a few things like a grocery store and local dependable public transprotation the core downtown can truly be the walkable neighborhood it was designed to be. Developement with higher density will help support this.
If there is going to be 200 units built in Natick, then where is the best place for those units? We can not stop growth, so we need to manage it and place it where there are the most services to support it. I would rather have 200 units on 6 acres located within walking distance to town than 200 spread out over 40 acres in South Natick. No location will be absolutey perfect and eliminate all car trips, but putting development in core downtown areas will reduce the amount of car trips and makes much more sense than the alternative.
Comment by Displaced | January 23, 2007
I’m not sure I see the logic of advocating for crowding downtown with apartments and condos. What support services are there downtown? Jobs? No, they’re already scattered. Schools? No. Clothing stores? No. Grocerys? No. How does housing downtown eliminate car trips? Everything you need is a car trip away.
Oh, I see, it keeps the developers away from your neighborhood. Nice try.
Comment by J. Friedkin | January 26, 2007
Crowding downtown with apartments and condos is not a solution. A downtown must have a mix of uses to allow a reduction of car trips. Right now there is a decent mix even with the key missing ingredient like a supermarket. Here’s a list of places I am able to walk to and reduce a good amount of weekly car trips: Natick Center Commuter Rail Station, Post office, Pizza Plus, Library, Town Hall, Cafe on Common, Cleaners, Middlesex Savings. These businesses and public buildings are the vital mixed use component of a strong downtown. Sure, I do make other car trips but by living close to town I am able to reduce many trips.
Could there and should there be more businesses downtown? Absolutely. Is housing another major component in this vital mix? Yes. Will housing downtown eliminate all car trips? No, but it will reduce them. It will also provide a customer base within walking distance and provide an opportunity to “develop” a grocery store downtown. Are developers in my neighborhood? Yes, otherwise I would not have a house. I assume someone developed your house, too.
Downtown also does have a thriving business community with good jobs, you can check out Natick Center Associates website for details.
Comment by Displaced | January 27, 2007
“These businesses and public buildings are the vital mixed use component of a strong downtown.” I have to say it’s a stretch to look at the meager offerings you present and believe one can spend a day downtown doing things.
Whether I live in Wethersfield or behind town hall, I think I’ll need my car.(Actually, I’m probably closer to most of my needs living in Wethersfield.)
Comment by Dave | January 27, 2007