The meeting began with Robin announcing the agenda, which included the following: 

— How applying for landmarking status prevented the demolition of 36 Maple Ave 

— The upcoming override 

— Potential improvements to Burr Park, and 

— What the cancellation of the Department of Transportation’s  (DOT) recent meeting might mean for the rotary’s Long-Term Planning Project.

36 Maple Historical Preservation Update:  Suzanne Laughlin shared the story of how she and her husband sold their historic home on Maple Avenue to a young couple, only to discover later that the new owners had immediately applied for a teardown permit. After neighbors, Ward 1 City Councilors, and the historical commission intervened, the house was landmarked to prevent demolition, and the new owners eventually hired a historic architect to renovate the property instead. 

Newton Property Landmarking Discussion: The discussion then moved to “How and Why to landmark a property” in Newton. Councilor Alison Leary and others noted the importance of proactive preservation efforts and the need for better outreach to realtors and homeowners about historic preservation requirements. The group agreed that once a property is landmarked and renovation plans are approved by the Historic Commission, the owners must adhere to those plans and cannot make significant changes without further commission approval. In conclusion, it was agreed that landmarking a property is an excellent way to preserve our history for future generations.

Burr Park Planning and Tennis Court Improvements:  Ellen Gibson noted the poor condition of Burr Park, especially the tennis courts, and suggested how the courts would benefit from low-cost repairs (A full renovation is unlikely since this project ranks 127th in the city’s Capital Improvement Plan). Options for such a short-term fix include patching cracks, repainting lines, and adding pickleball markings. The neighborhood association is in the process of securing bids to implement these limited improvements and make the courts usable for residents and students at the nearby Bigelow Middle School. 

Once improved, the courts would also provide potential rental opportunities. In response, Mayor Marc announced plans to conduct a comprehensive parks assessment using in-house talent to inventory and evaluate all city recreational facilities. This work would begin in late fall, and the goal would be to create an implementable plan for facility improvements. Councilor Oliver reported on a recent walk with John Rice, Newton’s Chief of Community Services, to identify smaller fixes for Burr Park, which will be addressed separately from the larger planning process. He agreed to follow up with John regarding this list.

The Override:  

Mayor Marc Laredo announced his intention to seek voter approval for a municipal override to fund four major projects:
1. A new police station
2.  Renovations to Newton South High School
3. Renovations to or new construction of Ward School and Underwood School

He plans to present this request to the City Council in April.  Brown Middle School would have a separate vote in the future due to the availability of potential MSBA  (Massachusetts School Building Authority) funding. The Mayor explained that applying for such funding is a multi-year process that would begin as soon as the currently funded MSBA project (Countryside Elementary) was complete.

The Mayor reported strong support from the school committee and city council for a proposed school building override. He explained that Underwood and Ward schools would be replaced simultaneously or sequentially. When asked about the role of city officials in promoting the override, Mayor Marc clarified that city officials like the COO (Chief Operating Officer). Josh Morse can discuss existing conditions and new building plans but cannot actively advocate for the override. Elected officials, however, have more flexibility in their advocacy roles. He concluded by announcing the formation of a Kitchen Cabinet Override Committee and invited all interested residents to join.

Newton Corner Rotary Project Updates: The primary focus of this meeting was the cancellation of the recent meeting at which the DOT was to present preliminary findings from the Long Term Planning Project for the Newton Corner rotary, including related pedestrian safety concerns. Representative Sangiolo reported that MassDOT has gone radio silent on project results, with the agency claiming they need more time to ensure alignment with community values. Councilor John Oliver explained that there are ongoing challenges with state and city coordination regarding transportation projects, with MassDOT struggling to manage multiple initiatives simultaneously.  After the Department of Transportation canceled the meeting, Richard Belkin, a former NCNA president and a long-time advocate for improving the rotary, formed a task force to identify affordable pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements. The Task Force proposed five specific items that have strong community support. These include:

1. Improve the safety of pedestrian connections on Charlesbank Road to Nonantum Road

2. Increase pedestrian safety by improving the lighting at the intersection of Centre and Vernon Streets 

3. Make the pedestrian crossing at Park St. and Centre Ave. less dangerous

4. Restore bus service to Boston that was decreased after Covid 

5. Make Washington Street two-way on the north side of the Turnpike

Dr. Srdjan Nedeljkovic presented analysis showing that all five MassDOT project alternatives supported making Washington Street north of the Turnpike two-way to reduce circular traffic movements. Mayor Laredo committed to reviewing the task force recommendations and walkability issues over the next couple of weeks before providing updates at the next meeting.

The meeting concluded at 8:35.  

Thank you for your interest in the NCNA and in improving the quality of life in Newton Corner.

Warm regards,

Robin Boger, President

NCNA

Addendum

A summary of the history of building the Mass Pike Extension is presented below. My intent in presenting this summary is to demonstrate how complicated the process of big-scale development is. What we identify as key issues at the ground level might not, in actuality, be what really drives decision-making. That was certainly the case with the Mass Pike Extension. 

My interest in the history of the Mass Pike Extension began when I came across a MA thesis written in 1994 by Stacey Bancroft Neustadt. It was called “The Impact of the Mass Turnpike Extension on the Citizens of the City of Newton” and included the following  (troubling) quotes

’’The refusal (of the MTA) to participate in a feasibility study. . . was a disservice to the citizens of Newton. . . ”The attempt to determine the road’s long-term viability was not even undertaken”

“The City of Newton was truly in the wrong place at the wrong time.  In an era of fast-paced road building, but before accountability, it found its voice silenced and its people uprooted.  What they had known was disrupted, but they never had the chance to slow the tide of events and examine what was happening.”

If you were to Google “History of Newton Corner, Building the Mass Pike,” you would find an official history that reads as follows: 

“The construction of the Mass Turnpike Extension through Newton Corner in the early 1960’s transformed the village from a bustling 19th-century commercial hub into a transit corridor.

The thriving commercial and residential center at the intersection of Washington and Centre streets featured local shops, churches, farm stands, taverns, and neighborhood parks. 

• The Route: Backed by the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (MTA) led by William F. Callahan, planners chose to route the 12-mile turnpike extension into Boston directly along the path of the existing railroad bed. 

• Resistance: Newton residents and local leaders fiercely opposed the project through petitions, public hearings, and alternative proposals, but the MTA possessed broad eminent domain powers and immunity from local oversight.

• Destruction: Groundbreaking began in 1962. The deep highway cut and the complex "circle of death" rotary interchange demolished roughly one-third of Newton Corner's businesses, split the village in two, and tore through historic street patterns. In all, the Pike extension displaced 550 families in Newton, destroyed 288 houses, 48 businesses, 8 apartment buildings, 2 fire stations, and 4 RR stations.”

What is not often reported — but provides the context necessary to understand the dynamics of what did happen — is this: 

• Economic Need: Post WWII, Boston was in desperate need of economic development. The 1948 Master Highway Plan for the Metropolitan Area recommended a new expressway be built to supplement Route 9 and connect Routes 20 & 30. This was the seed of the idea for the Mass Turnpike, which would follow the old  Boston & Albany RR line.

• The MTA:  In 1952, legislation, supported by Newton resident and commissioner of the Mass DPW, William Callahan, was passed to create the Mass Turnpike Authority.  Callahan was appointed as its leader. The MTA was given an unprecedented amount of power, including the authority to use private funding and to take by eminent domain lands necessary for the construction of the highway. It was also free from government control and therefore not responsible to the citizens of the Commonwealth.

• Toll Road vs Highway: In 1955, when legislators turned to the MTA to build the highway, Callahan proposed funding it as a toll road with bonds to be paid back by tolls. In 1956, however, Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower signed into law the Interstate Highway Act, which offered state highway departments 90% federal funding for their highway projects.  Now highways could be built for a dime on the dollar, gutting the appeal of Callahan’s toll road. 

• Two Men, Two Views: John Volpe, who had been Callahan’s successor at the DPW and then had become Governor, wanted to use the Highway Act to support the building of what was called the “Western Freeway”. His preferred route, however, was slightly different from that proposed by MTA head Callahan. There was little love lost between Volpe and Callahan, and building the Mass Pike Extension became a high-stakes political and bureaucratic power struggle between two powerful adversaries.

• Prudential Center: The situation became more complicated when the Prudential Insurance company announced it would only develop its proposed office tower and residential complex in Boston if the state agreed to Callahan’s plan. The decision ultimately became a choice between building the Prudential Center or the Freeway.  Due to Boston's great economic need, Callahan’s toll road extension plan was allowed to proceed.

I cite this history because it illustrates the complexity of public/private and city/state relationships in developing property for the common good. In the recent past (2018, 2022 and 2024), the DOT organized several studies to address the impact of the rotary on Newton Corner. Throughout this process, the priorities of the residents of Newton Corner have remained he same:

1. Improve pedestrian access, safety, and mobility when crossing the rotary

2. Reconnect neighborhoods divided by the interchange

3. Minimize impacts to residential neighborhoods from the externalities of 1-90 transportation demands

4. Improve pubic transit

Conclusion:
It seems we are now at another pause, without knowing why or what will happen next. 
Has important federal legislation changed the state’s priorities?
Is this another Prudential Center situation with threatening economic consequences? How do we assess what is really happening and respond in a way that will benefit our village?  
All we know, for now, is that we don’t know.

Join the NCNA Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/214498274674458/