Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board hears City Realty plan for Chestnut Hill site that could add hundreds of units and billions in value; board flags shadow, traffic and affordability
Summary
Town staff and developer City Realty presented a phased redevelopment concept for the Chestnut Hill Office Park proposing three buildings (one up to about 20 stories), roughly 850 underground parking spaces and a large central lawn. Staff estimated roughly $9—10 million in new annual tax revenue; board members pressed for shadow studies, transportation analysis and concrete affordable-housing commitments.
Meredith Mooney, Brookline—conomic Development director, and representatives of City Realty presented a phased redevelopment proposal for the Chestnut Hill Office Park on Oct. 1, describing a three-building concept with a central landscaped lawn, retail at street level and substantial underground parking.
"This proposal is projected to be in the neighborhood of $10 million," Mooney said, and added the figure did not include potential hotel excise taxes; she summarized a conservative estimate that the plan could yield roughly $9 million in additional annual tax revenue for the town. City Realty—xecutive Cliff Kensington said the scheme prioritizes pedestrian and landscape space by placing most parking underground.
Why it matters: the proposal would change the scale and character of the Route 9/Chestnut Hill area and could materially increase the town—udget through new commercial tax revenue. Board members and residents raised immediate concerns about building height, shadow impacts on the proposed public lawn, traffic and pedestrian safety across Route 9 and the adequacy and form of affordable housing.
Board members asked for concrete studies and commitments. Select Board members said they want to see shadow and fiscal-impact analyses and clearer affordable-housing outcomes before the town frames specific zoning changes or takes votes. "There will be tradeoffs," a board member said during questions, noting the developer said two levels of underground parking and the scale of underground work were major cost drivers.
Design and scale: the developer—raming included one tower proposed at about 20 stories and two midrise buildings (12—13 stories in the current iteration). City Realty presented renderings and a massing approach that places open space at the center and locates taller elements closer to the Newton border. According to the presentation materials cited by staff, the project team estimated about 850 parking spaces would be provided underground; Mooney relayed an approximate construction cost of $125,000 per underground parking space cited in the pro forma analysis.
Traffic and pedestrian access: town staff and board members emphasized gaps in pedestrian connections between the proposed site and the Chestnut Hill MBTA station and commercial areas on the south side of Route 9. Mooney said transportation analysis is ongoing and that the proposal currently envisions a principal vehicular access using Boon/Tully/Heath Street alignments to channel traffic to a signalized intersection, but acknowledged more detailed engineering is needed. Residents raised concerns that phased construction could worsen traffic on Hammond Street and in South Brookline.
Affordable housing and fiscal questions: staff said the pro forma includes a line item for affordable housing but had not yet set a firm number or income targeting (AMI levels). Mooney said the town will pursue multiple options and anticipated negotiation on on-site units versus in-lieu approaches, with the inclusionary-zoning rules applying once the project—nters a zoning review. Board members asked the developer and staff to return with explicit scenarios that show unit counts at different AMI targets and the fiscal tradeoffs of reduced building height or alternative parking strategies.
Next steps: staff told the board that phase-one zoning recommendations could be considered for May 2025 Town Meeting, with additional study and community engagement continuing through fall 2024 and early 2025. The board asked City Realty to provide shadow studies, more detailed parking/ingress-egress plans and a clearer affordable-housing proposal before any formal zoning actions. The presentation was informational; no land-use vote was taken that evening.
What to watch: the board said it wants the developer and staff to return with (1) shadow studies for the tallest building option, (2) a transportation analysis that models pedestrian crossings and construction-phase traffic impacts, and (3) concrete affordable-housing scenarios tied to AMI levels and unit counts.
