_{This story is from The Heights, an independent, nonprofit newspaper run by Boston College students with which the Newton Beacon has a partnership.}

The Newton Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) met on Wednesday to discuss changes made to a proposal for a Nonantum development, prompting significant criticism from the public and board members about the project’s overall impact on the local community.

“This is not good development,” said Nonantum resident Kevin Rife. “This is one of the reasons why people are looking to move out of Newton, move out of the village. Let’s knock it down some units … and make sure that it aesthetically fits into our neighborhood.”

The development team is requesting a comprehensive permit to construct the 234-unit residential development on a 2.7-acre lot located on Crafts Street in Nonantum. Peer review for the project was permitted by the ZBA in November, which led to a number of changes to the project.

“I’m not against development,” said Newton resident Adam Lunin. “There’s a right and a wrong way to do this. This is not the right way. It does not fit the neighborhood.”

Lunin also expressed frustration that there wasn’t more public feedback involved in the decision-making process.

“Projects of this magnitude require conversations for context and clarity, and as the public, we do not get that opportunity,” Lunin said. “It would be nice if there would be meetings where we can actually sit down and have a back and forth and flesh out these issues.”

Cat Kemmett, deputy chief planner for current planning in Newton, broke down what the project’s peer review recommended. He explained that the project remains mostly the same as it was during the previous hearing, but emphasized that the planning department still has concerns about the size and affordability of the project.

“The setback from Crafts Street is still only 10 feet—the building footprint takes up much of the site, and I think we’d still be interested in seeing some more varying story heights to better transition to the adjacent residential areas,” Kemmett said. “We’ve also recommended deeper levels of affordability. As it stands today, the deepest level of affordability proposes an 80 percent area median income.”

The transportation peer review from Transportation Planning Director Jeff Maxtutis from the BETA Group, a New England design firm, explained how the project would negatively impact the level of service at nearby intersections.

“The Crafts Street and Washington Street intersections [would go] from a level of service E during the no-build conditions, so that’s the future conditions without the development, to a level of service F, with the development during the weekday evening peak hour,” Maxtutis said.

In MassDOT planning, the letter grade for level of service at an intersection indicates the level of value of the traveler-perceived quality of service, with an F level being the lowest quality of service rating for an intersection.

“I’m concerned about the traffic impact at Crafts and Washington Street,” ZBA associate member Charles Eisenberg said. “I’m not sure what the solution is, but if that’s functioning as an E right now, an F’s going to be intolerable.”

ZBA member Jennifer Pucci raised resounding concerns about the size of the project and the ways it would struggle to fit into the fabric of the Nonantum neighborhood.

“My biggest concern is about the visual impact on the neighborhood,” Pucci said. “ I haven’t seen a proposal that has such a tight perimeter right up against all these neighbors. So I think that matters, and I would ask the applicant to think about that and do quite a bit of work, kind of in that space, to improve how this integrates into the neighborhood.”

ZBA member Deb Crossley had similar concerns, recommending they reduce the number of parking spots to scale down the project.

“The parking needs to be reduced,” Crossley said. “Even if we keep this many units in the building, we don’t need this much parking.”

Dave Snell, the project architect, emphasized that the development team is working to make changes that are informed by the peer review discussion.

“We’re committed to looking at [the peer review], and we will be back to you,” Snell said. “We wanted to hit some of these big pieces to start here tonight, understanding we’ll be here multiple times.”

ZBA Chair Michael Rossi noted that voting to approve the project’s comprehensive permit likely won’t happen soon, as more work still needs to be done. The next ZBA meeting for the project will be on Feb. 25.