Hey, there! Log in / Register
South Boston residents who said proposed development wouldn't have enough parking buy the land and plan to put in a parking lot
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
brilliant decision. Not only
brilliant decision. Not only do they have the wonderful benefit of looking at 18 surface parking spaces, but those spaces will also generate more than twice as much traffic as 9 condo units.
Bravo neighbors! real insightful thinking on your part.
This is about parking in
This is about parking in place that has almost no public transportation. They increased the amount of parking without increasing the number of housing units nearby.
no this is/was about stopping
no this is/was about stopping residential development.
9 condos with 11 off street parking spaces would have resulted in no new demand for on street parking.
So that brings us back to my original comment. 18 parking spaces will result in more than twice as much traffic as 9 condos.
The neighbors stepped up and instead of just bitching, came up with the money and a separate solution that they think is better for their neighborhood. Im glad they got involved instead of just complaining and not providing solutions. They just happen to be completely wrong. The fact that residential development was replaced with surface parking is just a terrible answer to a 'problem' that had no merit to begin with.
"no this is/was about
"no this is/was about stopping residential development."
New development brings more demand for parking.
"18 parking spaces will result in more than twice as much traffic as 9 condos."
No. You are assuming that 18 new spaces will introduce 18 new cars to the neighborhood instead of existing residents moving their cars into the parking lot.
"The fact that residential development was replaced with surface parking is just a terrible answer to a 'problem' that had no merit to begin with."
More development brings more total demand for parking. This does not increase the total number of residents and adds even more parking.
When I talk about traffic l'm
When I talk about traffic l'm talking about old colony st specifically. 18 spaces brings more traffic to old colony st than 9 condos. Nobody should even attempt to argue that. As for the rest of the neighborhood, 9 condos are 18 spaces will have no impact on traffic.
2nd, 9 condos with 11 spaces would not increase on street parking demand. Not even for a space. Data clearly shows south boston residents have less than 1 car per household. And that data was before the influx of 'new' people that have even less cars than previous residents.
I will concede that there are now 18 more spaces for residents. But that is a tiny benefit that is outweighed by
1. Not increasing housing stock
2. Increased traffic on old colony.
3. Looking at a surface parking lot
Not sure you know what you're talking about
There is no Old Colony Street, there is an Old Colony Ave.
This parking lot is on Old Harbor Street.
you're right. I posted 3
you're right. I posted 3 times and once got 'colony' in my head instead of 'harbor'
but you're right, no idea what Im talking about. care to take on any of the actual points of my posts?
Sure
There is NO traffic on Old Harbor Street, ever.
"I will concede that there
"I will concede that there are now 18 more spaces for residents. But that is a tiny benefit that is outweighed by
1. Not increasing housing stock
2. Increased traffic on old colony.
3. Looking at a surface parking lot"
1. The neighborhood hardly needs more development and it's not going to make anything noticeably more affordable.
2. No. 18 cars, some of which are already from the neighborhood, are not going to increase traffic.
3. It's their neighborhood and money, and they would rather have the benefits of more parking rather than a large development.
1. Not sure if you noticed,
1. Not sure if you noticed, but Boston actually has a housing shortage: http://www.wbur.org/2015/03/18/tight-housing-market-boston
2. I suppose those 18 cars are going to get in and out of the neighborhood without using the local roads?
3. They do not "own" the neighborhood. But either way, what they did is entirely self-serving and undercuts the need for more housing.
And anyway, I strongly suspect these spots will not sell at a price that covers the cost of buying the land and building/maintaining the lot. The neighborhood doesn't have a parking shortage, it has a *free* parking shortage.
"1. Not sure if you noticed,
"1. Not sure if you noticed, but Boston actually has a housing shortage"
Yes, it does. That doesn't mean people can't advocate for certain housing densities in their neighborhood.
"2. I suppose those 18 cars are going to get in and out of the neighborhood without using the local roads?"
They aren't always all going to be driving around at the same time. However, since there are no new residents, this will provide additional parking to current residents.
"3. They do not "own" the neighborhood. But either way, what they did is entirely self-serving and undercuts the need for more housing."
No one said they "own" it, however it is their neighborhood as they do live there. They have every right to advocate for or against more development. This is not unique to this neighborhood or city.
"And anyway, I strongly suspect these spots will not sell at a price that covers the cost of buying the land and building/maintaining the lot. The neighborhood doesn't have a parking shortage, it has a *free* parking shortage."
All the spaces already sold. It's clear there is a parking shortage based on the demand.
1. It does, as a practical
1. It does, as a practical matter, because every neighborhood always advocates to preserve or reduce the existing density. It's a textbook example of "build more housing, but Not In My Back Yard."
2. Yes, additional parking for existing residents which, because they now will have an extra few spaces to store their cars, are slightly more likely to own one. Or perhaps another way to think of this is that someone who already owns a car is slightly more likely to want to live in Southie because parking there will now be slightly easier.
3. I disagree. Neighbors should not be able to advocate against new development. It is always in the financial best interest of land owners to prevent new real estate from being built. Incumbents should not be allowed to use this process to drive up rents and property values for everyone.
"All the spaces already sold. It's clear there is a parking shortage based on the demand."
Then I might also point out that selling these spaces at $70k/pop amounts to a land value of about $186.67/sqft, which is roughly half what this would have fetched had it been made into housing. In other words, it makes no rational sense to build parking *instead* of housing. It only happened here because of sheer neighborly determination to ignore the laws of supply and demand.
"1. It does, as a practical
"1. It does, as a practical matter, because every neighborhood always advocates to preserve or reduce the existing density."
It seems like your solution is to do away with people giving input on development in their neighborhood, or buying land and developing it the way they want? Hardly any neighborhood would agree to that.
"2. Yes, additional parking for existing residents which, because they now will have an extra few spaces to store their cars, are slightly more likely to own one. Or perhaps another way to think of this is that someone who already owns a car is slightly more likely to want to live in Southie because parking there will now be slightly easier."
That some existing residents might be more inclined to have cars is not equal to the demand that would come from more residents.
"3. I disagree. Neighbors should not be able to advocate against new development. It is always in the financial best interest of land owners to prevent new real estate from being built. Incumbents should not be allowed to use this process to drive up rents and property values for everyone."
This is completely unreasonable. You are basically saying people shouldn't be allowed to give any input if they want less development for their neighborhood.
"Then I might also point out that selling these spaces at $70k/pop amounts to a land value of about $186.67/sqft, which is roughly half what this would have fetched had it been made into housing. In other words, it makes no rational sense to build parking *instead* of housing. It only happened here because of sheer neighborly determination to ignore the laws of supply and demand."
You keep changing your argument. First you said you would doubt they would sell, which apparently shows you didn't even read the article. Now you are saying that the land has more potential to make money so it should be developed differently. Pretty much all neighborhoods have laws around development which limits their ability to maximize potential value.
Plus, the people who bought
Plus, the people who bought the lot is counting on selling each outdoor space for 70k! Although parking is in high demand in that area, they themselves should know that no one in that area likes to actually pay for the things they need.
Not counting on anything
They already sold the spots. All gone.
There is a huge demand for
There is a huge demand for reserved parking. You shouldn't use stereotypes just because you disagree with a decision they made.
Doesn't work that way.
I don't have a horse in this hysterical fight, but: New units create more congestion, shoe-horning more people with cars into the space. Adding 18 off-street spaces eases the burden because those users Already Live There, own cars and are parking on-street. The only way your idea makes sense is if the people moved into SB to live in their cars on the lot.
Those 18 are on the street
Those 18 are on the street anyhow, additional units would have brought in more cars. So you're wrong. It's math, pretty simple math too.
see reply post above. they
see reply post above. they are not traveling on Old Harbor Street now. so it is an increase in traffic on Old Harbor for the neighbors that will also have to look at the parking lot.
Only a fool would think that 9 units of housing or 18 parking spaces would make a difference in neighborhood wide traffic and congestion.
I didnt think that needed to be specifically stated. I guess I gave too much credit to the readers.
The math is simple, your ability to apply it properly is whats in doubt.
We are wicked smart
People who pay $70,000 for a parking space are people who live nearby and are sick of doing the dance of on-street parking in the (immediate) area. This lessens crowding and the traffic related to repeatedly going around the neighborhood looking for a spot. Maybe you would like to amend you statement again and claim you only meant traffic across the sidewalk to access the parking lot. That's the ticket.
Congestion Charges
In reasonable cities, like London, they have what are called congestion charges. They are a monetary fee for using ones car inside certain areas of the city. When I am supreme overlord I will also institute congestion charges. But I will be using the other meaning of the word charges. Sentencing will be harsh as it will involve having ones limbs tied to 4 separate cars which will then drive off in different directions.
100% for this
Hell, I'll even toss in some "bike usage fees" if it means better infrastructure and fewer private metal boxes blocking up our public roads.
All for the congestion charging...
It's the only way out of the mess we're in now.
I'm just worried that if we have too many of the "can't pry my hands from the steering wheel" crowd drawn and quartered right off the bat, we'll lose out on too much revenue. I'd much rather hammer them with congestion charges to rack up funding for the T, bike facilities, etc.
Thank God we live in a
Thank God we live in a democracy where all of these stupid ideas about congestion charges would be voted down by the silent majority. You guys can have your fun on here but these ideas will never see the light of day.
Never in a Democracy!
Yeah, clearly congestion charges can only be passed/work in undemocratic countries like Great Britain.
Seems legit.
They still have a queen they have now to
And London is a shell of a lot bigger, denser, and more well developed wrt public transit than Boston is, so unlike here, you really don't need a car there, and the fees only serve to discourage congestion, not bleed people.
If you live and work in the
If you live and work in the city you don't really need a car here either. And if you don't, then this won't really apply to you.
Disgusting! Suffering
Disgusting! Suffering Succotash!
They also have
good, if expensive, public transit. Southie is being developed all out of scale to the available public transit.
I am totally pro-congestion charges and higher parking fees at meters and lots but the problems in Southie specifically also involve really bad transit combined with very fast development (that is largely not transit oriented). This is why we need a real plan for development in the city--I hope what the mayor's office comes up with is more substantive then "develop where you can."
not just Southie
This is not a problem that is unique to Southie. Huge swaths of this city are not served by rapid transit, and have to rely on crappy, unreliable, slow buses or crappy, long headway-ed, expensive, unreliable commuter rail. I know a lot of commenters here want to turn Boston into a car-free utopia overnight, but without a multi-billion dollar expansion of rapid transit, that's a fantasy.
The issue with those changes
The issue with those changes is that those with money living in the city get to drive in less congested streets while the poorer folks get herded like cattle into increasingly crowded public transit.
For people passing through the rich can cut through the city and the poor have to drive the long route around.
Charging market rates for peak time vehicle storage is much more equitable that tolling.
Providing infrastructure for
Providing infrastructure for all of those cars costs a ton of money. Wouldn't it be more efficient to use that money to beef up the "increasingly crowded public transit?" As long as we're worrying about poorer folks, I think you get a lot more bang for your buck if you're taxing drivers to pay for transit, rather than the other way around.
The congestion charge only works
When you have a reliable alternative transportation system . Boston does not have one of those . London quite literally has subway stops on every block.
Take Boston on the other hand . You can stand at Castle Island and look at the airport a few hundred meters away. yet it would take you about an hour and a half by public transportation to get there.
You have to take a bus to Broadway T station, The redline to downtown crossing, switch to the Orange line to state , then switch again to the blue line to the airport, before hopping on the shuttle from the airport station to your terminal. Or alternatively, take the silver line bussey thing, but who does that? Probably still takes over an hour.
On Sundays, yes...
Otherwise you take the 7 to South Station, silver line to Logan.
I mean, why can't you
I mean, why can't you transfer to the silver line at South Station?
Bus->Red->Silver
(or as someone else pointed out, Bus->Silver works 6 days of the week)
versus your
Bus->Red->Orange->Blue->Bus
Maybe the real problem is that people in their cars don't actually know about the new line added a decade ago. And that residents of South Boston rejected having the Silver Line run down Broadway in 2004 is more than partially responsible for their continued poor transit service.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/12/17/s_bos...
It is hard to increase transit when drivers block you from increasing transit. I realize South Boston has a very different population now than in 2004, but the neighborhood rejected expansion of transit then and now is feeling the consequences.
You're full of it
Clearly you've never taken the silver line to the airport yourself. When I've used it, it's overly crowded and people with luggage (myself included) often have to wait a bus or two to get onto it. Thus increasing the commute time to the airport.
The end result is a ride via car, whether my own, a taxi or Uber. Faster and more reliable.
Where did I claim the silver
Where did I claim the silver line was faster than a car?
I claimed that starting in Southie, silver line is faster than transferring from red to the orange, then transferring to the blue, then transferring to a shuttle bus. Anyone who thinks that is how you get to the airport via public transit from Southie is deeply mistaken.
A car is much faster for getting to the airport at most times of day, no mistake about that.
You claimed
People in cars don't know about the new line. I called BS on that claim.
Lol
They literally proposed a public transportation system to do exactly what you just said, take people castle island to the airport. But of course the old guard in Southie stamped their feet and put an end to that
But sure we can continue the charade that this argument is about parking/transportation and not at all about stopping residential development to keep the newcomers out. Please...
Zoning
So people should show up at the BRA/ZBA meeting or whatever and protest. Get them to require so much green space that the proposal won't make monetary sense.
The flip side of that is no
The flip side of that is no development and further increasing home prices in the city. Pick your poison.
Credit where due
But just the tiniest smidgen of credit: At least they actually put their money where their dumb mouths are and bought the property.
It is really a testament to the power of car obsession that the end result was to sacrifice 9 units of housing in exchange for 7 parking spots. Truly amazing.
Perspective
The car owners already have housing, but need parking so they didn't sacrifice anything but money and prevented more people from living in their neighborhood. Seems like they got what they wanted...
The nuns are to blame for taking less money, right?
It was their money and it is allowed under zoning
The #7 bus and I get to see each other a lot as I walk to South Station. It crawls along in traffic filled to the brim like some well lit cattle car off to the feeding pen as I walk past it a few times depending on the light cycles. You pay $2,500 per month and have to deal with that?
Public transit in South Boston is terrible and here is a little story; Not everyone who lives in South Boston actually works downtown. Some people actually enjoy living there owing to its sense of neighborhood, family ties, and ocean air, not because of convenience to whatever company you are working for before you transfer to Jersey City and complain about the people there having cars. Some people in South Boston work in the suburbs or have to go to work at 2 in the AM and need a car. Some people in South Boston have these weird little things called kids and have to get to hockey practice, play against Rockland in soccer or haul enough groceries for the week back from S&S at South Bay. Anyone complaining here notice that people in the projects in the South End have a hell of a lot of parking, yet they are close to all that is city life and we pay for part of their rent?
People put their money where their mouth is and took control of a situation as opposed to anonymous postings about it. Get over it.
This doesn't help anyone
The only people that this lot helps are rich condo owners who can afford to pay $70k for a deeded spot. By the way these are people who typically work downtown and take public transportation anyways and only use their car on Saturdays to go to whole foods. For this rest of us it just becomes another eyesore parking lot.
I don't get why people still think Southie should have all the amenities of a suburb? Do other neighborhoods still hold on to this false reality? There are plenty of towns in the south shore where you can get all the things you just mentioned (neighborhood, family ties, ocean air) plus more for a fraction of the price.
For better or worse Southie is changing fast. The proximity to downtown is just too desirable. I really don't think fighting over a parking is going to slow it down.
By the way these are people
By the way these are people who typically work downtown and take public transportation anyways
You know this how?
Because
I live here and the same people I see on the 7 bus I see driving their jeep Cherokees out of their deeded parking spots in the condo complexs
"I don't get why people still
"I don't get why people still think Southie should have all the amenities of a suburb?"
It basically lacks the public transportation of a city.
Need a car, ample parking and little congestion?
Move to the suburbs.
Sorry Charlie but you need to take personal responsibility for your choices in housing and private transportation.
They are already living there
They are already living there, they can buy a parking lot if they want. There is almost no public transportation there.
Why do you think the bus moves so slowly?
And do you think adding more and more parking will make that better, or worse?
Build an elevated rail line
Build an elevated rail line down Broadway. Problem solved. Except for being the MBTA and all.
Those weird little things called kids don't need a car
We have two of them and no car.
See, we live in this weird little thing called a city where parks and groceries are in walking distance and, as they get bigger, scooter and biking distance.
Weird little kids in weird little cities learn how to walk further than from the car to the seat of a shopping cart. They learn how to carry their gear (and some groceries) on their backs and with their hands. It's like they're little people who can take part in life and not just zone out in the backseat unaware of the world.
Also, interesting thing about these weird little things called cities, you don't need to put a week's worth of food in the trunk of a car (and who has room for a week's worth of groceries in their city apartment anyway?), you can stop in multiple times and pick up a few things here and there. When you don't have to cross a parking ocean to get to the door of the store, it's pretty pleasant.
There are these weird little
There are these weird little things called neighborhood that have barely any public transit. This is one of them. Your specific definition of urban living doesn't apply to everyone.
That was a choice made by
That was a choice made by existing Southie residents in the interest of preserving their precious parking. It did not have to be that way and it can always be changed by converting some of that precious on-street parking into dedicated bus lanes. Oh, but wait, then how would I store my car that I need to drive to Vermont to go skiing?
Plenty of people need cars to
Plenty of people need cars to get to jobs that are not located near public transportation.
How is that possibly a
How is that possibly a reasonable argument? Plenty of people need public transit to get to jobs where parking is scarce or expensive! The difference is, if you want to use a car to get to work, you can live literally anywhere inside or near i-495, but if you want to use transit to get to work, Boston is pretty much your only option. Optimizing South Boston around car storage completely undercuts this advantage by making housing insanely expensive.
You are wrong. People can
You are wrong. People can take the train from outside the city. People who live in the city get new jobs all the time and may need cars to get to jobs away from public transit.
Factual correction
It is not true that Jersey City is worse than Boston re. car ownership. Wikipedia says the percentage of people with cars is higher in Boston. Jersey City has a 24 hour subway. The HBLR is comparable to Green Line D, except is so much more dependable. Even the jitney has longer hours than MBTA. Many grocery store operate a shuttle service that will take you and your purchased goods home for free. The farthest corners of Jersey City (Greenville) are more accessible than South Boston.
"car obsession"
"car obsession"
Try people needing to get to work because there isn't much public transit in the neighborhood or where a lot of people work.
The lot in question is a 15
The lot in question is a 15 minute walk from Andrew. If this debate were about City Point you might be on to something, but it is in fact quite believable that a significant number of people would have been willing to live car free in a condo on Old Harbor.
But then, car free wasn't even really the question since the original development proposal actually had more spaces than units. In this case it was the belief that a significant number of residents would want to own TWO cars.
Which leads you to wonder: Who that can afford a $2,500 for a one bedroom and wants to own two cars would choose to live somewhere where parking was such a constant struggle. Since they're clearly looking to drive to work anyway, why bother living in Southie at all?
But then the flip side: If someone DOES want to live near transit and NOT own a car, shouldn't we build housing for those people, too?
In 1974 it was ROAR (Restore our Alienated Rights)
in 2015 its RORE (Restore our Real Estate).
ROSE (Restore Our Sense of
2015: ROSE (Restore Our Sense of Entitlement)
Turning a garden into a parking lot?
Joni Mitchell called, she wants her song premise back.
Good! While I personally
Good! While I personally would rather see housing, I do hope this is the beginning of right-pricing parking in Boston. They wanted parking, so they bought and paid for it at market rates. Would that all parking in the city worked the same.
If Andrew Square weren't so
If Andrew Square weren't so sketchy, residents in that area could take the T.
When I was a kid a large
When I was a kid a large percentage of family's in South Boston did not have cars as mine in J.P. also did not. We felt held hostage to the MBTA. My high school was St. Tom's on South St.about 1 1/4 miles from my house. After a while I found that I could beat the trolley about half the time walking. At the time school children had badges for discounted fairs for school, it was still worth walking (except in extreme weather) because I could control my time of commute. There were no worries about breakdowns, trolleys blocked by traffic, traffic accidents or police and fire actions. Later my school was Boston State partially located at Huntington and Longwood. Sometimes my route to school was over Mission Hill (a little too sweaty to walk quickly to school ) or South Huntington to Huntington. Rarely did I beat the trolley but it took out the uncertainty on time of arrival. When I was a child I remember going to the original Lechmear Sooales in Cambridge to buy a kitchen appliance. On a weekend it took over an hour and a half to travel there. If you didn't have a lot of money Lechmere gave the best bargains. I don't remember going to the Dedham mall but neighbors told me if you were lucky it was an hour and a half trip by public transport. We had relatives in Watertown on a weekend at least 1 1/2 to 2 hour trip . When I was 19 we finally got a car (a series of s___ boxes) but we could go to Lechmere in 20 minutes Dido Dedham Mall and relatives in Watertown 35- 40 minutes. A radical change that I call freedom. Now there a lot of people who now live in Southie who live in cocooned societies that live in condo developments that are maintained by fees. They don't need to pay for bring home salt, sand,snowblower, window air conditioners or occasionally a grass mower. If you don't want a car that is your lifestyle you don't have the right to force this on other people. If you think you do you are either a Fascist or a Communist and I can't see the difference between the two.
Our American system of
Our American system of education at work:
I don't understand what part
I don't understand what part of any of this is forcing anyone not to own a car.
How about instead we not force everyone to buy parking for the cars they don't want to own?
And btw, you can do Southie to Watertown by bike in about 40 minutes, and you don't even have to get involved in this ridiculous parking debacle. It's great.
You can take the train from
You can take the train from outside the city.