Hey, there! Log in / Register
City to look at putting affordable housing on top of Roslindale Square parking lot
By adamg on Thu, 09/19/2019 - 2:49pm
DND map of municipal lot.
The city Department of Neighborhood Development is considering the idea of finding a developer interested in getting air rights above the Roslindale Square municipal parking lot for construction of affordable housing.
The department has scheduled a public meeting on the proposal - which would include keeping public parking on the nearly one-acre site - for 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, Sept. 26 at the Roslindale Community Center on Cummins Highway at Washington Street.
The idea is part of an initiative announced by Mayor Walsh last year to increase the city's supply of housing for moderate-income residents by redeveloping not just vacant lots but municipal facilities from parking lots to libraries and fire stations to include housing.
DND says it will use comments at the meeting to help draft a possible formal request for proposals.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
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
So much for all the Parking in Roslindale
This is getting unbelievable. Affordable housing?? We will see.
I just saw a condo on Willow St ( New building) available for 719K
Great Location. LOL.
It’d be affordable housing
It’d be affordable housing subsidized with public funds available to below area median income earners. Not market rate.
I think that amount is above
I think that amount is above area earners or would be if the middle class could afford to stay in the city.
So much for reading the article
It says the parking lot will still be there.
I mean, there is a question ...
Of how much of the spaces in the lot, if any, will be dedicated to the residents of the new building. But that's a reason to go to the meeting.
i DID READ IT
Where are the apartment dwellers going to park? On the roof.
What if there are 100 apartments or even 50
What if they are car-free households?
Certainly an argument for improving alternative modes of transit as well but you seem pretty averse to data driven solutions.
So what are you in favor of in terms of dealing with traffic congestion, transit and our city/regions desperate need for housing?
Genuine question.
Were we to look at multi-unit living structures today in Boston with, say, 20, or 35, or 55, or 85 (or whoever many) units, how many are car-free households? Seems like that would inform the actual (versus the optimistic or developer-spin) number of spots that residents would end up occupying (and yes, sure, filtered for income levels or whatever you like).
A related transit question
If/when the legal system and/or investor pressures to actually make money come to bear on the ride share companies and they then raise their prices, will people still forgo car ownership in the city? Right now seems like a reverse bubble of sorts in the pricing for that service.
To answer your question with a different question, 80 years ago there were more people living in Boston and far fewer cars. Why not assume we can go back to those days? Living in an apartment above a store on Centre St in WR makes a lot more sense if you have dedicated bus lanes down Belgrade and Washington St. to Forrest Hills, etc...
80 years ago was before the
80 years ago was before the car companies and the federal government conspired to destroy the vast majority of public transit in both this city and others. The amount of streetcar access people had in an era where half the city didn't have indoor plumbing is an EMBARRASSMENT to the current era.
I hate to burst your bubble
But the decline in public transit in Boston (which is debatable) had nothing to do with car companies or the federal government. In fact, the Orange and Red Lines were essentially rebuilt by the federal government.
No, trolley lines disappeared across the Commonwealth for the same reason print newspapers are disappearing across the Commonwealth- cheaper and more convenient alternatives came about, in the case of trolleys right after the end of the first world war. By the late 1920s it was a bit of a crisis, but since they were private companies, the free market spoke. Boston taking over the lines in and around the city saved what we have now.
There were also a lot more
There were also a lot more trolleys and buses then.
Yeah multi family numbers might be harder to find
Specific to large multifamily projects vs. 3-4 unit housing.
I know the city has data that I've seen recently, 54% of zero car households make under $25k and only 7% of zero car households make over $100,000. Neighborhood wise, it seems the most low/zero driving households are predominantly situated near transit, not a shocker of course but interesting to see visualized.
(Page 54-55)
https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/document-file-03-2017/go_bost...
Bottom line I think its a combination of lower parking minimums, transit oriented and better management of on-street parking thats coupled with data to get past the optimistic developer spin.
Personally for me, the issue of housing costs is the built-in cost for parking in a building, even if its not something our family will need to use. It just sucks that neighborhoods push back on projects for more off street parking when its partially an issue of not managing the current free on street parking properly and charging market rate.
OVER the parking, not INSTEAD
OVER the parking, not INSTEAD OF the parking. Elevated.
Get those other South St parcels!
Get those other parcels and incorporate them! First floor retail, go up to include more housing. Far cheaper per unit if you can build along long, clean lines...
There's a model for that
Vinny Marino did that a few years ago with his building where Redd's and Tony's used to be.
Not comparable
Vinny added what 4 apartments it drove Tony's market out of there
and they had been there for 5o years not there up the street where there is no foot traffic
Redd's is gone as well
It was eight apartments
Vinny and Tony got into an argument that only indirectly had to do with the new units and which probably would've gotten physical if Tim McCarthy hadn't stepped in between them (it was basically two guys who'd known each other forever arguing over who disrespected the other more).
And one guess who won approval in December to add apartments above his meat shop.
Redd agreed to the changes in the building (he had to give up a closet or something to allow for the apartment entrance to go in) and left for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with the apartments.
City to look at pushing for
City to look at pushing for replacement of super pricey inconsistent infrequent commuter rail with orange line extension always intended?? City to develop more bike and transit only lanes to allow people further out to have reasonable commutes? City realizes that price densities in places like Rozzie Square are directly correlated to the lack of transit and horrendous traffic in other southern neighborhoods?
ah, no, let's just sell the lot to one of Mahty's developer pals. Watch it turn into 80/20% "affordable" and not held to basic leed standards, either.
Taking the commuter rail from
Taking the commuter rail from Roslindale Village is a nicer riding experience than taking the Orange Line from Forest Hills. I'd rather the commuter rail stay how it is, but we could use more double-decker trains during peak times.
Agreed. With all it's flaws Needham > Orange line
I never understand people begging for the Orange line to be extended to Roslindale (or further). I agree that the commuter rail is expensive and infrequent. On the plus side, it's a much faster ride into the city and is actually very reliable.
CR price vs subway price
People want the subway extended so they don't have to pay the commuter rail premium. Also, subway trains run way more often and have trains on the weekend, unlike the Needham line.
More frequent and weekend service
Like Kelly says, I would love to be able to take the train downtown on the weekends which currently requires a bus then train ride. Even when CR service returns, it will only be on Saturdays and only limited service.
This. The difference between
This. The difference between zone 1a and zone 2 is well over $100 dollars. Out of reach for some.
You answer your own question
People want the Orange Line because it's frequent and less expensive. Sure, it's also less comfortable and slower, but it would be a hell of a lot better than the current option of a bus to Forest Hills, then transfer to the train. Very few people take the Needham Line compared to the bus/OL numbers. Let's serve that larger group.
Needham is packed to capacity
Needham is packed to capacity during peak hours. It's not like the line is under-used. We just need more double-decker cars during peak hours.
Yes, it's packed
I never said otherwise. The total ridership pales, though, in comparison to numbers riding buses to Forest Hills for the Orange Line transfer. My point is that the Needham Line does nothing for the people who either can't afford it or who need more schedule flexibility. And that group is the larger group. To make the Needham Line work for the larger group, we would need 15 minute headways and zone 1A pricing. Both are possible, but not if we intend to make similar frequency improvements on other CR lines. The three track trunk can't accommodate the number of trains and there is no likelihood of a Needham Line only improvement. The MBTA is going to work on improving the whole system. That means in all likelihood dropping the Needham Line in favor of Orange Line to West Roxbury and Green Line to Needham.
Except on Sundays, of course.
Except on Sundays, of course. Or like.... any time, that isn't the rush-hour-focused services. Because having to wait two hours for a train is real rapid transit!
Commuter rail ≠ proper intra-urban mass transit
I like the purple line too, but for most Bostonians, no mode of public transport that runs on such a limited schedule (not even every day of the week!) can be considered a legitimate default option. Plus, its f'ing expensive.
If Rosi village neighborhood continues to densify, we're going to have to do better than that.
Need to maintain that parking lot
That parking lot needs to be maintained. It is vital parking so that people (especially those with children and senior citizens) can get to all the Roslindale Village businesses, the post office, farmer's market, library, Sumner school activities, etc. Otherwise, it will be a set back all the hard work that has gone to revitalizing the square.
Bad for parking and the community
Truly unbelievable. What is going to happen to people who park to use the commuter rail? And for the local businesses and farmer's market on Saturdays. Will completely detract from the community feel of Roslindale.
If you park there to use commuter rail, you shouldn't
It's a two-hour lot.
Commuters are supposed to park in the commuter-rail lots, all of half a block away. Yeah, the muni lot is free, but the parking-enforcement people do show up there from time to time and write out tickets.
Come on Adam
Commuters are suppose to park in T Lot be realistic that doesn't happen
You told me there was oodles of parking in Roslindale all up and down washington street
behind Citizens Bank etc.
There is
If you're doing business in the square.
I have never
I have never had trouble parking in the Square. I am usually there at least a couple of times a week.
Right. When people say "there
Right. When people say "there is no parking here," what they almost always mean is "I am not able to park directly in front of my exact destination 24/7/365." And that is not a standard the city or anyone else should seriously be trying to meet in the year 2019.
Interesting idea
Maintaining the existing quantity of parking (or increasing it a bit) should be the first requirement. Having the city be a partner in creating moderate-priced housing is the only way that it is financially manageable for developers to build it.
It's close to the right idea
I appreciate that Marty only has access to public lots for this kind of proposal but the far more obvious solution is to figure out how to incentivize owners to build living spaces above the millions of sq. ft. of single story retail in the outlying neighborhoods first. As noted by Adam, this happened above the former Redd's and is slated to happen above wallpaper city. It should happen above the empty Petco space, all along Centre St. in JP, West Roxbury, etc...
While people used to live in greater numbers in smaller apartments across the city, the other thing in the 1/2 half of the last century when Boston had more people was that lots of these towns (like Roslindale) had the more standard 3-4 buildings vs. the low ones we have now. That's the correct answer and urban planners should figure out how to encourage owners to rebuild those second and third floors.
All of the above
Only some of the single-story buildings in Roslindale Square can sustain additional floors on top at the foundation level. The ones that can are having housing built on top as you noted. I agree with you on the need to incentivize more mixed-use like that. But that doesn't obviate the need to build affordable housing however and wherever possible, and on city-owned land is one obvious way.
Fair point but...
I'd argue that a building like say the ones on Belgrade across from the bike shop are the kind of building that can be knocked down and rebuilt without any great loss. Or the ones across from Target, etc...
Parkwayne
I am not sure what you mean 3-4 buildings in Roslidnale? You don't mean 3 or 4 stories
I lived in roslindale for 50 years and the tallest bulding were maybe 2 stories. The old Parke Snows, the building where Sebastians is located definitely not 4 stories.
Maybe longer then
Check out http://roslindalehistoricalsociety.org/Images/Street/southandbelgrade1.jpg for more info.
Anyways, it's not a novel concept. Taller buildings in downtown areas, like say along Cleary Sq. in HP.
I don't get the image link
That view is basically the same as it is today, except that the library is no longer in the park, the municipal building was rebuilt, and the building by Poplar Street has been replaced with the building that houses Wallpaper City.
There are several one-story buildings there now
The former Petco, the 753 building, the place where the bakery used to be, probably something else I'm missing. Poplar and Corinth also have some one-story buildings.
Some may have always been one story, but there are also buildings in the Square where the owners actually took off the top two floors to reduce their taxes, back in the bad old days after the area was decimated by the opening of the Dedham Mall and they weren't getting tenants. The former Redd's/Tony's building was an example.
As conditions have improved, you've begun to see some "infill" projects to add in new floors (like the Redd's building) or just entirely new buildings, like the office/retail building next to the library (which replaced an old gas station) and the apartments next to that (which replaced a funeral home and its parking lot).
Keep the parking or lose the Square
Taft Hill Terrace now is the only go-to place to park right now. If they build over it, great idea but make sure the 2 hour free parking continues with the same or more spaces. If the new residents need parking, make the second floor a parking lot too. Yes, it's great when people walk or ride bikes and I do that too, but the businesses will fail if parking disappears.
How do U-hub posters get to the Square for shopping?
I live in the square so walk to the stores, etc... Obviously there's a lot of folks who walk to the CR station and then probably do incidental shopping to/from the train. But I'm curious about what people's shopping/transport habits are in Roslindale. If you aren't in walking distance, what are you driving to the village for? The Market? The restaurants? Haircuts? Coffee? If you live up near Beech St, do you come to the square or do you just go to WR instead?
If ample parking was the
If ample parking was the primary component for a successful business area, then every mall in America would be succeeding. Instead most are closing. Most people have absolutely know idea or care beyond their own parochial interests as to what businesses need. Roslindale Square and other successful business districts flourish because they’re walkable and have good experiences like the restaurants that you can’t buy on Amazon. Everyone harping about parking is stuck in the 70s, but they’re gonna keep most it anyway so stfu already!
I'm a millennial with kids.
I'm a millennial with kids. Our family loves going to the restaurants in Roslindale Village, the library, the farmer's market, etc. But we wouldn't be able to go if not for the reliable parking in the municipal lot.
You are so correct
You can't do that on a bike, razor scooter or rollerblades. But some on here will tell you they do that with their kids.
Build it bigger
Not everyone can live in Southie and Dorchester.