Fairmount Line could get housing development in Hyde Park

New cars, Diesel Mobile Units (DMU's) have been put on order Gov Patrick, this line is supposed to the earliest beneficiary of them. The run about $4M vs. the current $10M ones. Are ore automated, use less fuel, and for the dollar can increase the number available, to provide more trips.. But someone, probably here, will complain about that. I mean locals {who don't take the train] already complained about the lower fares being a negative impact: more people will take it - more people will park around here. Oh MY!

That's 24 and three, don't know where 36 came from

How's a bike not an affordable transportation choice? Tens of thousands of dollars cheaper in the long run for the average city dweller.

those aren't correct units nbrs, but one thing HP has is a reputation for keeping developers out. RE: the similar proposal that would've rehabbed much of the fairmount block from the bridge to the Riverside theater, was pulled and not one project has happened since. there are 14 or so empty store fronts just in that block alone. Developers want to and need to go up ( living space above retail/comml space) to make it viable and with the stigma of a dug in opposition its not worth it.

We'll have to see what happens on the corner of Dana & HP ave - 9-10 units with retail, very limited or no designated parking on a busy corner - but its good proximity to the bus and commuter line. If that works there - then maybe there will some confidence in fixing Fairmount/Logan & Cleary.

There's nothing cheap about car ownership! Ask a friend or co-worker who owns one.

Parking requirements for new buildings are a major reason why housing is UNaffordable around here. Once you're building more than a 2- or 3-family house, the costs to provide off-street parking go up exponentially.

Until the 1950s it was legal to build apartments with *no* off-street parking. Such buildings are still great places to live today. Local governments should allow developers to build more of them.

A friend from Japan couldn't believe how many close-in neighborhoods around here have 2- and 3-family houses instead of apartment buildings. We need to make it easier to build more housing. That's the only way to make it more affordable to live here.

The train doesn't run late or on weekends and does not use the horn. FWIW

...Or a fool to pay market rate when the other 24 units are affordable. That ratio is way off and I'm not necessarily opposed to affordable housing

I can't speak for this particular development, but if your questions are sincere:

Per-unit costs run about $350-400k on this kind of development depending on the land costs and construction type - union vs open shop also makes a huge difference. No one pays $750k a unit. It would be absolutely impossible to finance and subsidize at that development cost.

Affordable doesn't necessarily mean very low-income. Most deals have a variety of subsidy in them, and most programs target working class people between 50% and 80% of the Area Median Income. Subsidies for people with very low to no income, such as a project based section 8 voucher, are few and far between. The typical deal will be lucky to land a handful of them.

How is it financed? Start with the mortgage. Yes, even households in affordable units pay rent. That rent creates an income stream (possibly enlarged by a subsidy on a few of the units) which a bank will lend against. It's the same as any market apartment development, but because the rents are low, the mortgage probably only covers somewhere between 25% and 50% of the deal (as opposed to 70-80% on a market deal). Often, an affordable or mixed-income development will then turn to Low Income Housing Tax Credits. The IRS allocates these credits to the state, which DHCD then gives to developers on a competitive basis, who then partner with a private investor in return for cash. The cash proceeds from the credits take care of another maybe 30% of the deal. The last 20% or so is made up piecemeal by a number of smaller grants and soft second loans, usually worth about $500k-$1M a pop and each with its own strings attached.

So, some but by no means most of the money comes from "taxpayer pockets" (unless you mean the taxpayers who are paying rent to live there). In return, the City gets badly needed housing, construction jobs, and lots of work for architects, lawyers, bankers, and bureaucrats. It turns into a net positive for public finances.

Absolutely, Jmaddenmass, I hear you on the fact that things like this don't move forward unless the 'city' or the financiers thinks it's a net positive. That doesn't automatically equate with a net positive for Hyde Park's business district. But again I don't have all the facts and in no way did I mean for any of my posts to seem inflammatory although I understand they may have come across that way. Also I think it's fair to say that this is not really presented as a mixed income development, and had I read it that way I wouldn't have had anything to say about it other than "great"

And the developer offsets the cost by raising the rent or sale price for all the other units. A few get an affordable unit and everyone else sees real estate become less affordable.

Boston needs to stop with the counterproductive Robin Hood politics of envy and red tape. Building more housing is the only way supply will ever meet demand and bring costs down.

The existing proposal documents say 60% of median income which is an eligibility of 0-33k. Not 80%.

Yes. That's 60 percnee of the Boston metro area income -- the area that runs from Quincy to Framingham to Methuen. That figure is about 1 .5 times the 60 percnet of median income figure for the City of Boston. A petition to Mayor Walsh is currently circulating asking that the City begin to use City of Boston income figures in setting housing policy and awarding housing subsidies.

Because PEOPLE THINK THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO TALK ABOUT IT FOREVER AND BITCH ABOUT EVERY DEVELOPMENT IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY AS IF IT REALLY MATTERED OR WAS ANY OF THEIR BUSINESS!

People do have a right to talk and bitch about whatever we want and for as long as we want. Are you the talk and bitch police?

When people don't like New England for whatever reason, they generally move away. As a matter of fact, I think people who hate it here should absolutely move -- it'll probably be cheaper wherever you go so win for you and win for the many people who want to move here but are having a hard time finding an apartment to rent or a condo to buy. Furthermore, PLENTY of people love it here which is why we have friends and neighbors from different states across the U.S. and from other countries.