Hey, there! Log in / Register
Plans to replace Forest Hills parking lot with apartments to get public airing
By adamg on Sun, 11/27/2016 - 10:01pm
Jamaica Plain News reports the BPDA will hold a public meeting on Criterion Development's proposal to replace the parking lot across from the Forest Hills T stop with a complex with 252 apartments in six-story buildings.
The hearing begins at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday at St. Andrew Church, 24 Orchardhill Rd.
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
No Arborway setback
After a five+ year battle to restore recreational access for bikes and pedestrians on this portion of the Emerald Necklace, Building B in this proposal - the one on the northeast corner - looms over the paths currently under construction with zero setback from the property line at that location. It is sited directly on the Arborway verge. No other building between the Fens and Franklin Park - with the exception of the proposed hotel on the industrial block in Brookline along River Street - does that without setback, and none on the western or southern side of the Emerald Necklace throws as much shade over this soon-to-be-restored recreational experience. That aspect of this project is very bad precedent in my view.
Doesn't it?
The plans on the earlier post show a bike path and separate pedestrian path on the north side of the development?
Or do you mean on Washington Street?
Those plans ARE
Those plans ARE the Casey Arborway plans with these propsed buildings superimposed to the south. They are pedestrian and bike paths being built by MASSDOT to restore the recreational connections between the Arboretum and Franklin Park. The Northeast building proposed is six stories, with zero setback from the Necklace sidewalk.
The pretty renderings of that building leave the impression that the sidewalks and plantings are being created by the Residences project (or so it seems to me) when in fact they're treating these public conveyances as their own front yard.
Not sure I see a huge problem?
Given that there are paths in the works and this is right next to Franklin Park and the cemeteries and near the Arboretum, I'd kind of rather have more living space. Even in a worst case scenario, a few blocks of Fenway neighborhood density at the end of a major T line would be worth the loss of some arbitrary amount of open space, given the location.
Prime TOD site
I generally have no beef with the proposed density of this prime TOD site, with the fairly interesting architecture, with the strong affordable housing allotment and other admirable aspects. They've been responsive to abutting neighbors too.
But for me, following a lengthy local battle to restore recreational access along the Emerald Necklace after a sixty year absence here, this project proposes to immediately undermine that experience for the public in offering no setback at all - while using the public parkways as a selling point.
If it weren't for the precedent of building to the edge of the Necklace, that would be annoying. But as it is, I see that one aspect as a threat to the much-cherished Emerald Necklace - a vital component of the city's livability well worth protecting.
Those plans ARE
Those plans ARE the Casey Arborway plans with these propsed buildings superimposed to the south. They are pedestrian and bike paths being built by MASSDOT to restore the recreational connections between the Arboretum and Franklin Park. The Northeast building proposed is six stories, with zero setback from the Necklace sidewalk.
The pretty renderings of that building leave the impression that the sidewalks and plantings are being created by the Residences project (or so it seems to me) when in fact they're treating these public conveyances as their own front yard.
I would suggest you make it
I would suggest you make it clear what you're asking for. Do you just want the buildings set further back from the Arborway? I think it's important that you don't appear to be a naysayer against development, because that's how people will paint you if you only say "no" without making proactive suggestions as to what you'd like to see done differently.
So much for history
A generation ago when the current Forest Hills station was built and current road patterns were fixed in place, the resounding cry of the neighborhood and abutters was no more development. They specifically sought a moratorium on development of the open land parcels that are now in that area so as to preserve green space.
Now, it's TOD and density. New generation, new people, new gentrification.
Venturing a dangerous opinion... I think MassDOT played the bike and hike lobby in those neighborhoods to get what they wanted... no replacement bridge... and offered it up as the will of the people.
We may not trust the MBTA but you truly cannot trust MassDOT. Ask anyone in Mattapan who was involved with the 28X BRT proposal.
Green space?
Putting aside the development by Ukraine Way, which is absolutely going into a formerly open green space, this is going on a parking lot and the new building kitty corner from this site on the north west side of Washington also went in where there were some random buildings. What green space is being lost? Also Franklin Park and the Arbs are pretty good, close green spaces.
I think a larger and tougher question is who gets to say no to development? The city needs more housing and building it right next to transit makes the most sense. Should the will of abutters prevail over that? I think zoning is too often thrown by the way side for convenience, but this is where we should be building more housing, much more so than over on Walk Hill or in the Allendale Woods. Is the developer looking for significant variances to build this project?
Groceries
If there is going to be a full sized grocery store on this site, they can build a 50 story brutalist monstrosity for all I care. Southern JP needs a walkable grocery that isn't a Whole Foods or a co-op.
Not the right spot for it
Full size grocery stores require parking and loading areas far greater than what's possible here.
Now if Arborway Yard across the street ever gets developed, there's plenty of space for larger retail among whatever mixed-use buildings are proposed.
Can I say that the architecture of these buildings is really ugly. What are those faux boxes stuck randomly on the facade? Why are there cheap pillars in the front that make it look like a low-budget football stadium? Yuck.
I dunno
The Trader Joe's in Brookline manages to get by on a pretty minimal footprint. Granted, they do that by making parking a Kafkaesque nightmare, and forcing its delivery trucks to fight it out with cars in the lot, but I'm not opposed to a grocery store that encourages its customers to walk or bike there. I live up the street, and if there were a walkable grocery store, I'd probably go there two or three times a week for a bag or two of groceries.
Trader Joe's in Back Bay has
Trader Joe's in Back Bay has zero on-site parking, and it's one of their highest volume stores.
Its already hard to get a spot to park for the day at FH,
what about the huge loss of parking for commuters who drive to the T from points south? Seems like a terminal station should be adding parking capacity instead of taking it away.