Hey, there! Log in / Register

First sign of gentrification in Mattapan?

The new owners of the Fairlawn Apartment complex off Cummins Highway in the southern part of Mattapan have renamed it SoMa Apartments at the T, now that a Fairmount Line station has opened across the street:

Classic Apartment Living Meets Transit Convenience

It's all right here! At SoMa Apartments, you will find the convenience you have been looking for along with the comforts that make a home truly enjoyable. SoMa Apartments has a suburban feel in an urban location, two blocks from the heart of Mattapan Square and its many shops and services. Residents enjoy immediate access via car or public transit via the Mattapan Square MBTA Red Line Station to universities, major medical centers, recreation and the many cultural activities that the Greater Boston area has to offer.

The four-building complex sold for $65 million last fall.

H/t PKGM.

Neighborhoods: 
Ad:

Comments

And already there. Mattapan isn't, nor has it ever been, a downtrodden, forgotten neighborhood. Mattapan is and always has been a nice place to live with well tended homes on neatly manicured lots. Mattapan Square has always been a thriving business district, as are the other commercial districts within the neighborhood. Why do you think current Mattapan residents and their children leaving the nest wouldn't want the amenities that this project offers?

up
Voting closed 31

It's the making-up-names thing as a signifier that money may be coming into the area to "fix it up" and make it more amenable to richer people. See SoWA and the failed (so far) EaBo and SoBo.

up
Voting closed 48

Over thinking this and trying to turn this negative. It’s a silly marketing gimmick, but I find it more offensive that you imply that the people who call Mattapan home wouldn’t want good, reliable transit to their jobs and to all the rich cultural amenities we are free to enjoy in this city and that somehow these befits are for outsiders and gentrifiers. Furthermore, the money is already there and if this development brings more money into the values of the homeowners and business owners, who are you to deny them their due? There was nothing in that ad that was discriminatory, underhanded, or an affront to the residents of the neighborhood. It’s merely pointing out the benefits that the current residents already enjoy.

up
Voting closed 6

And getting hit back by the city. Meanwhile the Cote site rots next door.

up
Voting closed 0

Stop telling everyone! We need people to believe they are gonna get shot if they step foot in the neighborhood if we want our property taxes to remain low!

up
Voting closed 10

What about mattapan square is thriving? There are many squares in this part of the country and I would not consider mattapan square to be an example of one that is doing well. Also the landlord renaming their apartments is not reflective of the area doing well, it is rather reflective of the landlord wanting to make more money. Having a "fancy" name lets them jack up rents using the excuse that they are now "transit-oriented" being across from a half-assed commuter rail station (which btw is next to a particularly dilapidated abandoned auto body).

up
Voting closed 10

on a daily basis implies to me that people frequent the area, because wherever people are, there is litter(just read yesterday humans have left 200 TONS of trash on the moon!), and Mattapan Sq. looks like a landfill transfer area most days. Beyond that, there are more boarded up storefront in Union Sq. Somerville for cryin out loud. Not much for rent in Mattapan Sq these days.

up
Voting closed 0

They refer to it on the Amenities page as being "Adjacent to the Recently Opened MBTA Blue Hills Station" ... which makes it sound like it's somewhere in the Blue Hills, rather than on Blue Hill Ave, which is the actual name of the station.

up
Voting closed 19

With respect to the amenities , that place used to have a function hall you could rent out for parties and the such . And go across the street to Cote and buy a Ford too!

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 34

Spot on

up
Voting closed 1

The name change predated the opening of the train station.

But one has to guess that a level of gentrification of the area could be at hand. It might take a bit, and I'm hoping that the displacement and reworking of the sociodemographics that one saw in Charlestown and South Boston doesn't happen, but I wouldn't be surprised that the area will be different in 10 to 15 years.

up
Voting closed 3

of phase one. Developers have pretty much snapped up all the over grown lots, sandlots, and abandoned car dealerships/ industrial space and plans are being filed and holes being dug. In some cases buildings are already half-finished while lawyers are still fighting about proper build distances from HAZMAT areas. Phase 2 is when they buy up tiny single family houses and build triple-deckers or worse in their place. Phase 3 is when the newbs start bitching about inadequate transit that area residents have bitched about for decades and getting results due to their newfound political pull (money).
When the city starts selling off pieces of the Gallivan Blvd Apartments (projects, nicest ones in the city btw), to BPDA and contractor cronies for pennies on the dollar you know the cycle is complete.

up
Voting closed 5

It's just a rebranding of garden style apartments. You see it all the time in totally jngentrified areas. I just check their site Rent for a 2bd is 1850, utilities included . Just a regular upgrade.

up
Voting closed 2

There’s a catch-22 brewing along the Fairmount Line. There’s a need for greater housing density around the stations in order to justify the state/MBTA investing in higher frequency, subway-like service, which would hugely benefit current residents as well as new ones. But the usual combination of NIMBY homeowners plus justified fears of gentrification is at work opposing new apartment buildings. This kind of tin-eared branding doesn’t help.

up
Voting closed 15

Yup and per usual for Boston, this exact scenario will play out:

1. Existing homeowners oppose new housing, stop or delay most development.
2. Price of existing housing increases due to lack of supply and rising demand.
3. Some new housing still built but expensive due to #1.
4. Activists blame #3 for rising rents and costs instead of #1 and #2
5. #1 and #4 groups team up to oppose new housing.
6. Prices continue to skyrocket, actual gentrification worsens.

Rinse, repeat.

up
Voting closed 20

Lost for words, Fairlawn Estates? SoMa? GTFO.

up
Voting closed 16

As in no trains. Fairmount trains still get cancelled at a moment's notice.

up
Voting closed 1

For those of us who don’t suffer from status anxiety, there is nothing wrong with bargain looking appliances. I have them in my house, they are very dependable and they cook just fine.

But if I was re-branding my building with a pretentious name to maximize the rent, I wouldn’t feature an electric coil stove top and $40 discount faucet from Bargain Outlet on my website’s frontpage!

up
Voting closed 21

What's wrong with gentrification? Isn't peaceful coexistence a good thing?

up
Voting closed 6

Pricing out lifelong residents and local businesses is not a good thing

up
Voting closed 8

homeowners in economically downtrodden cities like East Saint Louis, Camden and Detroit would jump at the opportunity. Gentrification means a homeowner can sell at a profit versus a loss.

up
Voting closed 3

How about the lifelong renters in those places who find themselves priced out of their neighborhoods with no profit to show for it?

up
Voting closed 4

Segregation is a mortal sin

up
Voting closed 3

But to those of us who are getting priced out of the city - it looks like Boston is being whitewashed.
The South End, Fort Hill, Jamaica Plain, Roslindale, Hyde Park, East Boston, Columbia Point, et al. have lost thousands of people of color due to gentrification.
If you think that is a positive then maybe you are part of the gentry.

up
Voting closed 6

It was pretty much devoid of black folk (and definitely devoid of white folk) when it was redeveloped into Harbor Point. Considering that CMJ pledged to increase affordable housing in the development, I’d say you’d be off in your characterization.

But then I read your claim that Hyde Park is losing people of color. Now I know you’re clueless.

up
Voting closed 4

If it makes you feel better about the situation - maybe you are part of the problem.
I am referring to the Columbia Point of the '70s versus what it is now.
Remember, when you call someone else clueless it doesn't make you any smarter.

up
Voting closed 1

Just because there are more white (and let's not forget Asian) residents in Harbor Point today doesn't mean there are less black people in the area than in the 1970s. You have to remember that Columbia Point was mostly abandoned until CMJ moved in. Sure, when tenants returned the rules of the development were a bit stricter, but unless you are going to make some racist remark, that was a good thing for most tenants that were there before.

But please explain to the crowd how less people live in Hyde Park today than in the 1970s, or heck, than in the year 2000. I'm dying to see how you pull this one off.

up
Voting closed 0

Please don't conflate my comments. I mentioned Columbia Point in the '70s, not Hyde Park.
I'm talking H.P. as it is now. Go down to Cleary Square and look at the real estate listings in the windows of Tierney Realty or Century 21 or Walsh's. Single family homes in the 7s and 8s.
And I should be clear - it's not just Latinos and blacks who are being priced out - it is just about everyone who grows up in the city. The difference is that the people who are replacing - or gentrifying - are overwhelmingly white in the neighborhoods I mentioned.
I predict that by the next census Boston will once again be a white majority, which I don't necessarily have a problem with. My issue is that kids who grow up here can't afford to stay and live here.

up
Voting closed 5

The South End, Fort Hill, Jamaica Plain, Roslindale, Hyde Park, East Boston, Columbia Point, et al. have lost thousands of people of color due to gentrification.
If you think that is a positive then maybe you are part of the gentry.

But other than that, what you just wrote are things I agree with. I will continue to mock people who think gentrification is a new thing to Boston that only affects people of color, but I think you get it.

up
Voting closed 0

Are you saying that gentrification will not ultimately result in a net loss of minority residents?

up
Voting closed 0