BRA officials make a rare visit to Hyde Park tomorrow for a meeting on a proposed 27-unit residential building at the Fairmount train station off Fairmount Avenue.
At the session, which starts at 6:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 1179 River St., the Southwest Boston Community Development Corp. and the Codman Square Neighborhood Development Corp. will explain their proposal for the Residences at Fairmount Station.
This is one of the first "transit oriented" developments proposed for the newly revamped Fairmount Line, the only commuter-rail line with stops just within Boston. State officials have said the $200 million cost of upgrading the line could pay off in revitalization of the areas around its stations.
The two neighborhood development groups have agreements to purchase four dilapidated lots between Nott Street and the station and are seeking BRA approval to replace them with a four-story building holding 24 "affordable" units and 3 "market rate" units.
Besides being located just across from a Fairmount Line station, the project is about a half mile from the new Neponset River bicycle path.
The project would include spaces for 27 cars and 27 bicycles in a first-floor garage. The developers are also looking at trying to entice ZipCar to the location, which would be just the second ZipCar station in the city's southernmost neighborhood.
Among the buildings targeted for demolition: This ramshackle building on Nott Street that is marked with a warning to firefighters to stay out should it catch on fire:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Damn straight Adam's a Bostonian
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:37am
He's a hell of a lot more of a contributor to Boston than a lot of people who pride themselves on being "originally from here" going back however many generations....
Bob where are you from?
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:50am
$10 say not from Boston.....
$10 says you don't know how
By Matt, North End
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:50am
$10 says you don't know how to make an argument that's not an ad hominem.
I'll feed...where are you
By Seth
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:17am
I'll feed...where are you from, anon? Any additional criteria to list out for the qualifications list?
I think we'll hear crickets on that one.
By Sally
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:23am
Since he probably now lives in Quincy. Maybe someone taunted him last night at the bar that he wasn't REALLY from Quincy...
NOPE!
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:39am
I still live in Boston, Roslindale to be exact. Quincy is a shithole, it gone down hill in the past 15 years.
Yet...
By Neal
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:34pm
...you're afraid to tell us who you are. If you're not going to create a profile, why don't you man up and at least put your name up there? Until you do, you're just a random anon whose opinions should be taken with a great big grain of salt.
Glad to be able to say....
By Michael Kerpan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:42pm
... I have yet to personally meet anyone in Roslindale with the rotten attitude you display here.
Armchair quarterbacks
By jmaddenmass
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 10:29pm
I'm always amused by commenters like those above armchair quarterbacking the developer's proposals. Just because you personally wouldn't want to live in a mixed-income development or near the train or whatever your thing is does not mean that there aren't others out there that will happily pay for those homes. Almost no development - especially a mixed-income development with likely upwards of 5 or 6 financial participants - moves forward unless the risk-averse folks who invest in these deals are convinced that there is a market for it.
Absolutely, Jmaddenmass, I
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 7:22am
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"
Yes, net positive for Hyde Park's business district
By adamg
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 8:05am
Have you walked around Logan Square recently? I'm struggling to think how this project would NOT improve that area. It replaces a building that's so dangerous firefighters from down the block won't even go in it if it catches on fire, and could encourage further redevelopment of that area. Now if only somebody could do something with that equally derelict old factory (or whatever it was) building on the other side of the Fairmount Line.
A least
By bulgingbuick
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 8:35am
it's not another dollar store.
Sure. I think Boston needs
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:20am
Sure. I think Boston needs more housing. The lack of stock is part of the problem, but the market rents in Hyde Park I beleive were the lowest in the city? There are neighborhoods that could incorporate affordable and even low-income housing and the neighborhood economy could sustain. Hyde Park does not seem to be that type of neighborhood. Are any of the complexes going up in Fort Point and South boston waterfront 90 percent affordable? Why do so many developments in Hyde Park have stipulations on them? Artist requirements, income etc. 60k is not a lot for a family of two in Boston and the breadwinner in this situation will not be driving wine sales at Fairmount Grill.
Subsidizing market rents
By jmaddenmass
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:28am
If the market rents in Hyde Park are really that low, that may be why it takes affordable housing to get any development moving there. At today's construction prices, it takes rents around $3 per SF (think $2100/month for a 1BR) to pay for a new building.
Contrary to the bizarre popular belief that developers raise market rents to subsidize affordable (if you think you can charge an above market price, I've got a 2004 Ford I'd love to sell you for $15k); the affordable housing subsidies are often what enable a developer to create unrestricted market units in a building where the market rents don't pay for themselves.
Affordable is much different
By anon
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 10:33pm
Affordable is much different than low income. Affordable means 80% of the median, which in Boston last year meant $60,000 for a family of 2, or $80,000 for a family of 4.
And the developer offsets the
By anon
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 10:59pm
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.
Thanks for playing!
By KellyJMF
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 8:54am
They don't raise the rent or the sale price for the other units because the people won't pay more that a unit is worth. But they may be offsetting the ability to build "luxury" condos elsewhere by building affordable housing here.
I don't see
By Tim
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:35am
....luxury housing being built in HP for Logan Square for the foreseeable future...maybe in Rozzie and JP!
Also, check the stats: HP has one of the lowest proportions of subsidized housing of any Boston neighborhood...we can do our part.
I'll say this slowly then
By KellyJMF
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:44pm
The luxury development doesn't have to be anywhere near the affordable part. That's often the point. In exchange for high ROI units in an expensive/highly desirable area, developer builds affordable housing elsewhere (but all of it within Boston). The reason they can afford to develop below market rate is they are bringing in big money on the luxury units. Which they wouldn't be allowed to build at all without the 2nd project. Developer gets to make a pot of money, affordable housing also gets built that couldn't otherwise, taxes and jobs all around.
ok, kelly, got your point.
By Tim
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 2:30pm
ok, kelly, got your point. thanks.
The facts about who will live there
By Mat Thall
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:15am
If you come to the meeting tonight you will see the follwoing facts presented:
Of the 24 "affodable" units, 21 are targeted for working families. Proposed rents for these apartments -- which are higher than the develpers would like are:
Studio $925
1BR $1100
2 BR $1321
3 BR $1525
all about $150 below the "market" rents
The units will serve famlies with income between $28,000 ( for the smallest units) to $66,000 (for the largest units)
The terms "affordable" and "low Income" are very confusing becuase they are based on a geogrpahic area that extends from Quincy to Framingham to Methuen, and have little to do with the income profile of the City of Boston Southwest Boston CDC projects that the median ( that is, the exact middle)
household income of all residents of the develpment when built will be about $45,500 in present dollars, compared to the median household income in the City of Boston of $51,450
Great, thanks Matt
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:34am
Great, thanks Matt
Honest question here. Do
By anonoo
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 1:36pm
Honest question here. Do working families rent studio apartments? By family, I assume is meant at least 1 parent and 1 child. Better to move to a cheaper city then pay $925 for neither parent nor child to have a bedroom just to live in a new development. Boston IS crazy expensive. There are cheaper nearby cities: Randolph, Lawrence, Worcester, Haverhill, Manchester, NH, and so on and so forth. I have plenty of friends and relatives who work in Boston and would love to live in Boston too, but they don't because they can't afford it. In total agreement that there should be housing for working middle class families in the city of Boston, but the yuppification of so many neighborhoods has decreased everyone's options.
The existing proposal
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:18am
The existing proposal documents say 60% of median income which is an eligibility of 0-33k. Not 80%.
Res at Fairmount Station
By Tim
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:08am
From what I know about the Res at Fairmount: This strikes me as a perfectly reasonable proposal which strives to build new housing for "work force" folks as well as subsidized residents: should new housing only be for folks who can afford it (I know I can't!)? Also, I agree that it will be good for Logan Sq, maybe jumpstart new development and investment (affordable housing projects do help with this) in the area, vastly improve what is currently there, and possibly provide construction jobs for folks in Hyde Park.
60% Median income
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:22am
http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/getatt...
Yes. That's 60 percnee of
By Mat Thall
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:49am
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.
Got it. Thanks for all the
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:37pm
Got it. Thanks for all the good info Matt. I hope it all works out.
So you want housing to be affordable
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:30am
You know why it isn't? Supply.
You know why supply is low? 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!
I swear - New England is so freaking loony about butting into property decisions. Oh well - enjoy your excessive rent that comes with nosy bitching privileges. It will definitely keep anything from being built that you might possibly have to look at at some point in your day.
Because PEOPLE THINK THEY
By anon
Fri, 09/19/2014 - 1:54pm
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.
Pages
Add comment