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
train rendering
By Saul
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 5:32pm
Wow, so if this development is built, the T will start running commuter rail cars that don't harken back to 19th-century practices of having train crew manually open each door?
rails
By Robert Paulson
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 5:45pm
I looks like they zoomed really far into tracks on google earth and took a screen shot. So resolution!
trains
By Vernon
Thu, 01/09/2014 - 3:42pm
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!
DMU
By BostonUrbEx
Fri, 01/10/2014 - 8:27am
Just a minor correction: The M = multiple. Diesel Multiple Units. As in, the train has multiple diesel units, as opposed to one locomotive.
Wise Proposal?
By Dave Sullivan
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 6:18pm
So only four market rate units with 36 affordable? Hyde Park needs some business revitalization and I'm not sure a strictly affordable complex is the way to do that. In fact, the country is moving towards the 80/20 model based on mixed-income development. A neighborhood like Hyde Park does not have the economic resilience right now to sustain this kind of development. The Bike path thing is so far out of touch. Bike Paths work in JP, but have little to do with affordable housing.
That's 24 and three, don't
By Dave Sullivan
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 7:10pm
That's 24 and three, don't know where 36 came from
How's a bike not an
By anon
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 7:46pm
How's a bike not an affordable transportation choice? Tens of thousands of dollars cheaper in the long run for the average city dweller.
A commuter bike is a great
By Dave Sullivan
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 8:20pm
A commuter bike is a great idea for affordable transportation, but just not a reality in affordable housing complexes.
why not?
By anon
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 8:42pm
why not?
because
By Stevil
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 9:35pm
A lot of these people are elderly single parents etc and because we live in boston. Been outside this week?
Affordable Housing is NOT Low Income Housing
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:50am
It is available to moderate-income households which earn between 70% and 100% of area median income (AMI). Boston's AMI is calculated annually by the U.S. Census Bureau not by a local agency. It is a way for working folks to buy/rent housing. If you assume these are one bedroom units, the annual salary range is somewhere between $46,250 and $75,500. The units would need to be priced between $124,800 to $210,800.
Affordable housing is usually are offered in a housing lottery. And by the way? Every city and town in MA is required by state law to have 10% of their housing stock as affordable.
Current BRA units:
http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/opport...
Other local cities:
http://www.massaffordablehomes.org/Search.aspx
http://www.chapa.org/looking-housing/affordable-homes
http://www.cityofmelrose.org/departments/opcd/affo...
http://www.town.arlington.ma.us/public_documents/A...
http://www.natickma.gov/sites/natickma/files/file/...
Concord Affordable Housing Units Available
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 3:59pm
http://www.concordma.gov/pages/ConcordMA_Planning/...
A) Open House on Sunday, January 12 from 1:00PM - 2:00 PM
at 95 Conant Street, Unit 319 at Concord Commons priced at $154,500
It is offered for $154,500 to eligible applicants with complete application packages, earning 80% of the Area Median Income (or less)
B) New Affordable Housing Units Available at Shaw Farm Village, 1257 Elm Street Concord MA
2 Bedroom—$161,600
3 Bedroom—$179,200
Units are available through a lottery to first time homebuyers, with some exceptions, who meet the applicable asset limit of up to $75,000 and who haveGross Incomes as follows:
1 person: $47,450
2 person: $54,200
3 person: $61,000
4 person: $67,750
5 person: $73,200
6 person: $78,600
Elderly single parents?
By Sally
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:06am
I don't think I've ever heard that phrase before.
Probably very much the same
By Dave Sullivan
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 10:35pm
Probably very much the same reasons why I don't bike to work anymore. It sucks in the winter and you get all sweaty in the summer. It's really something for enthusiasts. Working people and/or others who have little kids, or the elderly, or basically anyone who isn't hip and prone to affordable housing, doesn't have a lot of time and/or interest in being enthused.
You're bucking the trend.
By Sally
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:15am
Obviously it's a small contingent who bike to work year-round but that's no reason to discourage it. The nutty assumption here is that every resident needs a parking space for the car that apparently they can afford. And your assumption that only "enthusiasts" "hipsters" and not "working people" should be riding bikes is just plain limiting. I work. I am middle-aged and unhip and I ride a bike--and walk and take trains and buses. It's do-able. It's affordable. And it's healthy and fun. I guess that makes me an "enthusiast" but we should all have enthusiasms, right?
I was only speaking to what I
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:06pm
I was only speaking to what I see Sally. Not attempting to buck a trend. Sorry for that. As always I could be wrong. Again I don't think this part is really important.
I hear you.
By Sally
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:46pm
I'm just interested though in changing people's assumptions about what's cool or possible for certain groups of people to do. And re encouraging people to drive less or feel as if they "have" to have a car, I think of it as a kind of "build it and they will come" approach. The more normal it becomes, the more "normal" folks will do it.
Cycling IS 'cool' hip and
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 1:25pm
Cycling IS 'cool' hip and trendy right now. So, that's not bucking the trend. Having a car is akin to clubbing baby seals these days. Except of course when you're helping your buddies move to that new apartment.
Furthermore: you don't ride to bike OR drive a car. Plenty of people do neither and they either walk and/or take public transportation.
My point
By Sally
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 2:38pm
was that yes--since he's not biking to work anymore, he is bucking the trend. And yes, thanks--I'm aware that most people use different forms of transport. I'm assuming that these folks living next to a rail line will do that. My only quibble was with the assumption that lower-income people (and this is affordable housing, not low-income housing) aren't ever going to get on a bike or bike to work and that biking is only for trendy 25-year-old hipster white guys.
Sally I do take the commuter
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 4:54pm
Sally I do take the commuter rail to work. If there was an express path to downtown that I could bike, I'd likely give it a shot. The bike thing just sounded like the idea of some recent architecture student who thinks notions of biking have never occurred to these poor inner city folk and he/she is going to enlighten. Anyway, again all good and I'd like to see a more bike friendly city. It just seems like to get these things thru, the concessions become confounded and silly and unrealistic. I'd love to be wrong. And I don't doubt that money will be made.
Granted the bicycling
By Dave Sullivan
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 10:43pm
Granted the bicycling shoutout is a small and probably insignificant part of this development.
Pay less in rent, spend more at local businesses
By Ron Newman
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 11:43pm
Affordable housing is [b]good[/b] for neighborhood businesses! If the tenants don't have to spend so much on rent, they have more money available to spend locally.
Is that true? So lower rent
By Dave Sullivan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 7:04am
Is that true? So lower rent neighborhoods would have thriving business sectors? I'm willing to beleive it, but it doesn't seem that way to me. People get affordable housing because they don't have a lot of money. Nothing against anyone. I don't have a lot of money either but Ininderstand that you need a rounding of economic drivers in every neighborhood.
those aren't correct units
By Vernon
Thu, 01/09/2014 - 3:52pm
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.
Fairmount project
By adamg
Thu, 01/09/2014 - 4:12pm
Was actually the Southwest CDC's first attempt to build something in Hyde Park. And they were going to use the land between Nott Street and the train station as a parking lot for the project.
After it collapsed, that's when the mayor, sorry, the former mayor, suggested using the land for housing ...
Don't fudge affordable
By massmarrier
Tue, 03/24/2015 - 12:52pm
The "affordable" in this project from the start has been almost entirely the median income of the neighborhood. NIMBYs kept saying this would be some welfare hotel, which couldn't be more wrong. These are productive, working families who will contribute to the local economy. This is welcome and long overdue. It should not have been such a slog.
1 space per unit /=/ "transit oriented"
By TR
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 6:21pm
27 car spaces for 27 units? They assume that low income households living in affordable housing directly across from the station will have car ownership rates higher than the citywide average? Why would zipcar want to be there when the CDC is bending over backward to make car ownership easy and cheap?
are you serious?
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 8:19am
There's nothing cheap about car ownership! Ask a friend or co-worker who owns one.
Parking requirements for new
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 3:20pm
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.
ZipCar has options
By Markk02474
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 3:43pm
No building needs a ZipCar depot, one can often be placed nearby. There is one a block from me at a gas station next to a bus stop, such synergy! Building management can decide how many spots, if any, it will lease to ZipCar when it knows if and how many vacant parking spots are available. Chances are Zipcar usage may come from proximity to the T stop more than building residents. Why should the developers bend over to help ZipCar while losing value on units to give them parking? Perhaps condo buyers could lease spots to ZipCar instead.
just what I always wanted
By anon
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 6:38pm
...a view out my front window of a commuter rail train, train horn, etc. from my cell-block-looking apartment.
Newsflash to "transit-oriented development" proponents: I want to be a few minutes walk from said transit, not RIGHT ON IT. I enjoy my sleep, not having the building tremble, etc. If it isn't light rail, don't put people's homes right on top of it.
Cute use of electric integrated power unit cars (is that medium rail? I forget the terminology) that don't exist in the illustration, too.
DMUs
By adamg
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 6:42pm
Remember: The state says it wants to buy them for the Fairmount Line.
tracks
By Saul
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 6:59pm
I live around 50 feet from the Fitchburg line tracks. My home doesn't tremble and I don't jump out of my sleep as a train passes.
No one's forcing you to live beside a train station.
Agree! I lived real close to
By Patricia
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:19am
Agree! I lived real close to train tracks at one time, now I can still hear them where I am but not so close, and I actually find it relaxing. There was a bridge trouble years ago and the commuter trains couldn't run, I couldn't stand the quiet.
Now at night as I fall asleep, I can hear a commuter train in the distance and I find it relaxing. Something like white noise maybe?
Ditto
By Michael Kerpan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:27am
I would not buy or rent a house/apartment right NEXT to tracks -- but I don't mind trains passing by a few blocks away. I've been in earshot of train traffic for around 30 years -- in three cities. ;-}
Obligatory reference
By Saul
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:49am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S65lJGs7YC8
Limited train schedule
By DG99
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 8:13am
The train doesn't run late or on weekends and does not use the horn. FWIW
What is the view from most affordable housing?
By Sally
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:17am
Mountain ranges? Cape Cod Bay? Looks pretty nice to me. And I'd have no trouble living next to train tracks.
Parking on lower level, residences above
By Markk02474
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 3:52pm
Some of the noise is mitigated by having units above street level. Manhattan is even quiet once you get to a high enough floor.
I used to live in a Porter Square condo 50' from the track (Cogswell Ave.). I could feel every train going by (fairly slowly) from about 6 AM to 1:30 AM, as I recall.
Great...except there would
By anon
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 7:11pm
Great...except there would actually have to be running trains of the Fairmount Line and not this daily cancellation BS we've been subjected to lately. Plus there's no weekend service. You'd have to be a fool to pay market rate for living at service that's barely there.
...Or a fool to pay market
By Dave Sullivan
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 7:35pm
...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
Line incomplete
By BostonUrbEx
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 8:02am
The line still doesn't have it's own dedicated rolling stock, and there's Blue Hill Ave Station which isn't even under construction yet. Why run a full blown schedule when you're going to be shutting down for new station construction starting next year?
What shutdown?
By rsybuchanan
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:56am
Neither the Orange Line nor the Commuter Rail lines have shut down for construction of Assembly Square or of Fenway stations. I'm not even sure the delays sometimes caused by those projects is measurable among all the breakdown-related delays.
The line eventually is
By jdrinboston
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:50am
The line eventually is supposed to go over to DMUs, which I believe are geared toward high-level platforms. All of the new stations have high-level platforms, but the Readville/Fairmount station platforms still need to be raised. It's not so much an issue of construction shutdowns as it is a matter of having rolling stock to service the line. The DMUs wouldn't be usable right now and obviously you wouldn't purchase new equipment if it was going to be obsolete in 5 years.
Interesting
By Anon
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 8:21pm
Does anybody know the per unit cost of this glorified mini public housing project, and more importantly, where the money is coming from? It's all low-income housing, meaning no developer trying to make money would touch it with a ten foot pole, unless it's all grant money and it's not costing him anything out of pocket. My guess is it's another one of those feel-good $750k+ per unit projects, with most of the money coming out of taxpayer pockets. Makes way more sense than spending less than $75k a unit to refurbish all those dilapidated empty triple-deckers - why fix existing housing when you can really line your pockets with new construction?
Affordable Housing Finance Primer
By jmaddenmass
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 10:42pm
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.
50-75% taxpayer subsidized?
By Markk02474
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 4:09pm
You stated that "the mortgage probably only covers somewhere between 25% and 50% of the deal (as opposed to 70-80% on a market deal)." So, does this mean that taxpayers are picking up the rest, one way or another through tax credits and grants?
Would adding more floors to the project lower costs to taxpayers, besides making higher value upper floor units?
Again lets reward people for not having any drive
By anon
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 9:45pm
A working family wouldnt qualify for the subsidies in order to obtain one of these units nor would they be able to afforded the market rate units. Why work hard when less work = greater reward. Keep helping to further the income inequality by baiting people into poverty.
Umm.... really?
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:38am
How exactly does making housing subsidies available to a family making $60K per year equate to "rewarding people for not having any drive?"
Huh?
By whyaduck
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:12pm
And, again I say, "Huh?"
Yet another ignorant asshole anon
By Kaz
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 4:57pm
Read a book: "No Shame in My Game"
There are MANY working families who would qualify for these apartments because we don't pay our minimum wage workers enough to live at market rate. Furthermore, they work the shit jobs that you don't even know exist because they refuse to simply rely on the state and choose to try and be self-sufficient. More of them these days aren't able to do that and end up turning to food stamps and other means just to survive while doing everything within their power to elevate enough to go back to shunning the support systems that you claim breed laziness and "bait people into poverty".
Nobody in their right mind ever says "I don't want to try harder because I'll stop getting some pittance of a handout". Would you tell your boss that you don't want to make $80,000 a year instead of $60,000/yr because your taxes might go from 5% to 6%? Of course not! It's the same thing! If the opportunity to advance was presented, they'd take it...and be able to afford better than whatever subsidized place you claim they'd lose access to.
These housing situations exist because we allow people to be paid well under the cost of survival. They take those jobs because they want to be able to provide for themselves...even though it actually dooms them into a no-win situation. That no-win situation is still better psychologically for them than the alternative even though people like you keep on portraying it like it's a golden ticket which will motivate them to ignore what their own psyche wants them to do for themselves.
So, do us all a favor and educate yourself. My guess is that you're not as far above the quality of life that these people are trying to find their way out of. With the trend in the data that we see today, that means you're not far behind ending up in the exact same spot even though you've fooled yourself into thinking you're just one step behind the well-off. You're more one of them than you are one of the 1%, so be sure to let us know when you've decided you don't want to try harder and are willing to be baited into poverty. You seem to think it'll be an easy decision when you get there.
Middle class loses again in Boston. Thanks Walsh
By Boston_Bloke
Tue, 01/07/2014 - 10:28pm
Our new mayor made a point during the election to represent the working people.
This project does not do that. Rather it reinforces the polarization where Boston is a city for the rich, or those on public assistance. There's nothing for the working people in between.
It's not a housing project
By adamg
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 8:00am
Somebody making $60,000 a year would qualify for this building. That's exactly the sort of family we want to retain in this city so we don't become Manhattan.
"WE"
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:14am
Bro, you're not from Boston!
Yeah, "we"
By adamg
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:23am
I pay taxes here, I have a kid in BPS, I vote in every municipal election. I'm a Bostonian, no matter how much it pains you.
Haha
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:30am
You may live in Boston but you'll never be a Bostonian. You're not from here. If i moved to China, that wouldn't make me Chinese.
What does it matter?
By BostonUrbEx
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:13am
Do you suck that much that you have to come up with ways to "one up" someone on a news blog? I'm sure every 'Bostonian' is real proud of you, bro. You're so cool, man.
No it's just infuriating
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:29am
When you have a bunch a whinny liberals who ride in from out of town in their Prius's and think they know whats best for Boston. And at the same time consistently talk shit about the people who grew up here. But what do i know, im a White Irish-American from Boston, so according to the UHub crew im a racist bigot from Southie.
Deal with it
By adamg
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:34am
Was going to say something about the poor persecuted Irish and how if only we could elect an Irish-American mayor things would improve for you, but no, enough's enough. I've lived here longer than where I grew up and damn right I have every bit as much of a right as you to consider the city's future. And I vote! And yeah, I drive a Prius. Deal.
No, actually...
By Sally
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:35am
You're just a useless anonymous poster taking cheap shots at people. Your people came here from somewhere too--don't act as if being a Bostonian is some kind of elite and unattainable thing.
Would you feel different if
By jdrinboston
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 11:40am
Would you feel different if there were a bunch of conservatives riding into town driving Ford F-150s "thinking they know what's best for Boston?"
I dont know why you are a
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:00pm
I dont know why you are a bigot, but dont blame being irish.
It's whiny, not whinny. I don
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 12:26pm
It's whiny, not whinny. I don't drive a Prius. I have an Irish last name. My ancestors immigrated from Ireland to Boston during the potato famine. Not Catholic. I'm a Democrat. I live in Boston. Was born in NH. Can't we just shut the fuck up about the stereotypes!!??
God forbid people have a different perspective
By El Danimal
Fri, 09/19/2014 - 1:05pm
So living in more than one place and having a basis for comparison is a bad thing? Just because you refuse to change your way of thinking to keep up with the times does not mean that the rest of us have as well.
Don't you love anons who can't spell?
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 03/24/2015 - 1:01pm
What a piece of work. Hope you get priced out when you find out that mommy's basement is being sold to cover the mortgage.
For the purposes of this discussion...
By merlinmurph
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 10:30am
...he's from Boston.
He's a taxpayer and an active participant in the city. His vote counts just as much as a born-and-bred Bostonian.
Good enough for me.
If you think you're a Bostonian
By anon
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:37am
You obviously don't understand what being a Bostonian mean. You didn't grow up here, you didn't play youth sports here, you didn't go to school here, you don't have neighborhood friend you ran around the street as a kid with, ect..... You're not a Bostonian, not even close. Your kids YES, You NO!
You left something out
By adamg
Wed, 01/08/2014 - 9:54am
The part about my great-great-grandparents having come over here ...
It's this attitude
By Sparkle
Thu, 01/09/2014 - 2:53pm
that led my wife and I to leave Hyde Park and Boston altogether. We lived in Hyde Park for 5 years but we weren't born in Boston, we didn't go to college here, and our house wasn't a 100 years old. I've lived all over the US and Bostonians are the only ones that not only didn't embrace newcomers but openly looked down upon them.
Should have moved to our street...
By Michael Kerpan
Thu, 01/09/2014 - 3:14pm
... in Roslindale. Only one block long, we've got a woman who was born on our block over 90 years ago -- and we have newcomers. And everybody gets along just fine.
Pages
Add comment