Hey, there! Log in / Register
Rooming house would make way for new apartment building in Allston's Union Square
By adamg on Thu, 02/04/2016 - 9:52am
Architect's rendering.
A developer has filed plans with the BRA to replace a rooming house on a stretch of North Beacon Street that has "gritty charm" with more modern "quality transit-oriented housing at moderate prices" for young professionals who might otherwise be priced out of the gentrifying area.
Developer Gerry Bickoff, who grew up in the neighborhood and owns Commercial Cleaning Service across the street from the site, is proposing 20 units - three affordable - ranging from studios to one bedrooms in a building that would also replace a garage and a parking lot. He's proposing retail space on the ground floor and 22 parking spaces.
To encourage non-car ownership, he says he will buy incoming residents a one-month CharlieCard, a yearlong ZipCar membership and a half-price Hubway membership, as well as an unspecified number of Uber credits. In his filing, he cites studies that found that, already, more than half of Allston households do not own a car and that "renters are 3.5 times less likely to own a car than a homeowner."
31 N. Beacon St. small-project review request (3.5M PDF).
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
It says 22 spaces but the
It says 22 spaces but the design docs look like there's half of that? Am I missing something? Are they on those weird car-elevator things (how do those even work?)
Transit Oriented in Alston?
Are they bringing back the A-line?
Looks good to me
He's replacing housing with more housing plus retail, all good. He's got a parking spot for every unit and is doing a lot to make public transit work for the tenants. Build it!
The existing building:
https://goo.gl/maps/wSsc242nNHP2
Up
I am in favor of this development.
But I bet the person in that house between this site and 15 N. Beacon is not. That owner should consolidate with Bickoff and come up with an even bigger design.
Also, as a disclaimer, I would never live in this, proposed building due to the constant smell coming off the KFC.
It probably means
that the KFC is not long for this world. It's a 1 story building in a "building-up" area that produces greasy odors and typically attracts a lower-class crowd than the kind that lives in LEED certified buildings with living-wall espresso bars or whatever trendy crap they'll pile into this building.
Give it a couple of years, and that lot will have a six-story building where the ground floor retail is some trendy pour-over kale bar..
Hope So
I get bad fried chicken cravings just like the next person... but the dinginess and lack of service in that KFC is abysmal. And if that's what I want I would rather go all the way to Kenmore for Popeye's. Plus in Allston you are just down the street from about 5 amazing Korean Fried Chicken places, which is marginally better for you, and tastes better IMHO. Plus they are clean and nice in those places. For example, Bon Chon which is actually a franchise just like KFC, but you can sit down and have a nice meal and a beer there. And the rest of the menu is great as well.
Looked up who owns 23 N
Looked up who owns 23 N Beacon. The owner is "Nora LLC", which is Anwar Faisal. Won't cross my fingers on him selling.
Why can't
more developers take this approach (ample parking AND included alternative transit options)? At face value it seems kind of weird to have enough parking for every unit AND give all of the non-car ownership incentives, but I could also see it as a best of both worlds scenario for car owners who don't want to drive IN the city, and for the city to see reduced traffic.
Regardless, great to see.
We're all so jaded
That's true. The developer must just actually be a nice guy. Wow!
Sounds Iike you are
Sounds Iike you are suggesting a tax paying homeowner should just move aside and let developers do what they want. That doesn't mean this shouldn't be built but existing homeowners should have their perspectives considered in new developments. The other buildings in that specific area are not as large ad much different in style the new building that is shown.
This was meant to be a reply
This was meant to be a reply to the other poster suggesting someone should just offer to sell a early house.
Hrm? Why does “promoting non
Hrm? Why does “promoting non-car ownership” even matter if there’s a space for every unit anyway?
This is, of course, a function of our obscene under-investment in transit. It is totally absurd that a development in this location should need to have a single parking space, but even as a strongly anti-car person I can see why including parking is really the only rational choice a profit-oriented developer could make given the way things are.
Perhaps
the parking spots are more for the retail customers and less for the actual residents? I didn't read the proposal closely enough to see if it said one way or the other.
proposal says 1 space/unit.
proposal says 1 space/unit.
Zoning requires 2 spaces/unit
Thus, the BRA still requires mitigation.
Ah, the catch-22 (spaces?) of the comments section
Not enough parking spaces: How dare they not have enough parking? It's stupid and it's going to ruin everything.
Ample parking: Cars are stupid, this is stupid.
Take quick look at satellite view over there as well, there's a large number of houses/residential buildings with driveways and lots, it's not anything new for that area. Having lived around there at one time, I can also tell you that it is very much worth it to have one.
So nobody's concerned about...
...eliminating one of the few remaining rooming houses in Boston? It's all well and good to build swanky new digs for young professionals whose biggest concern is where to park their car. What about working people who can't afford city rents, for whom rooming houses are the only affordable option?
And while we're at it, did the developers specifically say "young" in their presentation, Adam? If so, how is that not discrimination?
It's Allston
is anyone in their 50s or 60s likely to want to live there?
"Want"?
Maybe not, but if they work in the city and commute by public transportation and can't pay $1,500/month for a studio, it's not a question of where they WANT to live, it's a question of where they can AFFORD to live.
I don't think anybody WANTS to share a bathroom with strangers or live without cooking facilities.
There are many residents of
There are many residents of 15 N Beacon in that age range. (Source: I am an owner-occupant there, many of the other owner-occupants at our condo meetings are in that age range.)
Maybe the same way 55+
Maybe the same way 55+ housing isn't discrimination?
LOL
Gritty charm :)
Allston is like a stage set for the old Twilight Zone. Whenever I'm there, I always expect to see Rod Sterling standing on a corner with a cigarette.
City rezoned this area a few years ago
When the New Balance development was approved, neighbors asked that this particular section of Allston be rezoned. It was, with heights and densities that would be a transition from that side of North Beacon Street to the enclave of single and two-family houses across the street. This looks to be way above what was decided.
I think that the incentives are great, and that this development could get away with a fewer spaces. Some parking is necessary, though. Plenty of people work in places without good public transit.