Hey, there! Log in / Register
74-unit apartment building proposed next to Shawmut T stop
By adamg on Mon, 01/09/2023 - 11:46am
Rendering by Icon Architecture.
Trinity Financial has filed plans with the BPDA for a four-story apartment building at 140-150 Centre St. in Dorchester, that would include 45 affordable apartments.
Some of the apartments would be rented to people making no more than 30% of the Boston area median income - Trinity says the affordable units would go to people or families making between $25,000 and $111,000 per year, "with rent as low as $736 per month, depending on the unit and family size."
The building, which would replace an existing autobody shop and garage, would have a mix of studios and one- and two-bedroom units. An underground garage would have space for 39 cars.
In its filing, Trinity says the building would make the area both nicer and even safer:
As an exercise in place making, the Project will provide both physical and visual connections between residents and Shawmut Station, and will establish a vibrant, active street edge along the MBTA Shawmut Station promenade. The Project will repurpose one of the largest underutilized sites in the heart of Dorchester and will result in many public benefits, including new affordable housing, improved stormwater management, improved open space, and enhanced pedestrian accessibility. With the eyes and ears of the future residents looking down upon the Shawmut Station promenade, the area will be considerably safer.
The Dorchester Reporter, though, reports some residents argue the proposal is too large for the site.
Trinity hopes to begin two years of construction in the spring of 2024.
Trinity co-founder Jim Keefe has himself lived in Dorchester for some 50 years, and led development of the Carruth and Treadmark buildings in Ashmont.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
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
Over 50% affordable housing,
Over 50% affordable housing, adjacent to transit, and a paucity of parking? What's the catch? Is the lot haunted? Bet that's it. Probably haunted.
The catch?
That it's only 74 units at a location directly next to a rapid transit station. There should be twice as many units, but the political will in this city does not support such bold housing moves.
The NIMBY neighbors
The neighbors have whined the whole time and shrunk this project down into lower amounts of units. It's absolutely insane when so many people in Dorchester are upset that they're getting priced out that they show up to these meetings to rail against development. The outcome of this is higher rent because inventory stays the same.
Trinity has done a great job with affordable housing in the other developments -- to me it's insane that in an area deeply concerned about gentrification they blindly oppose all housing.
Cue the NIMBYs in
3 … 2 … 1 … and go!
I've added a link ...
In the story to earlier Dorchester Reporter coverage about residents complaining about how the project is too large.
Can You Add The Link...
To the articles showing TOD transit being added adjacent to Beaconsfield, Waban, Eliot, Kendall Green, Pride's Crossing, Hastings, Sliver Hill, Concord Wellesley, Wellesley Farms, and Winchester? Thanks.
Didn't realize Concord
Didn't realize Concord Wellesley and Winchester had Red Line access. Damn, they snuck that by us all, huh.
Well all those commuter rail
Well all those commuter rail towns need to be doing their part to build more multi unit housing with the transit orientated housing bill that was passed a couple of years ago.
MBTA Communities law
Cities are required to put together a plan this year. It's a frustratingly slow process. But yes, we should be seeing buildings like this next to every station, both subway and commuter rail.
No
No, we should be seing buldings that are 3 - 4 floors taller, with ground floor retail but no setbacks next to every station, both subway and commuter rail.
The safety thing is a good point
It's a strange location compared to the adjacent red line stations which are right on Dot Ave. It's set back about 2-3 blocks from Washington St & Dot Ave and in a more quiet residential area. I could see how increasing foot traffic in that around the station could be a good thing.
I know people who live closer to that station but don't get off there if it's dark/late and will walk the extra distance from Ashmont or Fields Corner so they can stick to busier streets until they get close to home.
?
How is adding more housing to an area with density like this going to improve safety?
If the many hundreds of eyes that live here now can't control the crime, how are a hundred more going to do it?
Density?
Density is the problem. The station is surround by single family mansions. And the neighbors refuse to approve anything over 12 units for this huge site. The two cement corridors around Shawmut are surrounded by privacy fences. They needed better lighting and camera's. The new building can only light and put cameras around that site but it would help. Some creep tried to drag a kid into the bushes right next to the Ephinay.
Mansions?
This neighborhood is mostly tightly spaced triple deckers. I support the project, but John isn't wrong to imply that there is existing density. It is probably quite a bit higher density than many other areas around T stations.
Mansions?
Tell me you have never been to Shawmut station without telling me you have never been to Shawmut station.
I can't wait if I have an elementary school reunion and we call talk about the big arse f'ing mansions we all grew up in.
I live there and work there.
I live there and work there. more arrogant hogwash
Cinnamngrl I don’t think you know where this project is located.
.
I am in favor of this project
I am in favor of this project whether it is surrounded by mansions or not. I am not an abutter, but I don't think you have to be to have an opinion about this. Would I like our little neighborhood to be all cute little/big singe families and three-deckers. I would, really. But for the common good this is a necessity. Would love to see more life on our tunnel cap. A place to get a coffee would be grand too.
In the summer I ride through
In the summer I ride through the Epiphany lot everyday
16,000 people per square mile in that neighborhood!
Those must be some crazy crowded mansions. It's astonishing that she continues to make this claim when a few seconds on street view would demonstrate reality. That said, any neighborhood with a subway station needs to be even more than 16,000 p/sm.
I didn't know it was called a promenade
Note to future residents: This "promenade" is a popular launching pad for the local fireworks, and not just on July 4th. Big, loud, 24/7 fireworks, in season, which is any season. Just think, your "eyes and ears" will experience the fireworks up close and very personal.
Additional note to future residents: It's also a popular place for smokers of all ages to light up their joints. So some may like that.
The new apartments should also provide front row seats to occasional assaults, shootings, and muggings.
Welcome all you new residents to the neighborhood !!
I'm 2 streets away
And that is definitely too large.
2 years ago a one family house right across the street from this was torn down and a nine unit town.house was built..
oh noes
Do you mean the rickety 2 story duplex that was replaced with modern 2 story townhouses at 123-125 Centre? What is the complaint exactly?
Complaint?
It was an observation and a fact, a 9 unit. Building replaced what was there before, this would be a 74 unit 4 story building and is too large for the area in my opinion.
The "oh noes" in your reply is snarky and unnecessary.
It's fine if you think the area can handle this new building, I dont.
you can't whine about that townhouse
two story to two story.
Who whined?
Are you just looking for conflict and an argument?
I stated a fact about how 9 units of townhouses were just built in the area and my opinion that this new project is too large.
How you read that fact and my opinion is on you not me.
9 units is not enough
The new project has already downsized. If you keep being unreasonable in the face of this housing crisis, community input will be removed. That won't help anyone.
I'm also two streets away
And it's too small by half. Anything adjacent to a subway stop should have at least a six-story minimum. I'd like to see this upped to 8 or 10 stories!
Too big for the neighborhood?
I am not an abutter to this project, but I live in the neighborhood and am one of the volunteer caretakers of garden at the corner of Clementine and Centre, and the gardens along the tunnel cap. Depending where you look at current housing you can see that this project feels out of scale. I disagree with Trinity (and I personally know and like these folks) that the area is "underutilized". As for safety, I'm not sure having another building is going make the station feeling any less off the beaten path. People will still have to walk on mainly residential streets to get home.
That said, there is truly a need for affordable housing, and if you look at Centre St going up to Codman Square you will see another apartment building, as well as the new development of 9 units. There is also the Epiphany School which is larger in scale than the two and three family houses in the area. Part of the opposition is that the new building would be four stories and would be taller than anything else around there.
But like I said, I'm not an abutter. Read the articles in the Reporter and the Boston Globe for more up close and personal perspectives.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/12/29/business/this-fight-near-shawmut-...
138 Centre is a triple decker
138 Centre is a triple decker, but the basement is above grade so it is essentially 4 stories. That is the abutter. The other abutters are former mansions. What is the actual height of the proposed project? I really think that it unreasonable to make this smaller.
The only real issue is that Centre Street is too narrow to be a 2 way street. But that is a problem now. This building is not for car owners. .
Project Fact Sheet
The Project Fact Sheet indicates they're allowed to build to 35' but are asking for a variance to go to 46'. The elevation shows the top floor to be stepped back so that does reduce the "feel" of the overall height when standing on the sidewalk. Typically that's the feeling, but if someone's against the building as a whole, they won't be satisfied with the setback.
You can see the drawings in this Project Notification Form. It's a 493 page PDF.
mansions?
The abutting house on Sharp St. is one story, next to that is a two-story, two-family house, next to that is a single family, another single family, and then a triple decker, with another two-family at the corner of Allston and Centre. All told, 16 units — no "former mansions".
Allston Street is even more narrow than Centre St. The area cannot absorb this density.
This on area was more dense
This on area was more dense in the fifties. Half of the houses on Allston are huge. Allston is wider than Centre. Centre is really the only concern. The street width varies at every corner and cars go much too fast using it to cut through the neighborhood.
Sad Boston segregates income and race
I have lived here 18 years and noticed while not surprising, but a disturbing tend. Boston like to keep lower and restrictioned income developments in tight/closed areas and out of more racially and income mixed neighborhoods. Lets not even talk about affordable, income restricted housing in Beacon Hill or Seaport districts.