Roslindale Infill and Small Developments

JumboBuc said:
No, this is exactly what the developers were implying but it was never true and was always deceptive. You having this understanding is exactly what the developers wanted people to believe, and solidifies how dodgy their tactics were.

The developers used a pre-improvement photo for their before and a post-improvement rendering for their proposed, implying that their project would play a part in this improvement.

View attachment 67419

But this is what the Arboretum Road entrance has looked like since springtime.

View attachment 67422

All of the improvements have already been completed, and they had nothing to do with the proposed development.
Click to expand...
I believe this is incorrect: the development was going to pay for phase 2 of this work, which would improve and extend the path on the other side. My source here is a housing advocate who lives very close.
 
curcuas said:
I believe this is incorrect: the development was going to pay for phase 2 of this work, which would improve and extend the path on the other side. My source here is a housing advocate who lives very close.
Click to expand...
I don’t know about this one way or another (I had not heard this but I haven’t followed closely), but what I do know is that the segment of the path that is supposed to get you from the arbo entrance at Bussey/South to the gateway arch will have to be an elevated catwalk essentially over the wetland depression there, and the cost estimate for that is extraordinarily high—as in, it is unlikely to ever be built. So while it could be true that the developer had made some sort of promise, there’s no way any single development could pay for that particular segment. It’s a huge engineering project. The simpler solution would be to just blow up the stone wall and run the trail in its place with some degree of reinforcement of the embankment. I don’t know why this has never been considered but probably some sort of historical nonsense plus wetlands protection.
 
FK4 said:
I don’t know about this one way or another (I had not heard this but I haven’t followed closely), but what I do know is that the segment of the path that is supposed to get you from the arbo entrance at Bussey/South to the gateway arch will have to be an elevated catwalk essentially over the wetland depression there, and the cost estimate for that is extraordinarily high—as in, it is unlikely to ever be built. So while it could be true that the developer had made some sort of promise, there’s no way any single development could pay for that particular segment. It’s a huge engineering project. The simpler solution would be to just blow up the stone wall and run the trail in its place with some degree of reinforcement of the embankment. I don’t know why this has never been considered but probably some sort of historical nonsense plus wetlands protection.
Click to expand...
I'm also skeptical, but I think Phase 2, if that's really what was promised, is just the segment that would connect the Arboretum Road path with the Bussey/South entrance. The section from there, which involves the raised decking above the wetland to the end point by the train station is Phase 3. Phase 2 is still expensive, and pretty far out of the scope of a typical community benefits pledge, but might at least be something that happens.
 
HenryAlan said:
I'm also skeptical, but I think Phase 2, if that's really what was promised, is just the segment that would connect the Arboretum Road path with the Bussey/South entrance. The section from there, which involves the raised decking above the wetland to the end point by the train station is Phase 3. Phase 2 is still expensive, and pretty far out of the scope of a typical community benefits pledge, but might at least be something that happens.
Click to expand...
So Im actually confused here—looking at the site, on the main page they have an image of a very high walkway that also appears to be straight, but then they show Phase 2 as being a low, sinuous boardwalk connecting to the South St arch. Im not sure what the first image is supposed to be depicting, because I thought the only place elevation was needed was that lowland between the Arboretum and South St crossings, but now I am not so sure. Or is it just two different rough renderings of the same thing? https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/0f3a837adeec47abb477866fb475a2fd
 
FK4 said:
So Im actually confused here—looking at the site, on the main page they have an image of a very high walkway that also appears to be straight, but then they show Phase 2 as being a low, sinuous boardwalk connecting to the South St arch. Im not sure what the first image is supposed to be depicting, because I thought the only place elevation was needed was that lowland between the Arboretum and South St crossings, but now I am not so sure. Or is it just two different rough renderings of the same thing? https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/0f3a837adeec47abb477866fb475a2fd
Click to expand...
Looks like you're right, that the raised walkway is part of phase 2. I had the right idea about where phase 2 would be, but didn't realize that was the wetland section, which I thought was between the tracks and Arborough Road, closer to the train station.


1759430107289.png


Here's what it looks like right now:
1759430220100.png


And here's the schematic clearly showing that a portion of it is plank decking, rather than some sort of ground level paving.
1759430456808.png


So yeah, that seems well beyond what a developer would have promised. It's too bad the rest of the project hinges on this section, because I think everything else is much less complicated.
 
HenryAlan said:
Looks like you're right, that the raised walkway is part of phase 2. I had the right idea about where phase 2 would be, but didn't realize that was the wetland section, which I thought was between the tracks and Arborough Road, closer to the train station.


View attachment 67464

Here's what it looks like right now:
View attachment 67465

And here's the schematic clearly showing that a portion of it is plank decking, rather than some sort of ground level paving.
View attachment 67466

So yeah, that seems well beyond what a developer would have promised. It's too bad the rest of the project hinges on this section, because I think everything else is much less complicated.
Click to expand...
I was confused because the different images had made me think that there might be two separate legs that had two separate boardwalks, with one being really tall and the other not as much. What I really want to know is, why can’t they just build a cycle track right along South Street? The wetland is much further in. I’m wondering if this was ever even considered, and if even there are some difficulties due to proximity to the wetland, if the city simply said that it needed to widen South Street (and it wouldn’t even be by much), could they essentially widen the road just to accommodate bikes for that one stretch and thereby avoid the entire wetland… even though the proposal would obviously be incredibly nice if it ever was built, it’s totally unnecessary. That one little stretch is terrifying to bike on, especially at night. The only thing that really is needed is like 150 feet of a protected lane right alongside the road…
 
FK4 said:
I was confused because the different images had made me think that there might be two separate legs that had two separate boardwalks, with one being really tall and the other not as much. What I really want to know is, why can’t they just build a cycle track right along South Street? The wetland is much further in. I’m wondering if this was ever even considered, and if even there are some difficulties due to proximity to the wetland, if the city simply said that it needed to widen South Street (and it wouldn’t even be by much), could they essentially widen the road just to accommodate bikes for that one stretch and thereby avoid the entire wetland… even though the proposal would obviously be incredibly nice if it ever was built, it’s totally unnecessary. That one little stretch is terrifying to bike on, especially at night. The only thing that really is needed is like 150 feet of a protected lane right alongside the road…
Click to expand...
My impression is that there's a few pieces at play, but the biggest one is the gradient here, as South Street is cut into the side of a hill. To widen it any appreciable degree to accommodate a bike lane (and a sidewalk!), call it 10 ft, you'd need to disturb a significant area of the park to either maintain a stable slope leading down into the wetland, or more likely, build retaining walls. That itself would likely actually cost more than the elevated structure, and you most likely could not connect it directly to the new entrance, as the slope would be much too steep for ADA.
1000041620.png
 
Stlin said:
My impression is that there's a few pieces at play, but the biggest one is the gradient here, as South Street is cut into the side of a hill. To widen it any appreciable degree to accommodate a bike lane (and a sidewalk!), call it 10 ft, you'd need to disturb a significant area of the park to either maintain a stable slope leading down into the wetland, or more likely, build retaining walls. That itself would likely actually cost more than the elevated structure, and you most likely could not connect it directly to the new entrance, as the slope would be much too steep for ADA.
View attachment 67476
Click to expand...
I really dont know what I am talking about here, but I find it hard to believe that a retaining wall from the "S" of South Street on the right side of the map, to about the where arrow for the "electric lines to be buried" touches down, could really be as much as a boardwalk across the entire parcel? The leg that continues along south street is 100% unnecessary, all that is needed is to get to the top sign. The red asterisk is where a rain garden currently is and I could see that getting a mini boardwalk but the rest of the shoulder of south getting widened a bit. If you axe the whole second part of the boardwalk on the left, that would drop the cost a lot.
Screenshot 2025-10-03 at 11.53.57 AM.png
 

$7.4M Financing Secured for Hyde Park Avenue Redevelopment​


“Owners of 635 Hyde Park Avenue have secured a $7.4 million mortgage through OneLocal Bank to advance plans for a new mixed-use residential project. The development calls for demo of two existing buildings to make way for a four-story structure featuring 27 residential units along with 914 square feet of ground-floor retail space….”

$7.4M Financing Secured for Hyde Park Avenue Redevelopment

$7.4M Financing Secured for Hyde Park Avenue Redevelopment
www.bldup.com www.bldup.com

1760720659497.jpeg
 
stick n move said:

$7.4M Financing Secured for Hyde Park Avenue Redevelopment​


“Owners of 635 Hyde Park Avenue have secured a $7.4 million mortgage through OneLocal Bank to advance plans for a new mixed-use residential project. The development calls for demo of two existing buildings to make way for a four-story structure featuring 27 residential units along with 914 square feet of ground-floor retail space….”

$7.4M Financing Secured for Hyde Park Avenue Redevelopment

$7.4M Financing Secured for Hyde Park Avenue Redevelopment
www.bldup.com www.bldup.com

View attachment 67834
Click to expand...
I suspect there will be a lot of pushback on this, for all the wrong reasons. That intersection has notoriously bad traffic, which backs up on Cantebury St in both directions. People will believe this will make things worse and really fight it on that basis.
 
HenryAlan said:
I suspect there will be a lot of pushback on this, for all the wrong reasons. That intersection has notoriously bad traffic, which backs up on Cantebury St in both directions. People will believe this will make things worse and really fight it on that basis.
Click to expand...
My experience of that intersection is that it's a very simple matter of utterly horrendous signal timing that makes crossing HPA impossible. HPA itself is surely one of the worst roads in Boston, yet I myself have never seen serious traffic on it at any light, other than perhaps backups at West St (or at FH, which doesnt count). If the city tweaked those lights so there was more throughput via Cummins, it would probably make a world of difference, and lead only to a slight backup on HPA.
 
FK4 said:
My experience of that intersection is that it's a very simple matter of utterly horrendous signal timing that makes crossing HPA impossible. HPA itself is surely one of the worst roads in Boston, yet I myself have never seen serious traffic on it at any light, other than perhaps backups at West St (or at FH, which doesnt count). If the city tweaked those lights so there was more throughput via Cummins, it would probably make a world of difference, and lead only to a slight backup on HPA.
Click to expand...
I think the real problem is actually at the intersection of Cantebury/Cummins/American Legion. The backup from that light fills Cantebury Street completely between Cummins and HP Ave. When the light turns green for cars crossing, there is no place for cars to go, without blocking the box. And of course blocking the box is exactly what people do, which then screws up the HP Ave traffic when the light changes again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FK4
JumboBuc said:
No, this is exactly what the developers were implying but it was never true and was always deceptive. You having this understanding is exactly what the developers wanted people to believe, and solidifies how dodgy their tactics were.

The developers used a pre-improvement photo for their before and a post-improvement rendering for their proposed, implying that their project would play a part in this improvement.

View attachment 67419

But this is what the Arboretum Road entrance has looked like since springtime.

View attachment 67422

All of the improvements have already been completed, and they had nothing to do with the proposed development.
Click to expand...
Never thought that myself. In fact the first meeting I attended with the developer in the parking lot beside the tunnel was when the conditions looked just like the existing condition photo. The Arboretum, MBTA, and City did the initial work there a year or two before that meeting to remove the MBTA "blacksmith shed", some graffiti, cut back the overgrowth, and cleanup the inside of the tunnel. That was followed by a known Public Works Department project to improve Arboretum Road involving adding sidewalks and repaving that was completed over a year ago. The Gateway Path Phase 1 project you show was known and well documented to be done by the Arboretum with a original scheduled opening of last fall if I remember correctly, before the ever so diligent and hardworking contractor "discovered" a water line that required a long delay to reroute or pave over.
The Developers improvements were to be from Washington Street to the edge of Gateway Path phase 1 work, including a raised intersection at Archdale and the new driveway, a raised crosswalk across Arboretum Rd at Washington, I might be dreaming here, and also included a new crosswalk across Washington at Lochdale Road.
While there were several projects to keep track of, this was not a game of developer led three card Monty.
 
HenryAlan said:
I don't think I've seen mention of this previously, but a large grouping of parcels will be auctioned in December abutting the train tracks, and between Arboretum Road and the parking lot for the Mosaic School. Looks like an ideal location for a large residential development.

View attachment 68074

Details: https://jjmanning.com/auction/25-21...ZA0iLeEyiU9gNhhOFw_aem_F5ggpXQnbE4ODF7XpBNmSQ
Click to expand...
Anyone know why the parcels are divided by a curved gap? Is that a ROW that they want/need to preserve?
 
FK4 said:
It’s the Stony Brook. Runs right under the car wash at the emporium and then curves thru the property behind.
Click to expand...
cooper said:
Thanks FK
link
View attachment 68753
Click to expand...
If you go to mapjunction.com, you can find the old maps and trace all of its tributaries—Canterbury Brook being a biggie, but there was a stream that went almost to Roslindale Sq, too. Kind of sad, really, to think how ubiquitous streams are when you walk in the woods, and realizing how many little brooks and streams have been paved over or culverted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top