Roxbury Infill and Small Developments

estyle

Active Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
253
Reaction score
1
Roxbury in general seems to suffer from the super block more than other areas of Boston. Probably because they are government projects and people used the latest idea. It is sad that one of the most beautiful areas of Boston, with such great natural topography, has been so badly abused. I hope as those developments age out they are replaced in a way that is more connected, per Whittier and Orient Heights.



Looks like that land was cleared for the interchange (1962). Obviously plans changed as Madison Park/Campus High UR was developed after the interchange was moved.



A small point of interest, I never understood why the small residential section along Melnea Cass had the extra side streets right up against the boulevard. Clearly they were designed when I-695 was still planned and they wanted to keep them separate from the frontage roads. It's a total waste of space today.
 

vanshnookenraggen

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
6,305
Reaction score
46
Part of what I'm railing against is that the city isn't doing anything to fix these problems. They are keeping most of the mid-20th Century planning mistakes and just in filling the parts that never got filled or leaving small new sections to developers. I'm not suggesting we go back to the top down planning of old but rather look at the street grid and think of ways for new development to knit the city back together, rather than this suburban sprawl going on.
 

FK4

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
43
Part of what I'm railing against is that the city isn't doing anything to fix these problems. They are keeping most of the mid-20th Century planning mistakes and just in filling the parts that never got filled or leaving small new sections to developers. I'm not suggesting we go back to the top down planning of old but rather look at the street grid and think of ways for new development to knit the city back together, rather than this suburban sprawl going on.
The barriers separating Roxbury from the rest of the city are significant, and the numerous no outlet street systems that comprise the endless housing projects only reinforce the ghettoization - in the true meaning of that word. The Longwood Medical Area is literally right down the street from Dudley but it's worlds apart.. you've got Columbus Ave + the Orange Line, but the entire east wall of Columbus is superblocks of Roxbury CC, then Madison Park, then the Whittier St development. They'll never repair the street grid through RCC, but I fear there will be little change as re Madison. The Tremont Crossing development looks like maybe there will be some tiny connection, Dudley-ward, but I'm sure it will be some one way BS road or something. And I am sure there will be endless resistance from the neighborhood as well as school to doing what really needs to be done, which is a two way roadway connection from Columbus to Dudley that's between Melnea and Malcolm X.
 

tysmith95

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
2,502
Reaction score
12
numerous no outlet street systems
I'm totally getting off topic here, but I think this really fucks up traffic in many places. Alewife is so bad because they thought it would be a good idea to drop off a highway into a single city street (Alewife Parkway) and connect it to a bunch of streets that don't have any outlets. It's a recipe for disaster and the worst designed part of the Boston area. Even the transit station is not at all pedestrian friendly.

Roxbury doesn't have the traffic issues of Alewife. But they should definitively try to transform some of the low income housing into mixed income denser developments.

Although to be honest I think the percentage of low income residents needs to be a third or less for it to work the best. Any higher, and the property values of the market rate would be dragged down and the place would still turn into the ghetto that housing projects created when they were built.

I think the city should have pushed harder to include more affordable units in the Seaport rather then pushing it out to poorer areas. A spread of subsidized units is much better then having the units concentrated in certain neighborhoods.
 

vanshnookenraggen

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
6,305
Reaction score
46
Although to be honest I think the percentage of low income residents needs to be a third or less for it to work the best. Any higher, and the property values of the market rate would be dragged down and the place would still turn into the ghetto that housing projects created when they were built.
This is a fine line to walk because mixing incomes often leaves out services that cater to the poorer residents simply because they themselves cannot afford to be there anymore. Breaking up poor neighborhoods is even more disastrous because the social support system is itself so important and fragile. Middle class residents have more options but poorer residents don't. This means that an area like Dudley Sq needs to be redeveloped more consciously than other, more affluent areas. All I'm saying is we can do that AND create a better urban environment at the same time.
 

Suffolk 83

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Messages
2,187
Reaction score
28
I drove on Washington from Cummings hwy to Melnea Cass for the first time since last summer and wow there's a lot of development on that stretch since then.

Beeline maybe you know whats the large development that has its foundation dug near Boston Latin?
 

BeeLine

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
10,347
Reaction score
1,587
I drove on Washington from Cummings hwy to Melnea Cass for the first time since last summer and wow there's a lot of development on that stretch since then.

Beeline maybe you know whats the large development that has its foundation dug near Boston Latin?
Responce to your question on the JP Infill thread.
 

Top