Brookline Infill and Small Developments

Equilibria said:
The person leading the comprehensive planning effort that could result in many positive urbanist outcomes is not inherently a bad actor, nor is she inevitably stupid to be annoyed that this project is short-circuiting it.

Depending on the details one could get there, but if you advocate "not listening" to comprehensive planning in favor of whatever developers want you get Houston.
Click to expand...

Other than Jeremi, I can't imagine anyone here wanting Houston.

However, Olson Pehlke's REASONS of 'Hundreds and hundreds of new cars and people in an area that already has inadequate capacity in terms of roadways, parks, shops, sidewalks, post office and [Trader Joe’s] on the weekend anyone?" is such an incredibly false dogwhistle for Coolidge Corner (which has 6 Green Line Stations within 3,000 feet) and would see a net LOSS of 2 parking spaces from this development begs the conclusion that she a) doesn't know what she is talking about or b) does , in fact, know but is using falsehoods to get to her intended conclusion. THIS development means FEWER commuters and more walkers from the local area to the Trader Joes and other shops, etc. Her false reasoning is bassackwards and only feeds into increased car usage and traffic.

And at no point did I ever "advocate "not listening" to Ms. Olson Pehlke - someone else posted something perhaps suggesting that - I only advocate seeing her stated "reasoning" on this for what it is.

60 will always be a smaller number than 62. And local walking car-free residents will always be better for car traffic/congestion than drivers.

There are few neighborhoods BETTER suited for this than Coolidge Corner: https://www.15minutecity.com/

.
 
Last edited:
SuffolkHeights11 said:
The problem isn't Linda Olson Pehlke, it's Brookline listening to Linda Olson Pehlke.
Click to expand...
This.

I don't know much about this particular meeting, but in my neighborhood I noticed the following trend: A community meeting occurs with 20-30 people. 2-3 angry neighbors rant for 20 mins about somewhat irrelevant concerns only tangentially impacted by the project. 5 others have 'concerns' that are easily addressed. 6 people say they like the proposal. 90% of the meeting attendees roll their eyes at the 2-3 angry people. Next day the write up comes out and it's all about the "highly controversial" project with cherry picked quotes from the angry people only. It's always nowhere near representative of the actual meeting.
 
Sounds like we need a separate thread for Ms Olson Pehlke lol
 
shmessy said:
Other than Jeremi, I can't imagine anyone here wanting Houston.

However, Olson Pehlke's REASONS of 'Hundreds and hundreds of new cars and people in an area that already has inadequate capacity in terms of roadways, parks, shops, sidewalks, post office and [Trader Joe’s] on the weekend anyone?" is such an incredibly false dogwhistle for Coolidge Corner (which has 6 Green Line Stations within 3,000 feet) and would see a net LOSS of 2 parking spaces from this development begs the conclusion that she a) doesn't know what she is talking about or b) does , in fact, know but is using falsehoods to get to her intended conclusion. THIS development means FEWER commuters and more walkers from the local area to the Trader Joes and other shops, etc. Her false reasoning is bassackwards and only feeds into increased car usage and traffic.

And at no point did I ever "advocate "not listening" to Ms. Olson Pehlke - someone else posted something perhaps suggesting that - I only advocate seeing her stated "reasoning" on this for what it is.

60 will always be a smaller number than 62. And local walking car-free residents will always be better for car traffic/congestion than drivers.

There are few neighborhoods BETTER suited for this than Coolidge Corner: https://www.15minutecity.com/

.
Click to expand...
Houston has figured out how to build high density urban infill in a way that Boston absolutely has not. We should be so lucky as to have that here.
 
Jeremi said:
Houston has figured out how to build high density urban infill in a way that Boston absolutely has not. We should be so lucky as to have that here.
Click to expand...

Matching it up with their massive roadways and slavish reliance on cars/trucks????????

Volume of units isn't the entire answer. It is the LIVABILITY and 15 Minute City concept that will be the most efficient and livable future for cities. Unit volume PLUS enlightened urban planning and transportation is the answer. Doing just one part is shortsighted.
 
smintz said:
Developer proposes seven-story apartment building in Coolidge Corner parking lot

brookline.news

Developer proposes seven-story apartment building in Coolidge Corner parking lot - Brookline.News

The proposed project has quickly proven controversial among neighbors and Town Meeting members.
brookline.news brookline.news
Click to expand...

The render

26_pleasant.webp
 
shmessy said:
Matching it up with their massive roadways and slavish reliance on cars/trucks????????

Volume of units isn't the entire answer. It is the LIVABILITY and 15 Minute City concept that will be the most efficient and livable future for cities. Unit volume PLUS enlightened urban planning and transportation is the answer. Doing just one part is shortsighted.
Click to expand...
Many of those units are within the 610 loop. Their zoning laws (which encourage, not discourage development) have resulted in wastelands being developed into entirely walkable areas. I don't think anyone here thinks that they have a good TRANSPORTATION policy (and they, too, are obsessed with parking), but their zoning policy is a joy compared to ours.
 
JumboBuc said:
The Stop n Shop on Harvard St is a 5-minute walk from the heart of Coolidge Corner.
Click to expand...
That Stop n Shop is a 10min walk at best from Lee's and all a gradual uphill coming back (I'll give you that its two stops on the 66). But that's a whole other can a worms because it's the main grocery option for the ~13k residents that live on the Southside down to Brookline. And then the ~3500 folks on the other side of Rt 9 down Cypress are stuck between that, Brigham Circle, or Hyde Sq, all not exactly convenient to access. Thank God for Kurkman's. If you can't tell I'm very passionate about the ease of access to a wide variety of groceries.
 
FPJ said:
It’s strange that the developer proposes a (seemingly needless) mid-block connection to River Road, as opposed to making a coherent street wall.
Click to expand...
I think the purpose of that connection is to serve as a drop-off zone. in which case I think I like it better than the traditional semi-circular curb cut.
 
Actually it is for a drainage easement for a culvert that runs underneath Pearl St across Brookline Ave, past River Rd and empties into the Muddy River.
I really like that it adds a direct path for people walking or on bikes that connects the Muddy River Path to Brookline Village Station.
 

Walnut High Apartments​

Description
“The Walnut High Apartments is a 181-unit, transit-oriented development that will revitalize an existing property for the Brookline Housing Authority. The development includes two buildings that will be built in subsequent phases and will provide 37 rental units at or below 30% AMI, with the remaining 144 rental units between 30-50% AMI to the Brookline Village neighborhood……”

1775846872423.jpeg

1775846915620.jpeg

1775846937575.jpeg

1775846949371.jpeg

1775846959611.jpeg

1775846969675.jpeg

1775846883199.jpeg

1775846896492.png


www.utiledesign.com

Walnut High Apartments - Utile

www.utiledesign.com www.utiledesign.com

IMG_5616.png
 
what happens to the people who live in the buildings that are there now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top