Are you sure you arent talking about the liquor store a few addresses Stony Brook-ward from City Feed? City Feed has been there forever, as has the liquor store - but yes, that liquor store used to be a "ghetto liquor store" and got renovated three years ago and now is totally overpriced and sells IPAs and growlers, bulletproof glass is gone and there's a bicycle-shaped bike rack in front. So yes, things are getting better... But Jackson itself has a long way to go.
225 Centre @ Jackson Square | 225 Centre Street | Jamaica Plain
- Thread starter Revitalist
- Start date
Are you sure you arent talking about the liquor store a few addresses Stony Brook-ward from City Feed? City Feed has been there forever, as has the liquor store - but yes, that liquor store used to be a "ghetto liquor store" and got renovated three years ago and now is totally overpriced and sells IPAs and growlers, bulletproof glass is gone and there's a bicycle-shaped bike rack in front. So yes, things are getting better... But Jackson itself has a long way to go.
Re: Jackson Square/225 Centre
I agree on all counts. But what I dont get is how they had a grand master vision that included a really cool new greenspace and just totally axed it. Like entirely - I could at least see them doing surface parking plus some pitifully narrow bike access ROW - but this is parking right up to the MBTA fence. It sucks.
Makes me wonder about the rest of the master plan - the plan had been to extend Amory to Centre and line the extension with small artisan shops, as well as commercial / retail "incubator" to hide the MBTA building across from Jackson Station. I wonder if that will all bite the dust too.
This is Building K, aka 75 Amory Ave.
Worse than the loss of greenspace is the reduction from 36 affordable rental units and 16 affordable condos to just 39 rental units. What was proposed as a mixed rental and ownership building is now all rental and it's significantly smaller. Really disappointing.
And it's a painfully ugly building:
Image clipped from the May 16, 2013 BRA submission (PDF).
I agree on all counts. But what I dont get is how they had a grand master vision that included a really cool new greenspace and just totally axed it. Like entirely - I could at least see them doing surface parking plus some pitifully narrow bike access ROW - but this is parking right up to the MBTA fence. It sucks.
Makes me wonder about the rest of the master plan - the plan had been to extend Amory to Centre and line the extension with small artisan shops, as well as commercial / retail "incubator" to hide the MBTA building across from Jackson Station. I wonder if that will all bite the dust too.
Re: Jackson Square/225 Centre
Yep, it sure throws some credibility out the window.
The plan is rather grandiose and includes things that the community wanted but no one else agreed to. If you read through the BRA submission above, they explain why the park got axed: 1) They don't control the land where they wanted to build a parking garage; 2) The city hasn't built the new "Jackson St." that's called for in the plan; 3) There's no public funding available for the affordable ownership component.
There are other parcels where they'll have the same kind of problems - they don't control the salt shed site and the city has no plan to move it; the NSTAR substation at the corner of Centre & Columbus isn't moving any time soon; the MBTA hasn't agreed to building anything on the skinny parcel on Centre directly across from Jackson Station...
They're building what they can when they can. As a collaboration between two CDCs it's going about as well as could be expected. They're always limited by their funding sources, and can only build what they can scrounge up money for.
The vision was always a long-term one. I went to lots of meetings for this thing over ten years ago, so I'm glad to see they're making some progress and still plugging away.
I can only hope that the Mayor with throw some resources their way to get more housing built... it takes *years* to get funding to build this kind of housing even when you already have an approved project.
Yep, it sure throws some credibility out the window.
The plan is rather grandiose and includes things that the community wanted but no one else agreed to. If you read through the BRA submission above, they explain why the park got axed: 1) They don't control the land where they wanted to build a parking garage; 2) The city hasn't built the new "Jackson St." that's called for in the plan; 3) There's no public funding available for the affordable ownership component.
There are other parcels where they'll have the same kind of problems - they don't control the salt shed site and the city has no plan to move it; the NSTAR substation at the corner of Centre & Columbus isn't moving any time soon; the MBTA hasn't agreed to building anything on the skinny parcel on Centre directly across from Jackson Station...
They're building what they can when they can. As a collaboration between two CDCs it's going about as well as could be expected. They're always limited by their funding sources, and can only build what they can scrounge up money for.
The vision was always a long-term one. I went to lots of meetings for this thing over ten years ago, so I'm glad to see they're making some progress and still plugging away.
I can only hope that the Mayor with throw some resources their way to get more housing built... it takes *years* to get funding to build this kind of housing even when you already have an approved project.
underground
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,390
- Reaction score
- 3
Slowly, but Bromley Heath is probably always going to be the deciding factor. It needs a HOPE VI-ing yesterday.
Re: Jackson Square/225 Centre
Sure, the plan is grandiose... and it's great to see that slowly things are actually going to get built, in a very tough area... but I think ultimately, the buildings will all get built. Some of the plans more realistically now show the salt shed remaining, which is OK by me if it is screened from view by the proposed athletic center at Columbus & Ritchie.
Will probably wait a while for the MBTA to decide on allowing something to go on Centre opposite the station.
But the MBTA ROW on the far side of the Orange Line is wide enough to have a really nice greenway almost all the way to Stony Brook - this is not that utopian and would be a tremendous benefit to the whole neighborhood this side of the tracks. I'd rather see the parking go on a different parcel than compromise the greenway idea. Plus, they could've at least squeaked a little bike lane through the lot and maintained a corridor.
This all may have seen crazy fifteen years ago, but development is creeping up from Forest Hills and Walsh just explicitly proposed aggressive development from Jackson on down Columbus and Washington - so the momentum is now here.
Sure, the plan is grandiose... and it's great to see that slowly things are actually going to get built, in a very tough area... but I think ultimately, the buildings will all get built. Some of the plans more realistically now show the salt shed remaining, which is OK by me if it is screened from view by the proposed athletic center at Columbus & Ritchie.
Will probably wait a while for the MBTA to decide on allowing something to go on Centre opposite the station.
But the MBTA ROW on the far side of the Orange Line is wide enough to have a really nice greenway almost all the way to Stony Brook - this is not that utopian and would be a tremendous benefit to the whole neighborhood this side of the tracks. I'd rather see the parking go on a different parcel than compromise the greenway idea. Plus, they could've at least squeaked a little bike lane through the lot and maintained a corridor.
This all may have seen crazy fifteen years ago, but development is creeping up from Forest Hills and Walsh just explicitly proposed aggressive development from Jackson on down Columbus and Washington - so the momentum is now here.
I certainly hope that the Mayor's attention to building more housing will actually accelerate the pace of building on these parcels and investing in any infrastructure (like Jackson St) that is necessary to support the additional units.
Here's a really complete presentation from November on the next two buildings... 250 Centre St and "Building M," on Site III across from the T station:
https://jpndc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Site-III-presentation-updated-11-19-15.pdf
https://jpndc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Site-III-presentation-updated-11-19-15.pdf
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 6,966
- Reaction score
- 1,587
Finally repairing what urban renewal wrought.
HenryAlan
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,710
- Reaction score
- 3,296
Wow, 323 units at that one intersection. That's a tremendous change that will be great for local businesses and pedestrian safety. Plus fantastic T access and a short ride to downtown. I imagine nearby housing values will bet a boost from this as well. Now let's do it again and again and again.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,321
- Reaction score
- 2,659
More related to urban freeway ROW clearing that urban renewal, but still nice to see some of the damage finally being repaired.
elemenoh, i think that pic has some inaccuracies though... as we discussed somewhere before, they unfortunately axed the plans for that park and parallel SWC bike trail along the south side of the tracks, opting for surface parking instead (it looks like in that image that the greenway continues behind 75 amory, but it will not).... 75 amory also is to be a 4 story wood framed building instead of a story building...
more exciting is "250 centre st" which will add an important piece to the streetwall of centre. good images here...
http://www.jamaicaplainnews.com/201...ould-bring-mit-style-architecture-to-jp/15470
more exciting is "250 centre st" which will add an important piece to the streetwall of centre. good images here...
http://www.jamaicaplainnews.com/201...ould-bring-mit-style-architecture-to-jp/15470
This is actually the latest revised plan, which puts the park back and removes the big parking lot they had originally proposed.
Here's the latest, from the PDF link I posted above:
They're listening to the community. Another slide in that presentations ays:
The bike path doesn't really go anywhere, but it's better than a parking lot!
Cool, I didnt know they'd put the park back. Maybe it will eventually be possible to stitch together a whole parallel bike path on this side - there's certainly enough room along the tracks to connect to Atherton - then it's mostly parking lots and Kelley rink between Atherton and Stony Brook Station's path... but eventually could see the two connecting.
They are in fact building a bike path on the far side of the OL in the new developments closer to Forest Hills as well.
Edit - that document does say that they have since lost control of one of the lots for the Centre St development, not sure what that means... I hope they build something reasonably tall at Jackson though.
They are in fact building a bike path on the far side of the OL in the new developments closer to Forest Hills as well.
Edit - that document does say that they have since lost control of one of the lots for the Centre St development, not sure what that means... I hope they build something reasonably tall at Jackson though.
HenryAlan
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,710
- Reaction score
- 3,296
Yeah, I'm kind of bothered by the bike path to nowhere. If they made it merge more directly in to Amory St., and connected it better with the SWC on the other end, it could prove useful. But as it is right now, I don't see it getting much use.
At the top right of the most recent image is an arrow pointing at what I believe is the small brick MBTA ?electrical building across the street from Jackson station; the arrow says "access to MBTA" - are they going to create a second entrance to the station on the far side of centre street? Seems unlikely.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,321
- Reaction score
- 2,659
