Chelsea Infill and Small Developments

[datadyne007]

Hotel on Broadway on Revere line is coming along.

Its anti-streetwall orientation is tragic. Like if you have to have surface parking, fine, just put it behind the damn building, which should meet the street for the whole block. Instead they turned it perpendicular to the street.

 

[Arlington]

Sounds like Chelsea needs some kind of zoning to favor streetwall making. Does it have anything along those lines?

 

[djohnstonb]

Does anyone know what they're doing with the parking lot on Central Ave, across the street from the Cemetery?

 

[tysmith95]

Its anti-streetwall orientation is tragic. Like if you have to have surface parking, fine, just put it behind the damn building, which should meet the street for the whole block. Instead they turned it perpendicular to the street.

It matches the area where the hotel is being built. Not that this is a good thing.

Although 950 Broadway down the street is built on the street-wall and looks fairly new.

I bet that most of these hotels are for Pilots and Flight Attendants though. Probably not for people looking to explore the neighborhood.

 

[TomOfBoston]

Does anyone know what they're doing with the parking lot on Central Ave, across the street from the Cemetery?

No, but that was Berlin's Pharmacy when I was a kid. It burned in the early 1960's and has been a parking lot ever since. Factoid from a Chelsea native.

 

[djohnstonb]

No, but that was Berlin's Pharmacy when I was a kid. It burned in the early 1960's and has been a parking lot ever since. Factoid from a Chelsea native.

That's pretty cool, thanks for sharing that. I saw postings that it's been bought, maybe it'll be retail again.

On an unrelated note, will the Innes redo include retail?

 

[djohnstonb]

242 Spencer Avenue is undergoing structural framing. http://www.bldup.com/projects/242-spencer-avenue

 

[scorpio02150]

City Manager's, Tom Ambrosino,State of the City comments:

"On the Chelsea Creek, he announced that in the next few months, he would announce a significant mixed-use development for the Forbes Plant site. Much of the development, he said, is expected to be as of right and would need no extra relief at the Zoning or Planning Boards.

“Our goal for that project there is to ensure that the public benefits, particularly the public access to the waterfront, are not just significant, which they will need to be, but are also early action items, so that our residents benefit from the very start of the project, not just when the project is completed years from now,” he said.

On the same front, that being the waterfront, Ambrosino said the long-awaited Municipal Harbor Plan effort has finally moved forward. He announced that a contract has been signed with Utile Design of Boston to conduct the plan, and they are waiting for the Notice to Proceed from the state. He expects the first public meeting on that plan to take place in the spring."

"Another area he said he would like to think about spending more reserves is in the possible acquisition of properties in the Broadway business district in order to build mixed-use affordable housing. Such an acquisition was successful at the Salvation Army Store on Broadway last year, and the City hopes to find a developer to complete the job this year."


http://www.chelsearecord.com/2018/0...city-needs-to-continue-spending-on-residents/

 

[djohnstonb]

There's gotta be more than 2 buildings going up. Where can we get the deets!

 

[odurandina]

Backwater

 

[djohnstonb]

It would be a dream for the oil tanks nestled between the Chelsea Waterfront and Admiral's Hill to go. This is an otherwise idyllic urban enclave.

As for transit, the lower end of Broadway would benefit from a Gondola attached to the Tobin Bridge - just beyond Navy Yard Charlestown to just beyond Admiral's Hill Chelsea.

http://gizmodo.com/the-brilliant-plan-to-build-a-gondola-from-williamsburg-1635258583

I think the city could just throw up some cheap facades that mimic apartment building facades. Probably wouldn't be very expensive.

 

[Beton Brut]

Probably wouldn't be very expensive.

And extraordinarily insulting to many families being priced out of the community.

"Throw up" indeed.

 

[Shepard]

I’m confused. We shouldn’t do nice things in poor communities for fear of making poor people feel bad?

I’m not actually trying to be snarky.

 

[Beton Brut]

^ Yours is a valid, not snarky, question. Make no mistake, we absolutely should. By whatever means, local governments should incentivize industrial property owners like those in Chelsea to screen their facilities with something better than a blank concrete wall or a rusting chain-link fence.

But spending public money building a phony urban backdrop like a Hollywood studio back-lot is preposterous, and it's insulting to anyone who's at risk of losing their place in a community due to gentrification. "Sorry you can't afford to live here anymore, but enjoy the view of the pretend apartments as you leave." Optics matter.

A combination of earthen berms with vegetation, and green walls would be far more appropriate to this purpose.

 

[scorpio02150]

Forbes Update:

"The Forbes Lithograph owners have come back to the City with a plan for 700,000 sq. ft. of development and 630 residential units for the 18-plus acre site on Mill Hill – but they still only have one entrance.

The current plan would have 630 units, including several units in a 16-story building. The remainder of the units would be in a couple of other smaller buildings. The would be a small amount of commercial space, with retail and office workspace uses.

City Manager Tom Ambrosino said it has been scaled back, but the City will not take a stand on it until the company files with the Zoning Board in July.

Councillor Joe Perlatonda also has numerous concerns about the proposal. He said he has met with the developer, along with Councillor Leo Robinson, recently.

“First of all, there needs to be a two-way access to get in and out of this property which the only way the city would allow this is through a bridge connecting from the site to Rt. 1A, which will cost millions of dollars,” he said. “And what about the cleanup? Do we know if the land is contaminated? Is there a solution for pest control to combat the rodents? How long will this project take?… This will take years to develop even if this gets off the ground.

My fellow councillor and I would like to see a development that would consist of duplexes and single-family homes to keep up with the neighborhood.”

 

[Shepard]

^ Yours is a valid, not snarky, question. Make no mistake, we absolutely should. By whatever means, local governments should incentivize industrial property owners like those in Chelsea to screen their facilities with something better than a blank concrete wall or a rusting chain-link fence.

But spending public money building a phony urban backdrop like a Hollywood studio back-lot is preposterous, and it's insulting to anyone who's at risk of losing their place in a community due to gentrification. "Sorry you can't afford to live here anymore, but enjoy the view of the pretend apartments as you leave." Optics matter.

A combination of earthen berms with vegetation, and green walls would be far more appropriate to this purpose.

Thanks. I still don’t understand what the optics of fake apartments are, and it would still seem like “incentivizing” a beautification of these sites would involve public money at stake either way. Anyway, I defer to you as you seem to have your ear to the ground about this

 

[Brad Plaid]

Forbes Update: My fellow councillor and I would like to see a development that would consist of duplexes and single-family homes to keep up with the neighborhood.”

Dear wise councilor: There is so little housing available and it is so expensive, we might have to leave. What can you do?

Wise councilor: Fear not for my fellow wise councilors and my wise self will address the critical shortage of housing by proposing that duplexes and single-family houses be built. That should solve everything. You're welcome!

 

[Brad Plaid]

Thanks. I still don’t understand what the optics of fake apartments are, and it would still seem like “incentivizing” a beautification of these sites would involve public money at stake either way. Anyway, I defer to you as you seem to have your ear to the ground about this

Potemkin village https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potemkin_village

 

[Beton Brut]

I still don’t understand what the optics of fake apartments are...

I'm surprised, because you're among the most insightful posters here.

Put yourself in the shoes of a low-income wage earner staring down the barrel of an eviction notice. Would you find comfort or "beauty" in pretending that there's a neighborhood where there used to be an oil tank farm, especially if it's been paid for with some of your tax dollars?

...it would still seem like “incentivizing” a beautification of these sites would involve public money at stake either way.

Public murals could be a cost-neutral option, preserving grit and honoring the history, interests, and heritage of the community.

 

[odurandina]

My fellow councillor and I would like to see a development that would consist of duplexes and single-family homes to keep up with the neighborhood.”

This is why Chelsea should have gone under and be a neighborhood of Boston.

Jesus Christ.