Harvard - Allston Campus

I wonder if this is Harvard's way of saying your going to have an unfinished eyesore (science center) for a long time. There is this 2 story wooden wall surrounding the whole site, its pretty bad to think this neighborhood is going to have to deal with it for however long.
 
I wonder if this is Harvard's way of saying your going to have an unfinished eyesore (science center) for a long time. There is this 2 story wooden wall surrounding the whole site, its pretty bad to think this neighborhood is going to have to deal with it for however long.
The design of the Great Allston Wall reflects what the community, and immediate neighbors, sought. Harvard built several different mockups to allow the community to choose which one it wanted.

The Wall extends down to Cambridge St. where Harvard, even before the endowment's plunge, didn't intend doing any building for years.

As for the library park and sustainability, I believe that Harvard is on the hook to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for maintenance and upkeep.
 
Michael Van Valkenburgh does good work, this should be an interesting park.
 
I know which wall your talking about. I'm talking about the wall for the science center, on Western Ave. I know the neighborhood wanted this wall for construction, but I imagine, the neighborhood also thought this construction would end in a timely fashion. I'm getting the impression Harvard has no plans to finish the Science Center any time within the next couple of years.
 
Also it's important to recognize that North Allston already has an amazing park system called the Charles river, anyone who lives in N.A. is close to it. Also there are many baseball diamonds, and basketball courts on Western Ave and also another park at the end of hooker st. So really this park is completely unneccesary, and clearly Harvard could use the money else where.
 
Well that is a stretching it a bit. The Charles River is much further away from this section of Allston AND it is cut off by Soldiers Field Rd. This new park will be surrounded by houses, much safer for kids and much closer to the center of the neighborhood.
 
Also it's important to recognize that North Allston already has an amazing park system called the Charles river, anyone who lives in N.A. is close to it. Also there are many baseball diamonds, and basketball courts on Western Ave and also another park at the end of hooker st. So really this park is completely unneccesary, and clearly Harvard could use the money else where.
GW2500, the new park is part of the public benefits agreement reached between the city and Harvard. Harvard is to pay $3.5 million to construct the park, and $220,000 a year for 10 years to maintain the park.

(The agreement was negotiated and signed as part of the process for giving Harvard the okay to construct the science complex.)

On a per acre basis, I think this park is more expensive than the Greenway parks, and the maintenance is almost certainly more expensive.

You are correct though about North Allston already have an abundance of parks and recreation areas, the largest being Smith Field at Barry's Corners.

The reconstruction of N. Harvard St between Western Ave and Soldiers Field Rd to include bike lanes is also something Harvard was to do as part of the public benefits agreement. That project is just being completed, and I assume Harvard paid for it.
 
Much like the SBW, I think we can start to write off the Harvard-Allston campus. :(

Boston Globe
- July 28, 2009
Criticized housing complex is redesigned
Density, height were big issues for Allston


By Casey Ross, Globe Staff | July 28, 2009

An affordable housing development that is part of a big land swap with Harvard University will be significantly redesigned in response to some Allston residents? concerns that it was too densely packed into tall buildings.

The Charlesview Apartments, which will be relocated from its location near Harvard Stadium, will spread its 360 units among smaller, shorter buildings about a half-mile away on Western Avenue, at the former Brighton Mills shopping center.

Instead of 12 buildings on 6 acres, the new complex will have 26 buildings on 8 acres, according to the nonprofit developers, Charlesview Inc. and Community Builders Inc.

?We?re very excited to be moving forward and to introduce the new Charlesview to the community,?? said Felicia Jacques, director of development for Community Builders.

The current concrete complex, with 213 units, was completed in 1971, and has become worn and outdated, its critics say.

However, it sits on a triangle of land that Harvard wanted to redevelop as a showcase entrance to the Allston portion of its campus.

Harvard will acquire the 6 1/2-acre parcel at Stadium Way upon completion of the new complex.

The university, due to financial pressures, has slowed construction of its $1 billion science complex in Allston, which was planned to bring with it restaurants, stores, and hundreds of new workers.

The new Charlesview would have 260 apartments and 26 ownership units spread among 25 buildings on the Brighton Mills site. A parcel across Western Avenue along Telford Street would include 74 ownership units in an eight-story building.

Some neighbors are concerned there should be an equal number of rental and ownership units on the parcels to avoid segregating lower-income residents in one area.

?We?ve asked the builder to build a truly diverse mixed-income community, and not just put 260 apartments in one big mass,?? said Harry Mattison, an Allston resident who opposes the current plan.

City officials and the developers said Charlesview already includes a range of low- and middle-income families, and that the new development plan ensures ownership units will be spread across the property.

?The [old] complex has done its job, and now it?s time to move on and provide the kind of quality housing we want in the neighborhood,?? said the Rev. Samuel Johnson, chairman of the Charlesview board of trustees.

Charlesview Inc., the owner of the apartment complex, is an interdenominational organization that consists St. Anthony?s Roman Catholic Church, the Brighton synagogue Kadimah-Toras Moshe, and Community United Methodist Church.

In addition to the housing units, the proposed project would include a community center, 521 parking spaces, and a park along Telford Street.

Kairos Shen, chief planner for the Boston Redevelopment Authority, said the revised plan is consistent with a broader effort to build more housing and community space in the neighborhood.

He said the plan calls for up to 700 additional housing units in the years ahead.

Casey Ross can be reached at cross@globe.com.
 
Does this really need to be a high-rise neighborhood? Doesn't the fact that

Instead of 12 buildings on 6 acres, the new complex will have 26 buildings on 8 acres, according to the nonprofit developers, Charlesview Inc. and Community Builders Inc.

mean there will be smaller footprints and actually more tightly packed footprints? From comparing the visuals that have been produced so far, that's the direction it looks to be going, even though overall density may in fact be reduced.
 
Why do we listen to residents in the first place. It's like asking a child what they want to eat for dinner (chocolate).
 
^^ It goes back to the demolition of the West End and the creation of the Expressway. Those two events pushed the pendulum waaay over the the other side. It will take a while for it to swing back.
 
Remember that Allston has seen it's fair share of urban renewal as well (Charlesview, Pike) and the residents have long memories. Harvard coming in, bossing them around, wasn't going to play well.
 
today sadly down to one crane!
120-1.jpg
 
Why do we listen to residents in the first place. It's like asking a child what they want to eat for dinner (chocolate).

GW2500, don't you think it's a little offensive to compare the housing choices of low and moderate income individuals to the dinner choices of a child?

The design was agreed to by the Charlesview Board which is made up of 15 members of the A/B community. The Board runs a private non-profit that is charged with looking after the interests of the residents so of course they were given some say.
 
Well I wasn't talking exclusively of them. It was nimbys in general. I want this I don't want that, as if they know whats best for the area as a whole. Just being selfish, for the most part, not thinking about the greater good. They can't see the forrest through the trees. Boston needs more housing, not open space. Every develpoable plot of land in Boston should become urban. There are enough parks as is. Build like we did 100 years ago, nice and dense and not a shit park inbetween every building.
Also I'm probably just as poor.
 
Here's a juicy little story...

In Allston, BRA?s e-mails paint a disparaging picture

Project manager apologizes for offending residents
By Andreae Downs
Globe Correspondent / October 24, 2009

Internal Boston Redevelopment Authority e-mails that belittle Allston residents who question a controversial housing proposal have heightened worries among some in the neighborhood that the city undervalues their opinion on development matters.

The more than 200 pages of e-mails, posted on an Allston blog, are to and from Jay Rourke, a senior BRA project manager, to colleagues, his boss Heather Campisano, the developer, and employees of Harvard University. The messages concern plans to relocate Charlesview Apartments, an affordable housing complex next to Harvard Business School, from North Harvard Street to a Harvard-owned former strip mall farther down Western Avenue.

In one missive, Rourke comments on neighbors meeting to plan a less-dense alternative to the developer?s proposal by saying, ?Let them play their games.?? In another, he says, ?When referring to the ?community,? I?m speaking of a few individuals who are forcing their ideas and beliefs on the masses.?? A later Rourke e-mail about neighborhood activists asks, ?Why do we continue to meet with these . . . people???

The BRA e-mails span a period from February 2008, when plans for the project were coming to light, to August 2009, when revised plans were released. During this time, residents at community meetings contested the height, density, and several other aspects of the proposal for the new Charlesview.

The messages demonstrate ?pervasive contempt of the neighborhood from a public employee,?? said Allston activist Harry Mattison, who posted the e-mails on his Allston-Brighton Community Blog earlier this month after submitting a Freedom of Information request.

On Thursday, Rourke apologized to Allston residents who were offended by the messages. ?These are internal e-mails,?? he said. ?They are my comments to staff members and should not reflect on the agency.??

Rourke said he had lived in Allston for 27 years while growing up and is ?passionate?? about the neighborhood and the project.

?In the heat of the moment, sometimes your passions get the best of you, unfortunately,?? he said.

Later Thursday, the BRA said Rourke had received a ?verbal warning?? over the e-mails in his personnel file.

The e-mail flap coincides with the ongoing investigation of e-mails deleted by a top aide to Mayor Thomas M. Menino, in possible violation of state law.

BRA spokeswoman Susan Elsbree said that despite the friction over Charlesview Apartments, Rourke and other staff members had listened to community comments and as a result had pressed the developer to reduce building heights, add green space and homeownership units, and reduce the project?s density.

Responses to the revised plan commend the city and developer, but many say that it does not go far enough and that the project does not comply with either city zoning or planning documents. Further, many respondents had read the blog postings and their responses reflected disappointment with BRA staff.

?I am appalled that BRA considers us an annoyance and the lack of respect with which some neighbors have been treated in those e-mail exchanges,?? wrote Allston resident Rita Vaidya.

Brent Whelan, an Allston resident who has been reviewing the project, said he was surprised by the tone of e-mails.

?It made us wonder what kind of hearing we?re getting downtown,?? Whelan said. ?It?s clear to me that nobody was sending a message to junior staff that the community needs to be respected.??

Neighbors said the exchanges, some of which include notes that attached plans are ?confidential,?? and ?not for public disclosure,?? fed their suspicions that the city is withholding information, particularly the financing and maintenance plans for the project, which are still not public. They worried that the result may be another neighborhood catastrophe and point to the Filene?s Basement hole in Downtown Crossing and the unfinished Science Center.

?I?m concerned that in 40 years Charlesview residents will face the same conditions they have now,?? said Laura Bethard, referring to the disrepair of the current complex. ?I would love to be proved wrong, but until I see the numbers on paper, I can?t come to any other conclusion.??

Elsbree said BRA staff had reviewed the project?s finances to ensure that it can be completed and that it will be more durable than the poured concrete of the old structures.

?We share the concerns of the community,?? she said. ?We also want to be sure this is not just another hole in the ground.??

Other neighbors pointed to a July 2009 e-mail asking that the project not be mentioned in the concurrent planning process for the surrounding area. Residents say this bolsters their contention that the project does not conform to this or previous plans for North Allston.

BRA Deputy Director Mike Glavin said that in fact the revised proposal reduced the project?s density by adding acreage in response to the larger planning effort.

?We universally heard that the project now is better than what was originally proposed,?? he said. ?There is also major agreement on the plan. The question is, how much of it can be realized.??

Link
 
These emails are far from offensive. They show that the BRA is finally rethinking whether these loudmouths are representative of the "community," whether "listening to the community" shouldn't be balanced against broader concerns, and whether it might actually be counterproductive to do so when project financing is so delicate.

I'd say it shows they're doing their job, which is to apply policies that are not only good for the neighborhood, but for the city as a whole.
 
As far as I'm concerned Jay Rourke is absolute disgrace for the BRA and as a face the City presents to the neighborhoods. While many on the forum may side with his position on the Charlesview project, his behavior as the BRA rep on Shreve project public meeting was shockingly unprofessional and immature. I think in his case, he sees ANY community input as an obstruction to the developer/BRA goals, regardless if it's the typical NIMBY objection or well thought constructive feedback. In the public arena, he performs his job poorly.

By the way, his name surfaced in a negative light front and center recently in the press regarding cheap city lots going to public sector employees for a song.
 
Yeah, it seems to me that Rourke needs to be fired, at least for no other reason that he's burned too many bridges to effectively get projects completed.
 

Back
Top