Millennium (Hayward) Place | 580 Washington Street | Downtown

M

Mike

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
1,158
Reaction score
542
Hayward Developers Present to Chinatown
Details Vague

Jul 7, 2006

By Adam Smith and Anita Chang


Millennium Partners, the developer proposing to build on Hayward Place, met with neighborhood groups in June to describe their housing project.

So far, Millennium has given few specifics to the neighborhood council, safety committee, and resident association about their proposal, except that it will contain ?up to? 277 residential units and ?up to? 271 parking spaces, and that the development site is zoned for 155 feet, or 14 stories.

At the Chinatown Neighborhood Council meeting in June, Joe Larkin of Millennium said the developer was still refining the building?s design.

?This doesn?t tell you much, except what our architect wants,? said Larkin, while displaying a drawing of the building. ?We?re working with the Boston Redevelopment Authority to perfect this.?

He said the number of residential units would probably be close to about 225, and that the mid-rise tower would likely have fewer than 271 parking spaces. He also said the project would ?fill out the block? bounded by Washington Street, Hayward Place, Avenue de Lafayette, and Harrison Avenue, which is currently a parking lot.

During the meeting, some asked how the project would benefit Chinatown, such as in the number of jobs created during construction.

?We see quite a few construction projects in Chinatown, but we never really see any benefit to the Chinese workforce in the area,? said Albert Li, a council member.

Millennium said it would make its best effort to hire minorities and Boston residents for the construction of the project.

The developer said the project would include money for the city?s affordable housing fund and for the Chinatown Quincy Upper School. Hayward Place?s $23 million price tag, as determined by the Boston Redevelopment Authority, included $13 million for renovations for the Quincy Upper School and $10 million for affordable housing in Boston, though it's not clear where. Millennium has paid the $13 million but the city has not yet used it for the renovations (see: http://sampan.org/show_article.php?display=531 ). The developer has also noted that to meet the city affordable housing requirement, Millennium would be required to either set aside 15% of its housing for low-income residents or pay into a fund for the residents.

Some councilors asked how they could be assured the money would go to Chinatown.

Though Larkin said it is up to the city government how the money is used: ?it is in our best interest to have the money spent in our neighborhood.?



Link
 
The best way to increase the affordability of this housing is to remove all of the parking spaces, and replace them with additional housing units. This is close to three of Boston's four subway lines and there should be no need for parking at all.
 
Its expensive Downtown land owned by a private entity, if people can't afford to live in whatever is built, too bad. I'm sorry but being pragmatic poor people can do what they've always done when housing is expensive or there aren't jobs, MOVE to where there are jobs and plenty of affordable housing. All of our ancestors at one time did it for a better life, sitting in one spot forever and expecting everything to by peachy is not realistic given how economies change. I work 60 to 80 hours a week on average and don't have a ridiculous sense of entitlement that I've seen from some people in this city that think society owes them a free ride without effort on their own part.
 
Lurker said:
Its expensive Downtown land owned by a private entity, if people can't afford to live in whatever is built, too bad. I'm sorry but being pragmatic poor people can do what they've always done when housing is expensive or there aren't jobs, MOVE to where there are jobs and plenty of affordable housing. All of our ancestors at one time did it for a better life, sitting in one spot forever and expecting everything to by peachy is not realistic given how economies change. I work 60 to 80 hours a week on average and don't have a ridiculous sense of entitlement that I've seen from some people in this city that think society owes them a free ride without effort on their own part.
Click to expand...

You're officially the man.

What they need to do is make a law to mandatorily convert all subsidized housing to market rate and sell off all public housing projects to developers.

If people want to live downtown, they can work 80 hours a week. If not, they can move. School's over now and I'm looking for a second job, but during the school year I worked as much as 50 hours a week while also going to school another 40 hours. If I can handle it at 17 years old, then adults can handle it too.
 
If people want to live downtown, they can work 80 hours a week. If not, they can move. School's over now and I'm looking for a second job, but during the school year I worked as much as 50 hours a week while also going to school another 40 hours. If I can handle it at 17 years old, then adults can handle it too.
Click to expand...

Well that is spectacular for you now isn't it?

I have a few questions for you...

1) Do you pay for all of your expenses?
2) Are you mentally disabled (like most of the homeless in Boston?)
3) Do you have nice clothes to go to an interview?
4) Do you actually fucking think that some company is going to go ahead and hire some homeless person when there is a LARGE pool of middle class teenagers (with their parent's health insurance) like yourself to work?
5) Do you understand that the job market is not a level playing field but rather a class-based hierarchy?

Be realistic, not fascist. That little plan of yours may sound good in principle, but like all simple, reactionary ideas - the novelty fades
 
Suckling on the parents teet and looking down his nose at people.

Is Dude going to be the one who physically throws an 90 year old lady with an oxygen tank out on the street and tell her to go buy a condo?

There are people in this world we have an obligation to take care of.
 
If the proposed parking is underground, I withdraw my suggestion that it be converted to residential units. However, wherever it is, the housing will cost less to build if parking is omitted from the plan.
 
jboston said:
If people want to live downtown, they can work 80 hours a week. If not, they can move. School's over now and I'm looking for a second job, but during the school year I worked as much as 50 hours a week while also going to school another 40 hours. If I can handle it at 17 years old, then adults can handle it too.
Click to expand...

Well that is spectacular for you now isn't it?

I have a few questions for you...

1) Do you pay for all of your expenses?
2) Are you mentally disabled (like most of the homeless in Boston?)
3) Do you have nice clothes to go to an interview?
4) Do you actually fucking think that some company is going to go ahead and hire some homeless person when there is a LARGE pool of middle class teenagers (with their parent's health insurance) like yourself to work?
5) Do you understand that the job market is not a level playing field but rather a class-based hierarchy?

Be realistic, not fascist. That little plan of yours may sound good in principle, but like all simple, reactionary ideas - the novelty fades
Click to expand...

Working that much is unnecessary. However, it's the attitude that will result in the buying and selling of all your sorry asses.
 
Back to Hayward Place though, I feel this lot was always destined to be a mid rise. I wouldn't be dissapinted in 14 stories. It will fit in well with the rest of the vacancies on south washington.
 
Re: Hayward Place

Mike said:
During the meeting, some asked how the project would benefit Chinatown, such as in the number of jobs created during construction.

?We see quite a few construction projects in Chinatown, but we never really see any benefit to the Chinese workforce in the area,? said Albert Li, a council member.
Click to expand...
Don't most Chinese-Americans do something besides construction work? What service jobs are generated subsequent to construction aren't really any more worth having than the jobs currently available in Chinatown.

What exactly would suit these folks? Positions as bank managers, perhaps?
 
However, it's the attitude that will result in the buying and selling of all your sorry asses.


Hmmmmmmmmm, a rather insulting and arrogant statement. Sadly, it's an opinion of many in the corporate and political establishment around this country who look down on the "sorry ass masses" with contempt! Happily, more than a few of the Ken Lays and Tom DeLays of that group are now in jail or awaiting trial though Lay's passing sorta left him off the hook, so to speak. Sorry for this post but the above statement just rubbed me the wrong way. The Dude, JBoston and Scott all have a right to their opinions without their being lumped together and referred to as "sorry asses." That sort of statement tends to encompass and demean every poster on this forum.
 
Ron Newman said:
If the proposed parking is underground, I withdraw my suggestion that it be converted to residential units. However, wherever it is, the housing will cost less to build if parking is omitted from the plan.
Click to expand...

Ron, I don't have a driver's license, and would be the first (and possibly only) person to vote for increasing gas taxes to European levels, but I think that eliminating all parking goes too far. I think that a perfectly reasonable, environmentally conscious person can choose to live downtown, use the T, but still want to keep a car for weekend trips into the country etc.

justin
 
Agreed, but why does that mean a housing developer needs to provide parking?
 
New residents means new cars have to go somewhere. Street parking is unsightly and limited, and I'd much rather have parking garages tucked under apartment buildings than as free-standing, independently built structures.

justin
 
Not if the complex is explicitly marketed to people without cars, or Zipcar membership is included in the condo fee.
 
Ron Newman said:
Not if the complex is explicitly marketed to people without cars, or Zipcar membership is included in the condo fee.
Click to expand...
Fine, but once you've filled both buildings, we'll revert to the unfortunate fact that it is in the developer's economic interest to provide parking.

justin
 
Has anyone here ever tried using zip car? The service sucks. Not like I'd ever try it, but having to pay by the hour for a car is backwards.

Hayward place needs to keep some facet of parking in the plan simply because there's nowhere else for residents to park their cars. The price they could sell each unit for would drop substantially if parking were not available from the developer them self.

Idealism is abound on this forum (which is not necessarily a bad thing). However "having a car for weekend trips into the country" screams liberal yuppie in a convertible saab going out to concord for the strawberry festival.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top