Mission Hill Infill and Small Developments

This development is proposing some huge family units, like 3 and even 4 BR, so to me it makes sense that they are banning students from making the building into their own cheaper apartment-style dorm and splitting the rent 4 ways. That's really the issue on Mission Hill. There's no family housing stock available because all of the 3/4 BR units are occupied by college kids. The glut of college kids in turn allows the rents to continue to skyrocket because 4 people splitting rent 4 ways can pay a lot more than a family of 4 or 5 paying a single rent.

Also, there's definitely precedent for banning undergrad students in apartment buildings.
 
Sure, not every student is a problem, but let's be honest here: plenty of them are. Ever been to Mission Hill on a weekend, or lived near a party house in Allston (where there's almost one on every block)?

I've lived near the Fens, in Mission Hill, and lower Allston, as a student and an adult with a job. Undergrads are, in relative terms, noisy and disruptive. In the end I found the best way to get away from it was move to a different neighborhood. For a lot of people that's not possible or desirable, so I think these restrictions are very fair.

"some students do care about where they are living and may even be thinking of living where they rent long term" - I was one of those! I actually liked lower Allston and Mission Hill, but frankly, the kids sucked, so I left.
 
I find it odd that he wants to take down the triple decker on the corner and replace with an offshoot from the building of roughly the same size. Is it just to include the retail space?
 
^my friends gf lived in the old rowhouses on sewall a long time ago, went there a couple times... They're great buildings. I think i prefer these puddingstone buildings as stand alone, but if done well this project could end up looking very cool. Aside from those two and the one next to fuentes I don't think I know of any other puddingstone buildings.
 
Sure, not every student is a problem, but let's be honest here: plenty of them are. Ever been to Mission Hill on a weekend, or lived near a party house in Allston (where there's almost one on every block)?

I've lived near the Fens, in Mission Hill, and lower Allston, as a student and an adult with a job. Undergrads are, in relative terms, noisy and disruptive. In the end I found the best way to get away from it was move to a different neighborhood. For a lot of people that's not possible or desirable, so I think these restrictions are very fair.

"some students do care about where they are living and may even be thinking of living where they rent long term" - I was one of those! I actually liked lower Allston and Mission Hill, but frankly, the kids sucked, so I left.

If the owner wants to only rent to people based on their occupation, then I suppose they have that right since you can discriminate based on occupation and people have a right to associate. But the city shouldn't be getting into those kinds of restrictions, that would cross the line for the same reason that people have a freedom of association.
 
If the owner wants to only rent to people based on their occupation, then I suppose they have that right since you can discriminate based on occupation and people have a right to associate. But the city shouldn't be getting into those kinds of restrictions, that would cross the line for the same reason that people have a freedom of association.

I agree about the city staying away that stuff, but I think this is a private development.
 
70 Parker Hill Ave.

This place is going to have fantastic views.

Hmmmm, sure is, if you like telephone poles and power lines which many of the units will face. Wish contractors would bury the damn things when the poles are on the block they're building on.

While I'm commenting here, Beeline, thanks for all the photos you posted today...!!!
 
Hmmmm, sure is, if you like telephone poles and power lines which many of the units will face. Wish contractors would bury the damn things when the poles are on the block they're building on.
Agree with the wire problem (North/West/South), but I was refering to the units facing the East. They look out over Longwood, Back Bay, Downtown and a lot of East Cambridge.

Kinda like this, but without the tree.
https://flic.kr/p/JXxybr
 
Hmmmm, sure is, if you like telephone poles and power lines which many of the units will face. Wish contractors would bury the damn things when the poles are on the block they're building on.

While I'm commenting here, Beeline, thanks for all the photos you posted today...!!!

It's not that easy, nor would it even be included in a procurement contract for a private development.

Additionally, pole-mounted transformers take up significantly less space than pad mounted ones, as pad-mounted ones require ridiculous clearances that eat up large amounts of space that could instead be landscaped or built upon.
 
It's not that easy, nor would it even be included in a procurement contract for a private development.

Additionally, pole-mounted transformers take up significantly less space than pad mounted ones, as pad-mounted ones require ridiculous clearances that eat up large amounts of space that could instead be landscaped or built upon.

Is grass allowed? My building's transformer is surrounded by gravel for all of its clearances, which annoys me. Google Images shows many on concrete pads, surrounded by grass:

ExofproperclearTrans.jpg


Then again, it also shows this absurdity:

padmount-clearance-sized-for-web_448x299.jpg
 
It's not that easy, nor would it even be included in a procurement contract for a private development.

Additionally, pole-mounted transformers take up significantly less space than pad mounted ones, as pad-mounted ones require ridiculous clearances that eat up large amounts of space that could instead be landscaped or built upon.

I know it wouldn't be easy or inexpensive but I don't understand what you mean by included in a procurement contract?

Also, I'm surprised that you, as an architect, would seem to prefer transformers on power poles rather than have the lines, transformers buried with no poles since, as the picture clearly shows, that building's appearance is marred by those poles, wires, and transformers. I'll take a green box on the ground anyday. It can also be covered by a decorative rock looking thing.

Also, if contractors are not required to bury the damn things, why is there no electrical mess downtown and close to downtown? Surely, many developers would not put out the extra bucks to bury them. Is there a city ordinance that mandates that large projects bury any existing electrical?
 
I had always assumed that they were buried a long time ago downtown and there isn't any reason to place them on poles after they have already been buried I figured its easier to just leave them buried.
 
^ this is a neighborhood-level infrastructure question. You can't (practically/reasonably) have a neighborhood that's still wired-and-poled suddenly have one building in the middle of the street that has buried utilities, which then re-emerge on the other side of the building. Sure, it's possible, but it's not common. Maybe others' have different experience, but my understanding is that this is usually coordinated at a scale greater than one building.
 
I know it wouldn't be easy or inexpensive but I don't understand what you mean by included in a procurement contract?

Also, I'm surprised that you, as an architect, would seem to prefer transformers on power poles rather than have the lines, transformers buried with no poles since, as the picture clearly shows, that building's appearance is marred by those poles, wires, and transformers. I'll take a green box on the ground anyday. It can also be covered by a decorative rock looking thing.

Also, if contractors are not required to bury the damn things, why is there no electrical mess downtown and close to downtown? Surely, many developers would not put out the extra bucks to bury them. Is there a city ordinance that mandates that large projects bury any existing electrical?

Um there might be a bit of misunderstanding about why transformers are either pad mounted, pole mounted, placed in a building along its exterior in a vault, or burred in the ground in a vault. They are never "buried in the ground".

Transformers explode. It happens pretty often, they also catch fire more often than that. For that reason they need to be gotten to quickly by the fire department. They would rather have them outside than in a vault. When they are in a vault the vaults have lots of bells and whistles to keep them safe. For that reason they often happen in the landscape. No architect would RATHER the transformer be exposed ... often they simply have no choice. NSTAR, the fire department and the client have all the say as to where these things go.

- Pole mounted(small) Pad mounted (large) = least expensive
- Exterior vault = medium expensive
- Building vault = most expensive.
 
Also, if contractors are not required to bury the damn things, why is there no electrical mess downtown and close to downtown? Surely, many developers would not put out the extra bucks to bury them. Is there a city ordinance that mandates that large projects bury any existing electrical?

Atlantaden -- Downtown is different than the suburban areas [even if within the city limits] mainly because of the mix of users.

The heavy users include: industrial, commercial, institutional, and now increasingly {Big} residential -- they can be characterized in terms of Peak and Average Demand and something quite esoteric called Power Factor. In nearly every case downtown, these users are supplied by a high voltage underground feed.

Big Users provide their own internal distribution and receive a high power, high voltage feed directly from the primary distribution network. Typically, the big user has one or more transformers and may have additional high voltage equipment. Most Big Users receive what is known as Polyphase AC [Tesla's major contribution] to power big motors. The Big User also is solely responsible to right-size things if demand changes substantially, and to do all the maintenance.

We can call the rest -- residential users including: single family, multifamily, small to medium sized shops and small offices -- aka small users. These are found both in lower density parts of cities and in suburbs. Their principal distinction is that the user directly receives a feed at the final voltages that they need. Typically this feed coming from a pole or underground from a local transformer [commonly the Big Green Box next to the sidewalk] is in the form of single phase [although there are often a pair] 120 VAC or 240 VAC for appliances consuming more than 1500 Watts [e.g. electric heat, stoves, dryers]. The Distribution Utility is responsible for everything upto the meter. Note Utilities do not much care for small users as the cost to service them [exclusive of the energy] is often as much or even more than the Big User.

The business of underground versus overhead is all about cost with a small bit of reliability and some regulatory.

The Regulatory -- mostly safety related -- High Voltage AC is DANGEROUS and so it has to be kept away from people -- commonly by putting it high on big tall poles out in the country side with nothing much below or even close to the center line of the ROW. Drive around near Totten Pond & Rt-128 in Waltham or take the T to Alewife and walk back toward Fresh Pond -- you will see High Voltage. However, we need high voltage to get lots of power in a compact form and so we need it in cities. Cities hide the HVAC in oil filled underground cables which connect between equipment either buried in a deep vault or inside a specialized building with nothing else in the building [e.g. Chauncey & Ave. Lafayette St] -- this is a substation. https://goo.gl/maps/oFpoUpLjh3H2
In these facilities really high voltage high power cables terminate and a bunch ofd much lowwer but still high voltage cables spring forth. These cables travel manhole to manhole and occasionally have dramatic fires and even explosions.

A very large amount of money has been invested by Eversource in setting up a reliable and robust grid of smaller transformer vaults and switching vaults with a small number of the BIG Substations to provide the "juice" direct from the Transmission grid.

Bottom Line -- If you can easily be reached from an existing underground distribution line from a nearby manhole and you are Big Enough to take the high distribution voltage -- well you're in luck. Otherwise you will probably merit a wire coming from a transformer on a pole or in many newer suburban locations often a transformer in a big green box sitting on someone's lawn near the street.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top