Roxbury Infill and Small Developments

Looking at the Boston Development site;
Looks like it's 16 Tabor st building - the red dot.
10 Tabor is complete the purple dot.
1 Tabor, the green dot, just got approved across Tabor St, basically the whole block between Harrison and Warren.

Untitled.png
 
Made it to Nubian Sq and was surprised just how inactive development sites were (at least along Warren + Wash + Dudley). Next time I'll map my route better to hit all the project sites.

16 Taber St
PXL_20230220_214507041 by LexSEDotVille, on Flickr

PXL_20230220_214549016 by LexSEDotVille, on Flickr

1950 Washington St - The lefthand side of the ground floor is pretty bad urban design...
PXL_20230220_214839790.MP by LexSEDotVille, on Flickr

1158 Tremont Street - Whittier Choice
PXL_20230220_213619174.PANO by LexSEDotVille, on Flickr

PXL_20230220_213456493 by LexSEDotVille, on Flickr

Nice streetscape! Could have handled one or two more floors
PXL_20230220_213732124 by LexSEDotVille, on Flickr
 
Not sure if a separate thread is warranted for this yet, but the BPDA is starting a public process to determine the future of several surface parking lots currently owned by the Boston Water and Sewer Commission. There is a "collaborative visioning session" scheduled for March 14 that is open to the public. Looks like a lot of land!

BWSC Parking Lots Disposition Public Meeting | Boston Planning & Development Agency

Stay informed and involved. See news, press releases, and more.
www.bostonplans.org www.bostonplans.org

1678484848576.png
 
#bancars said:
Not sure if a separate thread is warranted for this yet, but the BPDA is starting a public process to determine the future of several surface parking lots currently owned by the Boston Water and Sewer Commission. There is a "collaborative visioning session" scheduled for March 14 that is open to the public. Looks like a lot of land!

BWSC Parking Lots Disposition Public Meeting | Boston Planning & Development Agency

Stay informed and involved. See news, press releases, and more.
www.bostonplans.org www.bostonplans.org

View attachment 35109
Click to expand...

Finally! These plots have sat there for years without any proposals coming forward. This is a huge amount of land that would really stitch this part of the city together and would add a lot of whatever they choose to build residential or office/labs etc. Im hoping for residential.
 
Affordable apartments, condos approved for Washington Street at Melnea Cass Boulevard in Roxbury

By adamg on Tue, 04/11/2023 - 11:47am
Proposed new complex

Drone-eye rendering by DHK towards Nubian Square.
The Zoning Board of Appeal today approved a proposal for a ten-story building with 64 apartments and 32 condos - all but two to be rented or sold as affordable - on Washington Street at Melnea Cass Boulevard.
The two-wing building, next to Tropical Foods and proposed by the Madison Park Development Corp. and Trinity Financial, will include a public plaza and artist spaces fronting on the plaza - and solar panels on its two roofs.
Of the apartments, 16 will be rented to people making no more than 30% of the Boston-area median income, 4 to people making no more than 50% of that level, 22 to people making no more than 60% of that level and 22 to people making no more than 80%. Some 15 of the condos will be sold to people making no more than 80% of the Boston-area median income and 15 at 100%. Two of the condos will be sold at market rates.

https://www.universalhub.com/2023/affordable-apartments-condos-approved-washington
 
Love seeing quality infill, but this should really be taller/more dense. Also why put a small, unusable park next to two major thoroughfares? Either put the space behind the building where people could have a conversation without being drowned out by the sound of traffic or use the space to increase density and contribute capital to an actual park elsewhere in nubian.
 
I have no back up for this statement but I really think the neighborhood folks are still traumatized by the really big housing developments of the 1940 thru 1960s (think Whittier and Bromley Heath) that were basically left without tenant services or maintenance once federal funding ran out. This is a private development but it relies on assistance programs to begin construction as well as continued government funding in some form (HUD section 8?) for the "affordability" aspect of the building. People are still suspect of programs ending after so many years and get stuck with a "troubled" property like in the past. This is a large project with a lot of people to get out of trouble if it does run into problems. I prefer the urban aspect of this project but I bet the locals would prefer to have small town houses on that corner than this tower so it's easier to "police" if things go south.
 
dhawkins said:
I have no back up for this statement but I really think the neighborhood folks are still traumatized by the really big housing developments of the 1940 thru 1960s (think Whittier and Bromley Heath) that were basically left without tenant services or maintenance once federal funding ran out. This is a private development but it relies on assistance programs to begin construction and as well as continued government funding in some form (HUD section 8?) for the "affordability" aspect of the building. People are still suspect of programs ending after so many years and get stuck with a "troubled" property like in the past. This is a large project with a lot of people to get out of trouble if it does run into problems. I prefer the urban aspect of this project but I bet the locals would prefer to have small town houses on that corner than this tower so it's easier to "police" if things go south.
Click to expand...

"This is a private development but it relies on assistance programs to begin construction" That IS the reason why the project should have more density. Put more market rate housing in to subsidize the below market rate housing. By limiting the density you are forcing financial assistance to make the project viable. Add more market rate housing and you wouldnt need so much assistance and it would make projects like these more viable in the long run.
 
obvious_bicycle said:
"This is a private development but it relies on assistance programs to begin construction" That IS the reason why the project should have more density. Put more market rate housing in to subsidize the below market rate housing. By limiting the density you are forcing financial assistance to make the project viable. Add more market rate housing and you wouldnt need so much assistance and it would make projects like these more viable in the long run.
Click to expand...

True but then you get another segment that yells that the neighborhood is getting gentrified by students and Yuppies because no one from Roxbury can afford market rate". Just chalk this project up with as any other project in Boston, "You can't make everyone happy".
 
Last edited:
This is kind of old news, but I don't think it was discussed here --

Roxbury councilor: Neighborhood has enough affordable housing
https://www.universalhub.com/2022/roxbury-councilor-neighborhood-has-enough

I generally agree with the problem statement -- Roxbury has a disproportionate amount of income-restricted housing and is getting a disproportionate share of new development that is income-restricted. Even the new developments that are billed as 'mixed-income' in Roxbury tend to include only a nominal amount of market-rate units. The centralization of affordable housing in a single neighborhood seems like poor public policy that we should have learned from based on experiments in the 20th century. It seems like the market could support market-rate development in Roxbury, so I'm not sure if the City is really pushing affordable housing development, a lack of NIMBYs in Roxbury, or if developers and non-profits are very experienced at building affordable housing there, but in any case it doesn't seem like the best approach.
 
The reason why gentrification happens in lower income neighborhoods is because the ppl there have less political leverage than the richer neighborhoods who block development, so it ends up that the bulk of new housing that can be built all accumulates in the low income neighborhoods bringing up the prices and pushing ppl out.

I would have to imagine the same thing is happening in roxbury but reverse. The rich neighborhood nimbys also (especially) block low income developments from being built in their neighborhoods so again it gets dumped off onto lower income areas with less political clout. It seems roxbury is getting the worst of both worlds where all of the low income housing of an entire city is getting dumped on them, while at the same time lots of expensive housing is also being built due to nimbys blocking it everywhere else.

As far as this development itself it looks pretty good for the most part and its nice to see a lot of affordable housing being built, though the underlying problems of why need to be addressed going fwd. At the moment though you gotta take it how you get it. I definitely agree that clustering all of the low income housing in one area is not good and we already went through that whole process in the past and it left a bad taste in everyones mouth for a generation, so we shouldnt be trying to run that back again.
 
Doris Bunte Apartments
1685577255753.jpeg


“The Boston Housing Authority intends to renovate the Doris Bunte Apartments, the cylindrical tower in Egleston Square is formerly known as Walnut Park. The property, which is located at 1990 Columbus Avenue, is a HUD-assisted elderly/disabled public housing development. The building is a 20-story concrete framed structure with concrete and masonry exteriors currently comprising 165 residential units, including two units designated for occupancy by resident custodians (who are BHA employees) and two units currently used for non-residential functions. As part of the renovation, one non-residential unit will be merged with a residential unit in order to create a single, larger fully accessible apartment. The 164 units remaining upon completion of the renovations will be: 162 Project-Based Voucher (Section 8) subsidized apartments for occupancy by eligible elderly and non-elderly disabled occupants; one unsubsidized employee unit; and one unit to be used for non-residential purposes. Existing households will be subject to 80% AMI income eligibility and future residents will be subject to the 50% AMI income eligibility threshold for Section 8 subsidy. All residents will pay 30% of their adjusted annual income toward rent.”

http://www.bostonplans.org/projects/development-projects/doris-bunte-apartments
 

Attachments

  • 1685577172173.jpeg
    1685577172173.jpeg
    21.1 KB · Views: 29
Colliers Facilitates $3.2 Million Sale of Mixed-Use Development Opportunity in Roxbury
Boston_639-Warren-St-OM.jpg


“ROXBURY, MA- Colliers announced the arrangement of a $3.2 million land sale for a mixed-use, multifamily development located at 639 Warren Street in Grove Hall, Roxbury, MA.

The property, owned by Immobiliare Realty Trust, was exclusively represented in the transaction by Colliers’ investment sales specialist, Kendin Carr.

Situated on 0.75-acres, the opportunity offers convenient access to a range of transit options, making the property an ideal location for residents seeking easy commutes to downtown Boston and the greater metro area. This development is part of an ongoing transformation of a centrally located land site into a modern residential asset.”

https://bostonrealestatetimes.com/c...mixed-use-development-opportunity-in-roxbury/

https://bostonmultifamily.com/project/266-268-newbury-st-roxbury/
 
24-34 Notre Dame street
278840eb-e107-417d-98bc-355cc6a6c42b


“The Proponent is a local developer and an experienced minority-owned business operator and builder who seeks to revitalize the Project Site with a new five (5) story multifamily residential building of approximately 28,357 gross square feet, including 26 units of homeownership, 15 onsite parking spaces, roof decked, terraced, and ground level open spaces, amenity areas and related sidewalk, landscape, pedestrian, and vehicular access improvements.”

https://www.bostonplans.org/projects/development-projects/24-34-notre-dame-street
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top