Union Square Somerville Infill and Small Developments

Potential mixed-use site. Hopefully it gets rezoned and we get some retail/housing here
 
http://wgbhnews.org/post/somerville-high-anxiety-over-eminent-domain

That scenario has some of Union Square’s best-known businesses fearful for their future—and the neighborhood’s.

“Be careful what wish for,” says Ricky DiGiovanni, the owner of Ricky’s Flower Market. “Because if you want something squeaky clean, and too polished, and maybe not as authentic--maybe something cookie cutter--I’m not sure that’ll work here.”

For 25 years, Ricky’s market has been an isolated island of greenery in Union Square a rare splash of greenery. But it occupies one of several parcels slated for redevelopment and possible seizure—a prospect DiGiovanni dreads.

“Twenty-five years, I’ve spilled blood on this place here,” he says. “My heart, my everything. So to uproot and move, I don’t think that’s a possibility.”

He’s not the only one feeling anxious.

José Garcia and a partner opened Ebi Sushi three years ago. Now after a slow start, business is brisk.

“Union Square has become a food destination for many people,” Garcia says. “I like the neighborhood here. All the customers we have, they are regulars.”

But if Ebi’s landlord balks at selling to whichever developer the city chooses to work with—or, conversely, refuses to re-invest in the building in a way the city deems sufficient—Somerville could seize the property outright, and Ebi might have to move.

“We put over $200,000 into this business,” Garcia says. “It took two years build this rest. Now we’re doing successful—and two, three years later, we have to leave? “

It’s worth noting that Curtatone is a fan of both Ricky’s and Ebi Sushi. What’s more, the mayor has stressed that he wants businesses that make Union Square better to stay put—and that he’d rather not use eminent domain to hasten redevelopment.

But if he has to, he will.
Click to expand...
 
^ That is so much BS from the Ebi Sushi guy. $200,000 he put into his business, huh? Whoop-dee-do! You can't buy a studio condo for that anywhere in Somerville, let alone Union Square. And he's complaining that he's got a successful restaurant that he expects to remain successful for 2-3 more years? How many restaurateurs can claim that! Cry me a freakin' river.
 
The full article is interesting. As a somerville resident, I think the city will be hard pressed to force affordable housing. Rent control is stupid, and won't be done. Mandates are linked to what is built, and if not enough overall gets built, then not nearly enough affordable housing is built. Plus the middle is still cut out. Demand from growth in Cambridge, Boston, transit, and Somerville's own pull is not going to slow much.

The city needs to focus on height around these stations. And they can link the zoning to promises. If an area is zoned for 150 feet, allow a 50% increase in FAR if 40% of additional units are family scale or have prices rented based on the cities median income. If you have 60% of additional units priced as such, you get a 100% FAR increase.

This equals more housing overall, more 'affordable' housing (in the sense of working people not strictly low income).

I also like this approach because it links directly the cause and effect of NIMBYism, which loves to have things both ways and affront the general concern for balance. If you don't want height, you are directly giving up more affordable housing.
 
The lack of 3/4 bedroom units in most new construction in the Boston area bothers me. It feels like a subtle "Go away, and take your rug rats with you..." to families who may want to stay in the city. Incentivizing the construction of larger units is something I can agree with, but the trick is figuring out how to do it without creating warehouses for people.
 
One thing I see is that there's a lot of larger legacy units around. For example, I'm surrounded by houses that have 4+ bedrooms.

Trouble is with these larger units is that they get subdivided, legally or no, and turned into rooming houses/slum houses with even more bedrooms than listed. Families can't compete with that.
 
Matthew said:
One thing I see is that there's a lot of larger legacy units around. For example, I'm surrounded by houses that have 4+ bedrooms.

Trouble is with these larger units is that they get subdivided, legally or no, and turned into rooming houses/slum houses with even more bedrooms than listed. Families can't compete with that.
Click to expand...

Yes! The family sized housing stock exists in spades in all corners of the metro area. New construction of affordable 1 and 2 bed units will allow single 20 and 30 something's to change from sharing a house with roommates to living on their own and freeing up those traditional family sized units for families.

That isn't to say there is no need to build any new 3/4 bed units, but it is hardly a priority. Families that could afford to live in new construction are equally well suited to renovating legacy housing stock.

I think the slumlord overcrowding issue is predominant in the Allston/Fenway/Mission Hill areas and is not in fact pervasive throughout the metro. In my anecdotal experience, I have not seen that kind of overcrowding near Harvard, MIT, or Tufts.
 
Nobody splits up houses in Central/Cambridgeport or Davis/Somerville?

Allston/Fenway might have it worse since the city of Boston ISD never bothered to care/took bribes/who knows what.

Seems unlikely that there aren't the same forces working near Harvard, MIT or Tufts though.

Overcrowding is usually a sign of high demand combined with low density.
 
I don't see why we can't do what Seattle does with "apodments", rooms with kitchenettes and small bathrooms and a larger shared kitchen.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/the-fight-against-small-apartments/Content?oid=16701155

It's mostly new construction, designed to increase density and give younger single people a chance to live in the city. Micro-apartments basically but a lot of them I've read function more as a boarding house situation, so smaller and maybe a bit more feasible. The city uses a zoning loophole to get them constructed by counting the shared large kitchen and the associated "rooms" as one unit rather than separate. Homeowners of course are furious - mostly cause they lose parking in front of their house. It seems to be working though seeing that rent in Seattle is much cheaper than here or say San Francisco. You could argue that lower demand is the issue but it's still an expensive city and as far as I know they are the only one's trying this out.

This seems like it would be perfect for a place like Cambridge with it's transient population of students and young adults moving for a job. If nothing else it would spare them the dehumanizing experience of trying to find roommates on craigslist and deal with lease holders lists of 50+ personality/lifestyle requirements for a "compatible housemate" (or whatever bs goes along with that). Every time I see an empty space being filled with oversized low rise one and two bedroom condos I can't help but think how much more efficient it would be to put in a building with this kind of housing instead. Which naturally has the effect of freeing up older 3 and 4 bedroom apartments in detached housing for families.

The biggest obstacle (aside from residents who oppose everything) seems to be the "stigma" attached to a boarding house or and "SRO", but times have changed and they logically make a ton of sense given the kind of housing that is needed in Boston today.
 
aaaaaa said:
As a fellow Somerville resident, I agree with you wholeheartedly; however, there is a serious flaw in your logic. If Somerville allows for increased building height in exchange for a greater number of affordable units it will create shadows that will destroy parks and green space. Obviously, it would be unjust to subject lower-income residents to parks buried in shadows.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to figure out if you are serious or not. To anyone that says height around a park ruins it, I invite you to visit Post Office Square, one of the most heavily used and popular parks in Boston, and one that has won many awards. It is surrounded by skyscrapers...
 
aaaaaa said:
I'd love to visit Post Office Square, but where am I supposed to park my car?
Click to expand...

Sarcasm aside, the funny/sad thing is, the developers of Post Office Square actually put a lot of effort into answering this very question: so there's a garage underneath!

Surefire way to increase the costs of a park by dozens of millions of dollars. :)
 
It's scary that sarcasm and seriousness is hard to detect even when making what I would consider to be a ridiculous statement :)
 
gyro said:
If they were smart they would go with Gerding.
Click to expand...

Looks like a strong possibility;

https://unionsquaremain.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/CAC-Meeting-Minutes-6_23_14.pdf

The survey’s were collected and handed to CAC co-chair, Wig Zamore, to aggregate the results for the SRA report. The CAC indicated that Gerding Edlen and US2 are not mutually exclusive. They would like to move this process positively forward. The CAC members voted by a raise of hands for GE and US2 and the outcome were GE-12 and US2-2.
Click to expand...

Though they then go onto mention that the two developers are closer than the vote tally indicates. Gerding would be a good fit for this area, the Brewery Blocks in Portland is a fantastic urban space. It would also bode well for any historic preservation such as the post office.
 
Magellan has done/is doing the Lakeshore East development in Chicago. They've made sure that each of the buildings are distinct and unique, including the Aqua Tower. If they do something similar on a smaller scale as appropriate for Somerville, you won't be disappointed. They definitely won't do a monolithic build with copied and pasted buildings, as some have feared would happen if development in the square was dominated by a single developer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakeshore_East
 
McMorrow is always a great read and I fully agree with him here. The answer to the housing conundrum is right there in front of Boston - - Somerville has it.

The comments section, however, DO point out a truth though about the T needing to seriously step up its game in order to carry the weight of the increased ridership. If the region is going to evolve into the 22nd century, so must the T.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/...-that-could/1e287zFYLmzpZG4i2TjvQJ/story.html
 
Scalziand said:
Magellan has done/is doing the Lakeshore East development in Chicago. They've made sure that each of the buildings are distinct and unique, including the Aqua Tower. If they do something similar on a smaller scale as appropriate for Somerville, you won't be disappointed. They definitely won't do a monolithic build with copied and pasted buildings, as some have feared would happen if development in the square was dominated by a single developer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakeshore_East
Click to expand...

Magellan's smaller scale stuff is nondescript. Somerville missed an opportunity by not choosing Gerding Edlen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top