TL/DR: Brookline recently re-zoned the area to allow four stories, by right, to comply with the MBTA's Community Act, and the developers are proposing a six story building.
And they are using Brookline’s slow roll of affordable housing against them - they are seeking a state override of town zoning because Brookline currently falls short of affordable housing metrics.
Yeah, the 40B process. Brookline is poised to meet its quota but the units have not been built, so it's going to be fun to watch this race of getting a permit while you can with Brookline doing everything it can to do to drag out the process to meet its quota without this project.
California housing laws had a similar system, and there were some periods where the most nimby of towns like Santa Monica lost control of zoning.
In Santa Monica 16 projects got approved during that period. It was pretty awesome.
“ the 40B process. Brookline is poised to meet its quota but the units have not been built, ”
That’s not actually true if you read the article. Affordable housing in the pipeline is counted towards the 10% 40b requirement. The article states the affordable housing is not in the pipeline yet, it might not get into the pipeline before this developer gets the green light.
Brookline is also trying to get a 40b safe harbor by saying their affordable housing covers a certain % of their land, but it seems like the article says this may not be true according to the state.
What I wrote is in fact true--they have not been built. I didn't state they must be built to be counted.
>but it seems like the article says this may not be true according to the state.
Certifying 40B requires the states agreement. You are incorrect--the state has yet to form an opinion. The article just cautions, rightfully, that the state needs to concur before the Town can claim safe harbor. Towns and the state have disagreed before. What each considers "buildable land" is a big area for debate.
Great looking building!
> It’s concerning to me, deeply troubling, that the first proposal for Harvard Street is this proposal, that **violates everything** that the community envisioned and came to agreement on through compromise
What incredible hyperbole. That Brookline's electeds will employ such stark language against a building that will add much-needed housing near transit and is only 1-2 stories taller than a couple of other buildings in the vicinity is just so insane and out-of-touch.
I hope it squeaks in by-right, and the NIMBYs are forced to pound sand.
Listen, I’m fine with it being six stories, but I genuinely find that building ugly as hell. I wish it were easier to get nicer looking apartment blocks.
Weird you would think a town enforcing its code is insane or out-of-touch. What's the point of having democratically decided laws if those in charge could just do whatever they want? Anarchy.
They are not NIMBY. They upzoned to four stories--YIMBY. The developer is just being greedy. They bought the land zoned less than four stories. Then the town allowed four stories, and now they want it to be a six story lot--far more than they purchased. Pure greed.
There's no shortage of $2M apartments either, so unclear what "cirsis" these luxury units would solve!
Why would anyone want to do that though--devalue your own property and have more traffic, more noise, crowds. I get it that some people that can't afford to live in Brookline would enjoy seeing the rich people there have some nice things taken away from them out of spite, but kind of crazy to expect people to fuck themselves over.
Because you recognize that society doesnt function properly if everyone is selfish. I do agree we shouldnt be letting them make the decision though because it is against their interest. Zoning should be a state activity
Traffic and noise only come if a town continues to insist that everyone get around with cars even after the residents come in. If Brookline wants to mandate traffic into law by strictly separating commercial and residential uses that's a choice they can make.
As far as devaluing property, so what? Land value will increase because the development potential has increased.
Hi. I live in Brookline. I own a condo about half a mile from this proposed development. I think it’s awesome. Please don’t assume you know what the people most impacted by this development think.
Why? Because you're angry rich people have nice things? Why do you get to decide what happens to their land?
Hilarious you call these people that have way more money than you "losers".
Owning land is great. I highly recommend buying as much as possible.
Sometimes I just stand on my land and marvel that I own it.
I am the Lord of my land.
Good for you. Its not that rich people are losers, just smug ones like you
Also, its NOT their land. If it was, there wouldn’t be a building proposed to be built on it. Rich folks from Brookline assume the whole area is theirs to keep frozen forever, the entitlement is absurd.
Hi I live in Brookline too and it should be much more dense because of its proximity to Boston. If you want a sprawling estate move to Sudbury or something.
Why did you call renter entitled? It’s obvious to me that you have an issue with renters having a say in the town based on your comments that I have read on this thread.
It goes to my earlier comment that idiots here expect landowners to vote against their own interests. Then here someone jumps in to claim, "I live in Brookline and will vote for it!" Sure you will, because they aren't a land owner.
Seems like you don't know what it means in this context.
>Urban sprawl has been described as the **unrestricted growth in many urban areas of housing, commercial development, and roads over large expanses of land**, with little concern for very dense urban planning
> I get it that some people that can't afford to live in Brookline would enjoy seeing the rich people there have some nice things taken away from them out of spite
This is definitely the kind of thing that a good faith interlocutor would say.
As a Brookline resident I fail to see any difference between a four store and a six story building here. They should be applauded for including only nine parking spaces for that many apartments which almost guarantees residents will be car-free.
The biggest downside is the line at Kupel's might be a little longer since if I lived there I'd be having bagels every morning.
I don’t care much about parking spaces, but I feel bad for anyone who discovers they need a car because of a job change or the lack of reliability from the MBTA. State reps outside of 128 will never pay for the MBTA to be a high-quality transit system. They want it treading water, on the verge of collapse, otherwise they’ll feel that they’re being hoodwinked into supporting the profligate lifestyles of latte-sipping urbanites and shiftless freeloaders.
Creating housing for more obligate-public-transit-users is fine, but more users won’t fix the T.
Those folks will rent parking, either from the building if it's available or off Craigslist. Being apartments people can always move if they want to be closer to work or need different amenities.
More transit ridership can only increase the priority of fixing the T too. It also gives the T more fare revenue which can only help its budget shortfalls.
Probably not in Brookline, since there's an overnight parking ban. Of course people from Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, Medford, etc do. They just won't live in this building. Or they'll rent off street parking separately.
So in your mind, people that have roommates and rent for under $2k a month might have a car but the people renting $2M apartments will take the bus to get groceries? Nah, that's a silly fantasy people think miraculous happens because you built "density". People that live in these luxury building are driving or ubering. More traffic either way.
I was responding to:
> Lots of people own cars without deeded parking. Lots.
My point was that if the building lacks parking, then tenants who own a car simply won't live there. If they live there, there's still 9 spaces available, presumably for rent separate from the apartment, and there's still third party spaces available off Craigslist.
This is especially true in a town like Brookline that has an overnight street parking ban.
Re:traffic, taking the bus to get groceries, etc - it's possible, but unlikely that traffic increases that much from a building with such limited parking. Ubers are a valid concern but if the area is walk/bike/transit friendly you minimize that. If anything I'd imagine delivery vehicles might be more of a problem. I'm probably not taking the bus to get groceries, but why would I Uber if I can get groceries delivered to my door? Even that is solvable with a loading zone, either on the street or where the parking for this place will be.
And your point is wrong. Plenty of people live in Brookline have cars without deeded onsite parking. Plenty of people live in Boston and never register their car here and don't get resident stickers. People rent parking. They do it all the time.
Delivery vehicles increase traffic too. Good point.
This site is across from a Tatte I propose the following Law, “The Tatte Tower”:
Any property abutting or across from a Tatte is eligible for 10 stories of market rate construction (or 10+2 affordable), by right.
If your neighborhood is bougie enough for a Tatte it can handle 10 or 12 stories getting dropped in it.
I remember reading about this, 6 story is the tallest you can go without the building cost going up significantly. That’s why most of the “commie-blocks” are 6 story or less.
Exactly - 5 stories is the limit you can practically build with classing framing wooden construction, then it has to be steel top to bottom. The “5 over 1” is 5 stories wood over 1 story steel
I find the “commie block” term very amusing
Five over ones can look decent sometimes. “The Albion” at the corner of Dorchester St/Ave and Preble St at Andrews Corner is actually a really beautiful building.
But the shitty ones you see off the highway in Texas? Yea those suck lol
Yeah because 5 over 1 is basically wood construction for 5 stories with a concrete or steel base for parking or ground floor commercial/retail. Once you get out of wood construction it's pretty expensive.
Imo 5 overs are pretty good all things considered. If you think about it, Somerville is the densest City in MA but it's almost entirely double and triple deckers. If we allowed 5 overs on every main road in MA, we'd have the housing crisis solved in a decade. The problem is these nonsense zoning laws. Instead of 4 stories they should have just aligned with industry standard 5 to 6 stories. Of course 4 is still better than 1 or 2, but considering there's a housing crisis I think we can do more.
Places I lived have +10 story buildings as standard, even in nice areas.
People here freak out because someone wants to build 6 story buildings. This is the mindset that makes a community worse, not better.
Y'all talking about the building but I can't stop looking at that substandard bike lane sandwiched between the travel way and parking with zero buffer.
yeah, i wish harvard ave through brookline had a protected lane. There is one block of sidewalk-bike lane-parking, near coolidge corner, but it should be the whole street.
If they are going to offer a variance on building size the counter should be comfort facilities for all modes of transportation especially with car parking minimums waived too. You can make more money, but make sure everyone is safe please
TL/DR: Brookline recently re-zoned the area to allow four stories, by right, to comply with the MBTA's Community Act, and the developers are proposing a six story building.
And they are using Brookline’s slow roll of affordable housing against them - they are seeking a state override of town zoning because Brookline currently falls short of affordable housing metrics.
Yeah, the 40B process. Brookline is poised to meet its quota but the units have not been built, so it's going to be fun to watch this race of getting a permit while you can with Brookline doing everything it can to do to drag out the process to meet its quota without this project.
California housing laws had a similar system, and there were some periods where the most nimby of towns like Santa Monica lost control of zoning. In Santa Monica 16 projects got approved during that period. It was pretty awesome.
“ the 40B process. Brookline is poised to meet its quota but the units have not been built, ” That’s not actually true if you read the article. Affordable housing in the pipeline is counted towards the 10% 40b requirement. The article states the affordable housing is not in the pipeline yet, it might not get into the pipeline before this developer gets the green light. Brookline is also trying to get a 40b safe harbor by saying their affordable housing covers a certain % of their land, but it seems like the article says this may not be true according to the state.
What I wrote is in fact true--they have not been built. I didn't state they must be built to be counted. >but it seems like the article says this may not be true according to the state. Certifying 40B requires the states agreement. You are incorrect--the state has yet to form an opinion. The article just cautions, rightfully, that the state needs to concur before the Town can claim safe harbor. Towns and the state have disagreed before. What each considers "buildable land" is a big area for debate.
Great looking building! > It’s concerning to me, deeply troubling, that the first proposal for Harvard Street is this proposal, that **violates everything** that the community envisioned and came to agreement on through compromise What incredible hyperbole. That Brookline's electeds will employ such stark language against a building that will add much-needed housing near transit and is only 1-2 stories taller than a couple of other buildings in the vicinity is just so insane and out-of-touch. I hope it squeaks in by-right, and the NIMBYs are forced to pound sand.
Brookline is very much in-touch with people anyone who isn't part of the top 5% out of its town.
They really should be dissolved back into Boston.
Listen, I’m fine with it being six stories, but I genuinely find that building ugly as hell. I wish it were easier to get nicer looking apartment blocks.
Weird you would think a town enforcing its code is insane or out-of-touch. What's the point of having democratically decided laws if those in charge could just do whatever they want? Anarchy. They are not NIMBY. They upzoned to four stories--YIMBY. The developer is just being greedy. They bought the land zoned less than four stories. Then the town allowed four stories, and now they want it to be a six story lot--far more than they purchased. Pure greed. There's no shortage of $2M apartments either, so unclear what "cirsis" these luxury units would solve!
YIMBY would be upzoning without needing the state to pass a law requiring it be done
Why would anyone want to do that though--devalue your own property and have more traffic, more noise, crowds. I get it that some people that can't afford to live in Brookline would enjoy seeing the rich people there have some nice things taken away from them out of spite, but kind of crazy to expect people to fuck themselves over.
Because you recognize that society doesnt function properly if everyone is selfish. I do agree we shouldnt be letting them make the decision though because it is against their interest. Zoning should be a state activity
The state just passed a law that Brookline complied with that upzoned this area. That's the state democratic will in action.
Traffic and noise only come if a town continues to insist that everyone get around with cars even after the residents come in. If Brookline wants to mandate traffic into law by strictly separating commercial and residential uses that's a choice they can make. As far as devaluing property, so what? Land value will increase because the development potential has increased.
Hi. I live in Brookline. I own a condo about half a mile from this proposed development. I think it’s awesome. Please don’t assume you know what the people most impacted by this development think.
For it's proximity to Boston and size Brookline should have like double the amount of people. Fuck these losers.
Why? Because you're angry rich people have nice things? Why do you get to decide what happens to their land? Hilarious you call these people that have way more money than you "losers".
“Their land” lmfaooooooo
Owning land is great. I highly recommend buying as much as possible. Sometimes I just stand on my land and marvel that I own it. I am the Lord of my land.
Good for you. Its not that rich people are losers, just smug ones like you Also, its NOT their land. If it was, there wouldn’t be a building proposed to be built on it. Rich folks from Brookline assume the whole area is theirs to keep frozen forever, the entitlement is absurd.
Their town, not yours. How entitled you appear to be to tell people how to live, just to accommodate you.
Hi I live in Brookline too and it should be much more dense because of its proximity to Boston. If you want a sprawling estate move to Sudbury or something.
If you want dense urban sprawl, move to Brighton. Do you own or rent? I suspect you rent. A lot of entitled people rent what they can't afford to buy.
Why do renters have less of a say in their government than property owners in your mind?
I didn't state such. In fact, the opposite is generally true--tenant has voting rights, whereby the landlord may not if they don't live in that town.
Why did you call renter entitled? It’s obvious to me that you have an issue with renters having a say in the town based on your comments that I have read on this thread.
It goes to my earlier comment that idiots here expect landowners to vote against their own interests. Then here someone jumps in to claim, "I live in Brookline and will vote for it!" Sure you will, because they aren't a land owner.
Not surprising you don't even know what "sprawl" is
Seems like you don't know what it means in this context. >Urban sprawl has been described as the **unrestricted growth in many urban areas of housing, commercial development, and roads over large expanses of land**, with little concern for very dense urban planning
>with little concern for very dense urban planning I also must've missed in what world Brookline or Brighton count as "large expanses of land"
Yeah, you seem to be missing a lot actually.
> I get it that some people that can't afford to live in Brookline would enjoy seeing the rich people there have some nice things taken away from them out of spite This is definitely the kind of thing that a good faith interlocutor would say.
As a Brookline resident I fail to see any difference between a four store and a six story building here. They should be applauded for including only nine parking spaces for that many apartments which almost guarantees residents will be car-free. The biggest downside is the line at Kupel's might be a little longer since if I lived there I'd be having bagels every morning.
I don’t care much about parking spaces, but I feel bad for anyone who discovers they need a car because of a job change or the lack of reliability from the MBTA. State reps outside of 128 will never pay for the MBTA to be a high-quality transit system. They want it treading water, on the verge of collapse, otherwise they’ll feel that they’re being hoodwinked into supporting the profligate lifestyles of latte-sipping urbanites and shiftless freeloaders. Creating housing for more obligate-public-transit-users is fine, but more users won’t fix the T.
Those folks will rent parking, either from the building if it's available or off Craigslist. Being apartments people can always move if they want to be closer to work or need different amenities. More transit ridership can only increase the priority of fixing the T too. It also gives the T more fare revenue which can only help its budget shortfalls.
Lmfao you don’t need to feel bad for them. They can pay for a spot or drive in circles for 30 minutes like the rest of us in the area
Two stories of housing is the difference.
If no difference, then make if four stories and comply with zoning. Lots of people own cars without deeded parking. Lots.
Probably not in Brookline, since there's an overnight parking ban. Of course people from Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, Medford, etc do. They just won't live in this building. Or they'll rent off street parking separately.
So in your mind, people that have roommates and rent for under $2k a month might have a car but the people renting $2M apartments will take the bus to get groceries? Nah, that's a silly fantasy people think miraculous happens because you built "density". People that live in these luxury building are driving or ubering. More traffic either way.
I was responding to: > Lots of people own cars without deeded parking. Lots. My point was that if the building lacks parking, then tenants who own a car simply won't live there. If they live there, there's still 9 spaces available, presumably for rent separate from the apartment, and there's still third party spaces available off Craigslist. This is especially true in a town like Brookline that has an overnight street parking ban. Re:traffic, taking the bus to get groceries, etc - it's possible, but unlikely that traffic increases that much from a building with such limited parking. Ubers are a valid concern but if the area is walk/bike/transit friendly you minimize that. If anything I'd imagine delivery vehicles might be more of a problem. I'm probably not taking the bus to get groceries, but why would I Uber if I can get groceries delivered to my door? Even that is solvable with a loading zone, either on the street or where the parking for this place will be.
And your point is wrong. Plenty of people live in Brookline have cars without deeded onsite parking. Plenty of people live in Boston and never register their car here and don't get resident stickers. People rent parking. They do it all the time. Delivery vehicles increase traffic too. Good point.
There is a five story building one block over on Harvard. Build it.
This site is across from a Tatte I propose the following Law, “The Tatte Tower”: Any property abutting or across from a Tatte is eligible for 10 stories of market rate construction (or 10+2 affordable), by right. If your neighborhood is bougie enough for a Tatte it can handle 10 or 12 stories getting dropped in it.
A lot of us lost faith in Brookline'e ability to zone when they zoned that shit for just four stories.
Just gonna drop the pro housing Brookline link here: https://brooklineforeveryone.com/
This is ridiculous nonsense. A 6 story building is a good start but we need much more and taller to make a dent on the housing crisis
I remember reading about this, 6 story is the tallest you can go without the building cost going up significantly. That’s why most of the “commie-blocks” are 6 story or less.
Exactly - 5 stories is the limit you can practically build with classing framing wooden construction, then it has to be steel top to bottom. The “5 over 1” is 5 stories wood over 1 story steel I find the “commie block” term very amusing
Five over ones can look decent sometimes. “The Albion” at the corner of Dorchester St/Ave and Preble St at Andrews Corner is actually a really beautiful building. But the shitty ones you see off the highway in Texas? Yea those suck lol
Yeah because 5 over 1 is basically wood construction for 5 stories with a concrete or steel base for parking or ground floor commercial/retail. Once you get out of wood construction it's pretty expensive. Imo 5 overs are pretty good all things considered. If you think about it, Somerville is the densest City in MA but it's almost entirely double and triple deckers. If we allowed 5 overs on every main road in MA, we'd have the housing crisis solved in a decade. The problem is these nonsense zoning laws. Instead of 4 stories they should have just aligned with industry standard 5 to 6 stories. Of course 4 is still better than 1 or 2, but considering there's a housing crisis I think we can do more.
Brookline should have three times as much housing as it currently does. Can’t wait to see it go up.
Brookline, the epitome of “I got mine, fuck everybody else” limousine liberal NIMBYism
They're talking about you u/Notamforlove
Build it. The pearl clutching from the NIMBYS in Brookline will be fully worth it
Whenever you see the words "zoning vision," just substitute "NIMBYism" and everything makes much more sense.
Places I lived have +10 story buildings as standard, even in nice areas. People here freak out because someone wants to build 6 story buildings. This is the mindset that makes a community worse, not better.
Y'all talking about the building but I can't stop looking at that substandard bike lane sandwiched between the travel way and parking with zero buffer.
yeah, i wish harvard ave through brookline had a protected lane. There is one block of sidewalk-bike lane-parking, near coolidge corner, but it should be the whole street.
If they are going to offer a variance on building size the counter should be comfort facilities for all modes of transportation especially with car parking minimums waived too. You can make more money, but make sure everyone is safe please