Brookline sues over proposed expansion of its half of Hancock Village complex

No more housing, Brookline says in suit against both the developer and the state agency that approved it, Wicked Local reports.

The apartment complex is split between South Brookline and West Roxbury; all of the new units would be on the Brookline side.

Neighborhoods: 

Topics: 

    Free tagging: 

    Comments

    All those poor people uber

    By on

    All those poor people uber liberal Brookline residents claim to care SO much about are supposed to stay over the border in Allston and Brighton.

    up
    14

    As an uber-liberal Brookliner,

    By on

    I'd point out that no one consulted me. I'd further state that representative democracy doesn't always allow for one to elect a representative that is perfectly in line with one's own beliefs on every issue. I'm still new to this area, so I can't honestly say what I'd vote for if given the opportunity in this specific instance, but the insinuation that liberals, Brookliners, or both are hypocrites isn't well-reasoned. But, then again, this is the comments section of an internet news site, so...nevermind, you're doing great! Have fun trolling wherever you head next! ;-)

    NIMBYism

    By on

    at it's finest. I'd get a good laugh if they put in below market rate housing and started accepting large numbers of section 8. On a side note: Do you have to be Chinese, Indian or Russian to rent at Hancock Village?

    up
    14

    Very true

    By on

    Typical Southie/Dorchester blue collar conservative: can't say I like them poor folks, but they can live next door to me as long as they're quiet
    Brookline uber-liberal: my heart bleeds for the under-served, disadvantaged and disenfranchised, they can express themselves in any way they want and can do whatever they want wherever* they want

    *as long as they do it in Dorchester/Roxbury/Mattapan/etc and not within a three mile radius of my house, otherwise I'm calling my local gestapo, I mean Brookline PD.

    up
    16

    No?

    By on

    Of course you are - accusing anyone advocating against section 8 housing and welfaroids in their neighborhoods of being bigoted and racist, then filing a lawsuit to prevent the welfaroids from moving into your town. How is that not hypocrisy? Why are you posting smug (and meaningless) comments instead of having a rally at Brookline city hall, demanding more section 8 housing and housing projects in Brookline?

    up
    12

    Hancock Village is Market Rate

    By on

    And not low market either. A 2-BR townhouse style unit is approx $1800-2200 per month. At that rent it is far above the rent payment standards for a Section 8 voucher.

    Hancock Village as an apartment complex is attractive for families because it is townhouse style, split between West Roxbury and Brookline, has large green spaces and a community feel. As a result there are a LOT of young couples (many would fall in the upwardly mobile category) with children who live there.

    This isn't Brookline NIMBYS advocating against affordable housing it is Brookline advocating against more children in the school system and a few NIMBYS with big old houses complaining about losing a little green space buffer that separates them from the renters.

    Brookline has has decades to

    By on

    Brookline has has decades to get to the states minimum percentage of affordable housing (10%) to avoid these kinds of projects. But, they haven't, and every time a developer tries to do a 40b development they spend time and resources fighting it and then do nothing until the next one. If they would just meet this low threshold, which many neighboring communities have, they wouldn't have to worry about this again.

    up
    21

    Exactly! If Cambridge can put

    By on

    Exactly! If Cambridge can put its money where its Liberal mouth is and build public housing then so can Brookline!

    up
    19

    Logic

    By on

    Brookline doesn't usually make much sense. At their Town Meeting yesterday, they voted to not reduce the number of off-street parking spaces for 1-bedroom and studio apartments to anything below 2 spaces per unit, even though this current policy has resulted in lots of unnecessary unused off-street parking. Their fear is that smaller apartments would attract college students as well as families whose children would flood the public schools. Never mind that recent studies show that college students are more likely to rent 3+ apartments so they can split the rent more cheaply, and most families with children don't live in 1-bedroom or studio apartments. But hey what sense is logic when we can vote based on irrational, illogical fears?!

    up
    14

    Why are people

    By on

    Who don't even live the Hancock Village development complaining about losing green space? The nearby residents simply don't want more apartments, especially the affordable housing type. And those children of renters filling up "their" schools - the nerve!

    up
    10

    I lived in Hancock village for 2 years.

    25 years ago there were probably 2-5 kids who went to the Brookline or Boston public schools who lived there. Today I bet there are a few hundred. Brookline is having a school enrollment problem, and they are realizing that their school space they just expanded and spend hundreds of millions on over the last 10 years simply isn't going be adequate if they keep building there or in the town in general.

    And the green space that would be eliminated would be two nice sections that separate the current village and the single family homes on Beverly Rd. and Russett Rd. Lots of kids play there on both sections, the Boston and Brookline parts.

    I don't think this has to do with affordable housing either. Brookline has 3 or 4 public housing complexes that towns like Newton, Wellesley or Needham doesn't have, and this new development wouldn't have too much of an impact in that department.

    Not quite

    By on

    Sure, it's an inconvenience, but it needs to be built somewhere, meaning some other town will have to deal with school overcrowding and loss of green space. But that's OK as long as it's not Brookline, right? Better yet, why don't all the alleged liberals have some self-respect and say what they really mean instead of beating around the bush with their bullcrap excuses? Low-income housing, unless the occupants are carefully selected, increases crime rate, trashes the neighborhood, drives down property values and decreases school quality. Brookline residents pay top dollars so they don't have to deal with it, simple as that.

    Yea not quite,

    I've actually gone to these meetings because I own property in the area.

    And no, you don't have to build on Green space just because People "need" to live there. People don't "need" to live in that green space.

    This is being built because a company stands to make millions of dollars off it, not because it "needs" to be built somewhere. There will be very few low income units here, and the housing developments at 22 High, Egmont St, Chestnut St, and Walnut St, would dwarf the amount of low income units that would exist in this location.

    Residents are not worried about crime (doesn't really bring that much low income to the area), or trash (Chestnut Hill Reality is top-notch when it comes to that).

    And wouldn't anyone who owns property worry about the value of it. I would assume you would get less for your home if there is a 4 story apt. building in your back yard compared to a green space park where your kids are used to playing.