Hey, there! Log in / Register

Latest Forest Hills residential plans unwrapped

Proposed Residences at Forest Hills

Architect's rendering. See it larger.

Developers this week submitted their formal plans for turning a parking lot across from the Forest Hills T stop into a 252-unit, three-building apartment complex with retail and restaurant space along the street.

The Residences at Forest Hills project calls for 140 parking spaces for residents and guests - compared to the more than 300 spaces at the Laz lot that currently serve T commuters and people going to West Roxbury Municipal Court. The complex would have more bicycle spaces than apartments - and a free bike-share program for residents.

Criterion Development Partners of Dallas says 50 of the units in the six-story, wood-framed buildings would be marketed as affordable - 17 more than required by the city - most for people making no more than 70% of the Boston area median income. The units would consist of 58 studios, 125 one-bedroom units, 58 two-bedroom units and 11 three-bedroom units.

The Residences at Forest Hills is expected to appeal to renters who appreciate the neighborhood walkability, nearby transit access, the bicycle path, nearby shops and restaurants, and the neighborhood’s abundant greenspace.

The developers say the complex will both anchor and help define the key crossing of the Arborway and Washington Street, including: "Tree like columns support the building above, highlighting the dense landscape character of the adjacent Arborway." Also, they say, it fits in with the city's long-term goals for revitalizing Forest Hills:

The full vision identifies the potential for multiple underutilized publicly-owned sites to transform the neighborhood from a scattering of industrial and infrastructure-related uses to a vital, mixeduse neighborhood anchored by a major transportation hub. Implementation of this vision has been ongoing though other Washington Street parcels remain either vacant, or in the case of the MBTA bus servicing facility abutting the Arborway, are being used for purposes that disrupt the neighborhood urban fabric.

The Project will continue the long-term revitalization of Jamaica Plain's Washington Street corridor - reconnecting the Stony Brook neighborhood to Forest Hills by transforming a parking lot into a lively and dense residential community with retail on the ground floor. When completed, the Project will provide an improved commercial corridor along Washington Street and provide additional residential density directly adjacent to the Forest Hills Station. It will animate the edges of what is now a barren and uninviting sidewalk with new street trees and lighting. The Project will continue, along its northern border, the application of the Greenbelt Protection Overlay District with landscaping along the Arborway. Use and

More renderings from the Residences at Forest Hills filing:

Residences at Forest Hills
Residences at Forest Hills
Residences at Forest Hills

Residences at Forest Hills project notification form (26M PDF).

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

An added amenity is units will have a bullseye view of the quarreling homeless down below. Being a longtime Forest Hills resident, you get used to it.

up
Voting closed 0

I didn't spot when this project would be completed?

up
Voting closed 0

so where are the 300 cars that park in that lot every day going to go? that lot gets full every day along with the smaller one attached to the T.
I really want to know because I park there. The buses take forever to get to forest hill so I drive my car in with my husband and we take the car home together as well.

up
Voting closed 0

Depending on circumstance, people will either:

- Park on the street near one of the JP Orange Line stops and walk (probably a further walk than present);
- Park at one of the more distant suburban commuter rail stops;
- Take a bus;
- Some minority will adopt biking or another alternate transit method;
- Find another job.

It sucks to be in that position, but building housing is a greater good that helps solve a pressing need. Park-and-ride at terminal light rail stops is a failed model for Boston (even with more parking, like Alewife) and can't scale to meet our future needs. Looking ahead 5, 10 & 15 years, it makes so much more sense to build Forest Hills to be housing-rich than to hold onto a park-and-ride model that doesn't work well in this location.

up
Voting closed 0

And some folks who currently drive/park will (not immediately, but in time) choose to move closer to public transit. Many/most won't, and probably none of them will move into the new building right away, but there is the option.

up
Voting closed 0

So you want me to sell my house that I worked so long and hard to purchase and move into a rental? Mind you that I own in Boston and support the increase in tax for the neighborhood initiative. What I do mind is the making it harder for me to take the t. I live all the way in Westie near the Dedham line. The only option for the bus is the thirty six and still walking a good distance to get to it. That is not reliable due to how long it takes and how often they run. I'm an hourly paid worker. I need to get to work on time. Displacing people who are trying to use the t isn't helpful when there's no alternative that won't cost me more money.

up
Voting closed 0

I'm not suggesting it doesn't stink for some people (e.g., you), and will present some people (you) with worse trade-offs than you currently have.

My comment above was more to point out that collectively, it may not suck. Once it's built, > 300 people will now live MUCH nearer to a T station than were able to before. And collectively, one hopes that the people who live there will be people who like the trade-offs they make to live there. Some of them probably will be renters moving from other rentals, but some will probably be people selling a house or condo, downsizing, moving closer to the city, or whatever.

A knock-on effect of having the lot be developed rather than a surface lot is that some percentage of the people who currently drive will stop driving to Forest Hills because of the increased hassles, costs, and lack of parking. None of us will notice the difference in traffic patterns as a result of those changes in behavior. But, there will be some marginal decrease in traffic due to those decisions, and some marginal improvement to the quality of bus service that runs on the same roads.

Will your bus service from West Rox/Dedham to FH get noticeably better as a result? No way. It'll take transit priority and dedicated bus lanes for you to notice an improvement. I support both of those moves on Washington St and Hyde Park Ave. I wish the MBTA did too.

up
Voting closed 0

This is just growth, it's not transitioning more of the current demand to using the transportation. People who were there before will now have fewer options.

up
Voting closed 0

I wouldn't mind parking at one of the other commuter rail lots except that the commuter rail passes are so much more expensive starting from Roslindale Village on. And then I'm still paying for parking. I understand that housing is needed but I find it hard to believe that these will be affordable and it's inconveniencing people who who are in tight financial spots but need to drive at least part of the way due to time constraints.

up
Voting closed 0

This area is in the midst of a major use transition. This is no longer going to be a park and ride location in any way, shape, or form. If you want to park and ride, you'll have to use a lot farther out, maybe on commuter rail.

Cities change. The reason the location was ever used as a parking lot is just a historical accident. Stony Brook runs directly under it; its course was changed repeatedly over the 19th and 20th centuries. It was put in a culvert when the railroad was built - the single greatest expense in the railroad project - but it reemerged to the surface at Tower Street, cutting the front part of the lots from Tower up to Morton (then) off from the back parts, and from the expansive grounds of the mansions built along Orchardhill.

When the ground level parkway (back to the future!) was pushed through at the end of the nineteenth century, it was much wider than Morton Street, and the corner was reshaped and Stony Brook rerouted again. At that point, there was a broad square in front of Tower Street and Forest Hills Station, which remained there for decades until Washington street was rerouted. The corner of Washington and Merton (now called Hyde Park and New Washington) had a three-story house with a funeral parlor in the front in 1899.

By 1905, Forest Hills Station was moved up the street, to more or less where it currently is, but the area that is today the parking lot still had Stony Brook cutting it in half about a hundred feet back. Around 1900, that lot was cut off at an angle to widen Washington Street (aka Forest Hills Square). The funeral home at the corner of Washington and Morton was torn down. The string of storefronts on Washington were picked up and moved back along the new street line . So if you're having a burger at Grass Fed, that building used to be a few dozen feet farther forward.

The part of Stony Brook that bisected the lot was finally placed underground sometime around 1914, giving access from Washington Street to what is now the back of the parking lot (then three separate lots on Orchardhill). At that point, people were starting to drive cars, enough to support gas stations and parking lots. The corner lot was sold to Standard Oil, a gas station was opened in 1919, and the land behind the gas station (and over the subterranean Stony Brook) started to be used as a parking lot. The gas station was closed when the Casey Overpass was built, but the parking lot remained. It was an unattractive parcel, wedged between an elevated railway and a viaduct.

If Stony Brook had been placed underground twenty years previously, there never would have been a parking lot there; it would have been more suitable for industrial or retail uses. If that corner hadn't been reshaped a half-dozen times in less than a century, likewise. It's maybe the oldest parking lot in the city, but the use it's changing to is a use it might already have had ages ago if it weren't for the unusual degree of change in local roadways and the presence of Stony Brook. Boston's population is growing rapidly, with great demand, and areas that were neglected thirty years ago are going to be developed today. The idea that a lot at this now-prime location should continue to be used for parking is preposterous.

up
Voting closed 0

That is not sustainable. Just adding housing near these locations without parking for other people reduces the number of potential people who can use them.

Places changed in the past. That doesn't mean the area needs to change the way you are suggesting.

These places have parking so they can encourage people to be able to use them. The circumstances about why parking was placed there in the first place is irrelevant. That is why all these places have parking near them so it's not just residents who can use them.

up
Voting closed 0

The lot is privately owned, so the owners kind of can do whatever they want with it.

I sympathize with those who park at Forest Hills. The expectation that those who use the lot will simply take bases, walk, or whatever is unrealistic. Even before the construction, those lots got full quickly weekdays, but real estate is what it is. The land is worth more developed.

up
Voting closed 0

... already fills up pretty early on work days.

up
Voting closed 0

Remember when the T had a temporary lot over in the Arborway yard? That filled, too.

up
Voting closed 0

These places don't "have parking so they can encourage people to be able to use them." They have parking because it's an easy way for the owner to make a quick buck without doing much (or not - the lot went into bankruptcy in 2010).

The lot across the street from Forest Hills is not owned by the MBTA, and its use as a parking lot is not a matter of collusion or cooperation. It's simply a historical accident based on the fact that the land was impaired and/or unattractive up to the current time. Now, with all the bridges finally coming down, the lot is neither impaired nor unattractive, and the area is also undergoing a housing boom. The owner of the lot wants to make more money from it than they can parking cars on it, and they will. LAZ saved it from foreclosure in 2010 for 6 million. They'll make their money back and change.

Also bear in mind that the number of people who will be using the lot (and probably the T) as residents of the apartment complex will be greater than the number who have been using it as drivers of automobiles.

up
Voting closed 0

The parking was not in reference to the new parking for the housing, but the parking that people are using now who don't live there.

The point was that having parking for more than just residents allows more people to use it. That's why other places have parking, and advocating for less parking at these places reduces the number of people that can it.

That the ownership may result in a different situation here is irrelevant the point that the parking is used by more than just residents in places where that provides more options for people that don't live there.

Also, the number of housing units proposed is less than the number of spaces there now. Therefore, there's not necessarily going to be more people from the apartments using it than people who pared there before.

up
Voting closed 0

I was talking about something else - the demise of the parking lot.

As to why the new development won't have extra parking, why would it? They'd have to be able to charge far over the going rate to build out the spaces.

The local retail won't need rental parking to survive . There are going to be around a thousand new people living at that intersection. It'll be hard to park, but it'll be harder to get a table.

The number of people using this property will increase- not the number of cars. That's good.

up
Voting closed 0

The land is too valuable and too convenient for it to have stayed an access point for people from the outer neighborhoods forever. It sucks, but it is what it is.

The sooner Westie and Rozzie figure out they need to start advocating for the OLX, the better. I'm afraid we're going to get completely shut out of non-bus access before anyone comes to that realization, which would be unfortunate, since the bus access SUCKS (and I take it every day since I don't own a car, before somebody jumps down my throat). Driving further in and then getting on the T is going to become impossible. Relying on crappy - and exponentially more expensive - commuter rail is difficult for people who've moved further out due to gentrification of JP, etc.

Converting the Needham line at least partially to Orange, possibly incorporating a park and ride further down in Dedham, is an unavoidable eventuality.

up
Voting closed 0

That's 2 per cent of Forest Hills passengers using that parking lot. It is far more important that we make it possible for people to actually live near a station than preserve the right of 2% to drive to it. Those 300 people could fit in five buses, by the way, which would be a much better approach for moving them to the station.

up
Voting closed 0

i support this. It looks nice, and will solve the congestion problem of people blocking traffic trying to park in the lot it's replacing.

up
Voting closed 0

That doesn't make any sense. You are just reducing the ability of people to use it because they relied on the parking.

up
Voting closed 0

My biggest issue with this project, as a near-neighbor who has long battled for the coming greenspace of the Casey Arborway corridor, is the insensitive and non-existent set back from the under-construction adjacent pedestrian and bike paths of the Arborway. Building B in particular looms over that greenspace, throwing shade over the parkway. The second rendering in Adam's post imagines a lovely little flowered bed in front of Building B, as if it is part of their project space rather than the public parkway.

I don't begrudge them trying to get that approved, but will absolutely argue that by building to the property line they'd be diminishing the public experience in that spot.
Clay Harper
ArborwayMatters

up
Voting closed 0

In addition to a pedestrian sidewalk and separate bike path along the Arborway side of Building B, the Casey Arborway landscape planners have designed a surface "dry riverbed" feature running northeast from that spot across the median to the northern pedestrian and bike paths by the bus yard. That dry river will follow the former course of the Stony Brook, now buried in a culvert underground. Signage will tell some of its history. A very nice touch, that.

up
Voting closed 0

If there's no grocery store at Forest Hills when all is said and done it'll be a damn shame.

up
Voting closed 0

There's already a grocery store at FH - Harvest has been there for a few years now. Just south of the station on Washington St.

Too expensive for my taste and needs, but still a good store and gets a portion of my business because we can walk there and it's good for fill-in needs.

For bigger shops, we still head to Roche in W Rox, or hit stores like Roche in DTX as part of our subway-based daily commutes.

up
Voting closed 0