Hey, there! Log in / Register

New condos approved for Alpine Street in Roxbury

New condos approved for Alpine Street in Roxbury

Architect's rendering.

The Board of Appeals today approved a 14-unit building cooked up by Darryl Settles and his partner for the corner of Alpine and Regent streets.

The four-story building would have two affordable units - a studio and a one-bedroom unit - Settles' attorney, Joseph Feaster, told the board. The building would have one three-bedroom unit, and eight parking spaces, he said, adding the building would also have a roof deck.

The mayor's office and the BPDA supported the project. The BPDA is involved in part because it will sell a small parcel on Regent Street for the project.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 

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

Comments

Good for them. And Daryll, but the way, we need more of your addicting food! Any chance of more restaurants in the future????

up
Voting closed 2

Is this replacing an existing building? Or is it going up on vacant land?

up
Voting closed 2

Looks like there was a house there a long time ago, but the land must have been vacant for a long time given the trees: Click Here.

up
Voting closed 4

Was torn down for redevelopment between 1955 and 1969.

Of course, BRA didn't exactly get around to the promised redevelopment down there …

up
Voting closed 7

Location here.

There's actually quite a bit of vacant land down that way; several lots on that block alone. A little taste of the Rust Belt in Roxbury. I can't imagine it will stay that way for long, but I'm sure there are lot of roadblocks to developing housing there. And I'm sure that the usual "building housing will cause gentrification" nonsense will get trotted out. BPDA owned the corner lot, which combined to make it a buildable site.

One of the empty lots on the block is owned by the Trust for Public Land, which I'll never really understand. Maybe it's a community garden or something, but it certainly looks like a buildable lot to me. BPDA owns the empty lot on the opposite corner, too.

Then there's the block between Fountain, Circuit, Herman and Regent, which was bulldozed in the 50s or 60s and has sat vacant since. It's private property (or signed as such, at least) although the City's assessor database doesn't exactly say who owns it. That's two acres which could house 20 or 40 or 60 families and generate tax base for the City but instead lies fallow. I wonder … what exactly is the BPDA doing?

up
Voting closed 0

Those cement steps to nothing are really creepy.

Ari, nice post. This is exactly the kind of place that would benefit from development.

up
Voting closed 7

The house originally upon this site was still extant in the summer of 1967.

A photo of the house and its final residents can be found here.

Hardly looks like a "slum" to me. So much for urban renewal...

Fuck the BRA then, now and forever.

up
Voting closed 3

Lot of fires, too.

Entire blocks were destroyed by insurance frauds.

up
Voting closed 4

One of the finer examples of foreground/background distortion you'll see. Resulting in the project looking about half the size that it will really be. A few points are taken away for including a superfluous to-scale figure along the edge of the building - which kinda gives away the trick a little vis a vis the 'across the street' dogwalkers.

up
Voting closed 2

they must have lost points because it still looks like crap, right?
Great food.
horrible #crapitechture

up
Voting closed 5

Send Adam the renderings for the beautifully-crafted affordable apartment development that you will be offering up in the near future.

up
Voting closed 3

never opine on anything ever again because, unless you're Swirly, you probably aren't a professional [fill in the blank] with ooodles of talent and years of experience doing [fill in the blank] and therefore are not allowed to express an opinion on [fill in the blank].

I am NOT an architect. Don't plan on being one, but I do know when I see an ugly-ass, lowest common denominator box that looks like crap. I know it because EVERY GODDAMNED PROJECT PROPOSED IN THIS CITY LOOKS LIKE IT.

Feel free to post your opinion about the beauty of these buildings.

up
Voting closed 2

Feel free to spend your nights attending the community meetings where anything remotely interesting is opposed as not fitting in with the existing architecture. Because nothing is more interesting than a city where all buildings look like each other.

up
Voting closed 0

+1 to infinity!!!

Roxbury deserves better than this depressing building.

up
Voting closed 0

Why don't you do some research - talk to the designers, write an article even - rather than just repeat post after post about how horrifyingly awful it all is and how other people should just use magic to make them better or something?

Beats whining about your right to be an idiot in all caps and how nobody dare question you. May even help solve the problem.

Too much work to find out why this is the way it is? Too hard to actually understand or change things when you can just imperiously froth about how special your precious assaulted sensibilities are?

up
Voting closed 0

...you're really offended by ALL CAPS aren't you?

People are certainly free to question me - seems like no one stopped you. I'll take your advice and "do some research" on the question. Actually, do MORE (there it is again) research on it, as the conversations that I have had seem to indicate to me that a combination of aversion to architecturally "challenging" buildings and economics mostly dictate the current trend in boxes that occupy the entire footprint and airspace of a lot. But who knows maybe there's some other very sophisticated reason that every project is indistinguishable from every other one. I'll let you now (I'm sure you'll be waiting with bated breath).

up
Voting closed 2

...you're really offended by ALL CAPS aren't you?

People are certainly free to question me - seems like no one stopped you. I'll take your advice and "do some research" on the question. Actually, do MORE (there it is again) research on it, as the conversations that I have had seem to indicate to me that a combination of aversion to architecturally "challenging" buildings and economics mostly dictate the current trend in boxes that occupy the entire footprint and airspace of a lot. But who knows maybe there's some other very sophisticated reason that every project is indistinguishable from every other one. I'll let you now (I'm sure you'll be waiting with bated breath).

up
Voting closed 3

As long as development is as expensive and risky as it is in Boston don’t expect anyone to invest in “fun” architecture. You have to go with what you know will work.

up
Voting closed 3

The building offers 14 new homes and fills in a vacant lot that is a 10 minute walk to Dudley Station and 15 minute walk to Roxbury Crossing.

up
Voting closed 2

what the zoning code is for the neighborhood. The building needed ZBA approval. Was it setbacks, number of parking spaces, height, or being a multi-family in a one-family area?

The city doesn't seem to enforce its own regulations. If zoning codes need to be updated, it should be done in a process that involves the city and the communities. Boston needs planning, not spot zoning variances.

up
Voting closed 0

That’s what Plan Dudley Square/JPROX/Glover’s Corner/etc are about, but it takes years and is highly contentious and in the mean time we still need housing.

up
Voting closed 2

Of course it was a slum! Look at it. There were black people there! For a program dubbed, "Negro Removal," tearing it down and driving out the residents was exactly the right thing to do. And of course, redevelopment before gentrification violates the whole premise of that program, so this is exactly the right time to build.

You know what it is really the right time for? GETTING RID OF THE BRA. Which our stupid City Council refused to do when it had the chance a couple of years ago. People should get educated on the BRA, how has set up legally bullet-proof ways to wreak havoc with the city (not just in black neighborhoods), what it has done to Boston since 1957 when it was created (by the just-as-stupid-as-now City Council, on orders of the just-as-venal-as-now mayor).

Folks, it's up to you. Get rid of it already!

up
Voting closed 0

Of course it was a slum! Look at it. There were black people there! For a program dubbed, "Negro Removal," tearing it down and driving out the residents was exactly the right thing to do. And of course, redevelopment before gentrification violates the whole premise of that program, so this is exactly the right time to build.

You know what it is really the right time for? GETTING RID OF THE BRA. Which our stupid City Council refused to do when it had the chance a couple of years ago. People should get educated on the BRA, how has set up legally bullet-proof ways to wreak havoc with the city (not just in black neighborhoods), what it has done to Boston since 1957 when it was created (by the just-as-stupid-as-now City Council, on orders of the just-as-venal-as-now mayor).

Folks, it's up to you. Get rid of it already!

up
Voting closed 0