City says 'no' to more parking for Roxbury development

49 views
Skip to first unread message

tahir h

unread,
Apr 1, 2026, 8:23:37 AM (14 days ago) Apr 1
to allstonbr...@googlegroups.com


Rather than tearing down the original yellow brick hospital building, Kensington is looking at a renovation that would transform the long-vacant building into 164 apartment units, with parking for 124 cars.
   
 

Kensington Investments came to Roxbury in 2015 with big plans for the former Radius Hospital site at 45 Townsend Street: A total of 311 units in brand new buildings that would attract upscale renters.

But abutters to the site raised alarms about what wasn’t included in the project: Parking for more than a third of the units. The developers planned just 200 parking spaces. Abutters objected vociferously and the Boston Planning and Development Agency (BPDA) advised Kensington to go back to the drawing board.

Now in their third iteration, Kensington’s plans for the site have evolved substantially. Rather than tearing down the original yellow brick hospital building, Kensington is looking at a renovation that would transform the long-vacant building into 164 apartment units, with parking for 124 cars.

At a city-mandated meeting of abutters and community members last week, Kensington officials said they were constrained by the city’s own parking guidelines, which allow .75 parking spaces per unit at 45 Townsend Street. 

“The biggest challenge was the lack of parking,” said Garrison Trotter Neighborhood Association member Connie Forbes, who attended the meeting. “The overall project looked pretty good, but we felt it wouldn’t work without more parking.”

Abutters on Townsend Street, a three-quarter-mile long street with parking on only one side for its entire length, say the competition for on-street parking would make it impossible to park.

“It’s already horrible,” said Nefertiti Lawrence, who lives next to 45 Townsend. “There’s almost no on-street parking.”

As it is, the street absorbs overflow parking from the mosque at the corner of Washington Street, from visitors to the Council Tower elderly building on Washington and from guests and family members of tenants in Academy Homes, Lawrence said.

“There are a whole lot of times when I have to park on Washington Street or Walnut Avenue,” she said.

A Boston Planning spokesperson, commenting on background, referred The Reporter to the city’s Transportation Demand Management Point System, which dictates how many parking spaces a developer can include in its project.

The city’s guidelines take into account factors such as proximity to public transit, grocery stores, and jobs. The goal is to limit car use in Boston, according to the city’s Transportation Department website:

“The TDM point system tool allows developers to choose from a wide variety of strategies to help manage people’s travel choices. These strategies incentivize people to: drive less, ride transit and bike more, carpool, and use carshare.”

Neighborhood activists reached by The Reporter said the city’s calculations do not take into account the realities of life on Townsend Street: families that depend on cars to transport children or the elderly, the current lack of available on-street parking, and the lack of reliability of local transportation options. 

The route 42 bus, which runs along Washington Street between Forest Hills and Nubian Square, passes the Nubian Market, which sells groceries. But that bus is not reliable, according to Mike Kozu, executive director of Project RIGHT.

“The 42 bus is infrequent and irregular,” he said. “During school arrival and departure, buses on that route are over-filled.”

According to the MBTA’s website, 45 Townsend Street is a 15-minute walk from the Jackson Square Orange Line station. And it’s approximately one mile from the Stop and Shop on Centre Street. Kozu said tenants paying a market-rate rent of around $3,000 for a unit in the proposed Kensington development would likely rely more on vehicles.

“They will have a car or two,” he said. “Townsend Street and the surrounding streets will be impacted because tenants and their guests will be competing for spots.”

Kensington Chief Operating Officer Charlotte Lewis acknowledged that parking was the main sticking point for abutters, but she said the firm’s hands are tied by the city’s parking guidelines.

“As the 45 Townsend Street project is subject to the City of Boston’s Article 80 review process, we are required to comply with the city’s policies and guidelines,” she said in an email. “One of these is the Boston Transportation Department’s Maximum Parking Ratios.”

Kensington faced stiff local opposition to its plans for 45 Townsend Street during its Article 80 review. Now because its latest iteration of the plans is a supplemental filing to the ongoing process, the group held two meetings — one with Garrison Trotter Neighborhood Association and another with the impact advisory group — over a period of six weeks. The public comment period began January 30 and ended March 16.

Forbes said city officials heard loud and clear from community residents about their parking concerns and should be flexible in its guidelines.

“If a developer wants to create parking and the community wants it, the city should allow it,” she said.

The Flipside © 2026 
Powered by Ghost
 

Anthony D'Isidoro

unread,
Apr 3, 2026, 3:50:27 PM (11 days ago) Apr 3
to cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com, AllstonBrighton2006, Brighton Allston Community Coalition
Hello Everyone,

With more and more projects across the city being proposed with little if any parking, a reasonable and appropriate question to be asked is how does the city make those judgements?

The question was raised at a recent Impact Advisory Group meeting for 201-207 Brighton Ave.

You would think the City of Boston would have anticipated such a concern given the project proposes 145 units with no parking at all, Someone to discuss the economics of construction and a transportation planner would have been nice instead of the usually project manager response of "I'll get back to you on that", which very rarely happens.

I refer you to the article below only that it does provide some insight as to how these decisions are made.

Still, the city can do a much better job of accountability and transparency.

Tony


--


Christine Varriale

unread,
Apr 3, 2026, 4:49:02 PM (11 days ago) Apr 3
to bacommunit...@googlegroups.com, cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com, AllstonBrighton2006
Building a lot of parking adds a lot to the overall cost of constructing the apartment building, and that cost will inevitably be passed onto the folks renting in the building whether they are personally parking a vehicle in it or not. Here’s a good diagram of that cost:

Even at a modest 0.5 parking ratio for 201-207 Brighton Ave, that’s an additional 72x60k in the minimum here at $4.32m or $29k per apartment for underground garage which would be needed if parking was built on site. 

Sent from the future


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BACC" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bacommunitycoali...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bacommunitycoalition/LV3P222MB0886BDD8185E8631BC16D955AF5EA%40LV3P222MB0886.NAMP222.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

Barbara Parmenter

unread,
Apr 3, 2026, 4:50:31 PM (11 days ago) Apr 3
to allstonbr...@googlegroups.com, bacommunit...@googlegroups.com, cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com
Thank you for sending this around, Tony. Parking in many areas in our neighborhood and the city is definitely a problem. And I wholeheartedly agree that the City is not doing a good job figuring out how to solve the issue. But the solution has to be on MANAGING PARKING. We need to focus on the actual problem, and not make parking a tax on new housing (or renovating existing housing or adding an accessory dwelling unit)

The real crisis our city is facing is a housing crisis. As you have pointed out in several emails, we are losing population, and one of the primary causes of that loss is that housing in Boston and the state is unaffordable. Forcing developers to build more parking than they need means a lot of housing just won't get built. 

Parking is expensive (see this recent UCLA report about the costs of parking in new construction across 17 cities, including Boston) - for apartments, structured parking can add $50,000 to 100,000 per unit - that cost gets passed into the rent for each of those units, something like $100 for every $10,000 in cost. So $500-$1000 more a month in rent. Often that potential cost means an apartment building is simply not built to begin with because a developer knows he can't get the financing to build.

None of us want more cars in the neighborhood, BUT many of us need cars, and we need to park them somewhere - let's figure out how to manage that problem. It could be through metered parking, it could be through a much more sound parking permit system, or parking benefits districts. There are lots of tools out there - other cities are doing this. Donald Shoup's book, Parking in the City, is full of examples. That's where I think all of us could come together as advocates for our neighborhood.

Councilor Enrique Pepen held a very educational hearing yesterday as head of the Council's Housing Committee about the housing crisis here in Boston - you can read his Substack about it here: Boston Must Build a More Affordable Future, Now). Building that affordable future will take an "all of the above" strategy. And figuring out how to manage the parking we have, so that we can add parking that is necessary but not excess, will be a critical part of that.

Barbara Parmenter
Brighton

--
To post to this group, send email to AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/AllstonBrighton2006?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AllstonBrighton2006" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to allstonbrighton...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/allstonbrighton2006/CAJ%3DQJ5xwW2tEyeGJpwiog5S%3D4tnC2WFYiaHy7CUwHNzddT4NwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Paul Creighton

unread,
Apr 3, 2026, 9:57:01 PM (11 days ago) Apr 3
to allstonbr...@googlegroups.com, cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com, Brighton Allston Community Coalition
Anthony:
Good topic that should not remain on the downlow agenda any longer. 
This Brighton Ave proposal with 140 rental units (and 140 bike rack parking) is only the most recent scheme being advanced by the City Planning Department.

There is the nine(9) story 130 plus unit building already approved for the corner of Harvard Ave and Cambridge St.  Across the street a planned small hotel at Cambridge and Wilton St, neither with any parking ; this could be only the beginning since there are multiple unbuilt units in the pipeline.

At the recent City Zoom meeting regarding the Brighton Ave "Action Bearing" Co.145 unit rental, with no parking, neglected to address any indication that the City has any process vis a vis new construction with no parking provided for residents.

The closest to an official formal rationale for this urban planning concept (no parking) was presented by the developer's attorney; probably not the most optimal objective perspective.

Since the urban planning and development function has been removed from the responsibility of Boston Redevelopment Authority and placed directly under auspices of the Mayor a new way of engendering community participation has yet to materialize.

The most independent voice from the previous system has been Ted Landsmark: but now Ted, like Elvis, has left the building, so to speak.

Ironically, maybe the only way to stop the offensive overbuilding up around the Allston Railroad Station and the historic Allston Firehouse would be to put Harvard in charge of development.  They would never countenance this kind of poor excuse for planning and development.

We had asked the previous City Hall regime to create a planning area encompassing the Linden/Cambridge/Braintree/Hano area to manage development holistically, e.g. "Harvard in Allston".  What we have now is a hodge podge mishmash of buildings designed in isolation with no coherence.

This situation is much more than cars and or bikes.  We are demonstrating no vision regarding the big picture, quality of life questions and  promoting a closed development planning and approval process.

Keep packin them in with no green small units and zero parking provided.

Is this the best that the City can do?  How come the community is not involved in the creation of such a major policy swerve, how come no public discussion?

We thought the BRA did things without public input.

Paul






--
To post to this group, send email to AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/AllstonBrighton2006?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AllstonBrighton2006" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to allstonbrighton...@googlegroups.com.

Tyler Gabrielski

unread,
Apr 6, 2026, 10:03:20 PM (8 days ago) Apr 6
to bacommunit...@googlegroups.com, allstonbr...@googlegroups.com, cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com
I know I am a couple days late on this but wanted to chime in: the most surefire way to make traffic worse is to build more parking. And as Christine mentioned, it's also a primary driver in keeping new housing costs and therefore rents high. Developers should not be forced to include more parking than market conditions demand. 

Paul Creighton

unread,
Apr 7, 2026, 10:55:33 PM (7 days ago) Apr 7
to allstonbr...@googlegroups.com, bacommunit...@googlegroups.com, cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com
Are you saying that no parking  units required translates to lower unit rent$ or the  inclussionbuilding extra "affordable" units ?  Or just higher ROI
Thanks
Paul


Andrew Fischer

unread,
Apr 8, 2026, 11:23:56 PM (6 days ago) Apr 8
to cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com, allstonbr...@googlegroups.com, bacommunit...@googlegroups.com
Which of the three (lower unit rents, extra affordable units or higher ROI), or some combination of the three, depends on how we each play out our hands. Less parking unquestionably reduces the cost of building the units, as well as reducing traffic. The question is how we divide the savings. 

Andrew Fischer
21 Bartlett Crescent 
Brookline, Ma 02446
617-293-8304
andrewm...@gmail.com

On Apr 7, 2026, at 10:55 PM, Paul Creighton <creight...@gmail.com> wrote:

Are you saying that no parking  units required translates to lower unit rent$ or the  inclussionbuilding extra "affordable" units ?  Or just higher ROI
Thanks
Paul


On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 10:03 PM Tyler Gabrielski <tga...@gmail.com> wrote:
I know I am a couple days late on this but wanted to chime in: the most surefire way to make traffic worse is to build more parking. And as Christine mentioned, it's also a primary driver in keeping new housing costs and therefore rents high. Developers should not be forced to include more parking than market conditions demand. 

On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 4:50 PM Barbara Parmenter <barbara....@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for sending this around, Tony. Parking in many areas in our neighborhood and the city is definitely a problem. And I wholeheartedly agree that the City is not doing a good job figuring out how to solve the issue. But the solution has to be on MANAGING PARKING. We need to focus on the actual problem, and not make parking a tax on new housing (or renovating existing housing or adding an accessory dwelling unit)

The real crisis our city is facing is a housing crisis. As you have pointed out in several emails, we are losing population, and one of the primary causes of that loss is that housing in Boston and the state is unaffordable. Forcing developers to build more parking than they need means a lot of housing just won't get built. 

Parking is expensive (see this recent UCLA report about the costs of parking in new construction across 17 cities, including Boston) - for apartments, structured parking can add $50,000 to 100,000 per unit - that cost gets passed into the rent for each of those units, something like $100 for every $10,000 in cost. So $500-$1000 more a month in rent. Often that potential cost means an apartment building is simply not built to begin with because a developer knows he can't get the financing to build.

None of us want more cars in the neighborhood, BUT many of us need cars, and we need to park them somewhere - let's figure out how to manage that problem. It could be through metered parking, it could be through a much more sound parking permit system, or parking benefits districts. There are lots of tools out there - other cities are doing this. Donald Shoup's book, Parking in the City, is full of examples. That's where I think all of us could come together as advocates for our neighborhood.

Councilor Enrique Pepen held a very educational hearing yesterday as head of the Council's Housing Committee about the housing crisis here in Boston - you can read his Substack about it here: Boston Must Build a More Affordable Future, Now). Building that affordable future will take an "all of the above" strategy. And figuring out how to manage the parking we have, so that we can add parking that is necessary but not excess, will be a critical part of that.

Barbara Parmenter
Brighton

On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 4:49 PM Christine Varriale <christine...@gmail.com> wrote:
Building a lot of parking adds a lot to the overall cost of constructing the apartment building, and that cost will inevitably be passed onto the folks renting in the building whether they are personally parking a vehicle in it or not. Here’s a good diagram of that cost:
IMG_7141.jpeg

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cleveland Circle Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cleveland-circle-co...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cleveland-circle-community/CABFi4WHm9jPSFQoZ6Hs59F%2Ba57K6%3DUXYHWCRcXydPY%2B0Koe_oA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages