Fw: Allston Green (20 Linden St) Comment Letter
Anthony D'Isidoro
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 8:36 AM
To: Lance Campbell <lance.c...@boston.gov>
Subject: Allston Green (20 Linden St) Comment Letter
Hi Lance,
In the spirit of full disclosure, the following comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Allston Civic Association nor its members.
Background
The Compact Living Pilot is promoting a false narrative in the name of affordability, efficient design, sustainable and transit-oriented development; to the detriment of existing residents, retirees and empty nesters, people with disabilities, young growing families and young professionals and graduate students.
As you know, On November 12, 2020, the BPDA Board received an update of the program which included a two-year extension and a “minor” change” to reduce the maximum square footage for a one bedroom compact living unit from 625 to 600 and to reduce the maximum square footage for a two-bedroom compact living from 850 to 800.
It was disclosed that 14 compact living projects across 9 neighborhoods for 1,256 compact units in projects that range from 14 to 500 total units have been approved over the past two years. Some projects are completely compact and others are a mix of compact and standard.
BPDA Board Treasurer Carol Downs was quite perceptive in her questioning, given that BPDA failed to mention the word “affordable” in their presentation.
“My perception of this pilot was if you build more units at lower cost, the expectation was lower rents than larger units or is it more about enabling developers to build more units in the same square footage space and charge the same market rent.”
We continually hear from developers of these projects that market rents would be $400-$500 per month lower than a standard unit.
The BPDA response was disconcerting given that they claimed when they talk about a diversity of choices, affordability plays a role in that.
Secondly, there was no talk of freezing additional projects until the 1,256 compact units were constructed and occupied to accumulate relevant data regarding continued appeal of this lifestyle and whether the affordability issue was being reflected in the rents charged.
Given the disproportionate number of compact living unit projects in the community review pipeline in Allston and the inability to guarantee “affordability” of market rate units, the city has given the green light to perpetuate this false narrative and accept the city’s assurance that the policy goals of the pilot are consistent with good public policy.
Allston Brighton Purpose and Need
The purpose is to achieve sustainable, resilient, safe and healthy building environments for all in Allston Brighton that promotes preservation, rehabilitation and investment as a driver of future economic, social and civic development.
The need is to enrich the housing life cycle and housing choices in Allston Brighton to meet the varied housing needs of community members now and in the future.
The need is achieved by promoting a balance of affordable rental and home ownership opportunities throughout the housing life cycle with choices that include individual(s) and family households, people with disabilities, seniors, veterans and those individuals requiring assisted living, nursing care and hospice.
What do we know?
We know that companies in greater numbers are allowing their employees to work from home either full time or part time and this trend will likely continue after the virus is gone.
There has been a huge exodus of people with choices from using public transportation as the Commonwealth contemplates significant service cuts.
There has been a huge exodus of urban residents (especially older millennials) to the suburbs given affordability, transportation, education, public health, resiliency, sustainability and work at home considerations.
Public transportation continues to be competitively disadvantaged to cars that are more convenient, reliable, economical, efficient and cleaner to run. Low interest rates, cheap gas and added amenities will drive even more cars into the city from the suburbs Buses and commuter trains would see declines in returning riders, too, according to a City of Boston and A Better City survey.
People are looking for some additional space, including larger kitchens, dedicated work space, outside open space and balconies and less open floor plans.
Although I appreciate the Allston Green development team downsizing the tower from 14 stories to 7 stories, and the commitment to publicly accessible open space, the loss of homeownership opportunities and the decision to recalibrate the project as a compact living one was disappointing.
At the IAG meeting of November 16, 2020, the development team disclosed the unit mix of 186 studios with average living space of 413 square feet, 116 one bedroom with average living space of 542 square feet, 41 two bedrooms with average living space of 756 square feet and 6 artist lofts with an average living space of 406 square feet.
Percentage breakdown: Studios: 53%; One-Bedroom: 33%; Two Bedroom: 12%; Artist Lofts: 2%
Also disclosed were the current market rate projections for a studio at $2,300 and a one bedroom at $2,600 (Gross annual income to qualify: $92,100 - $104,100). Two-bedroom projections were not available.
Conclusion
The Allston Green project does not meet the purpose and need of Allston Brighton.
The project is following guidelines that are outdated, inconclusive and hinders its ability to compete in the open market.
The project is too dense, especially given its location on Linden St, a major pass-through artery already. Increased car traffic, ride sharing, pickup and drop off, deliveries and trash pickup will only complicate a difficult situation.
The project is not family friendly. 25% of the units should be two- and three-bedroom units.
The limited parking on site discriminates against seniors, people with disabilities, growing families and those who commute to work within the city or outside of the city where public transportation is not a viable option. Denying resident parking permits may make for good public relations, but the fact is there are still many unregulated streets when it comes to overnight parking.
The unit sizes are too small and are inconsistent with current consumer appeal, raising the possibility that the intended use of the project ends up being quite different than what was promised to the community.
The units are not affordable for the current residents of Allston. There should be more affordability and deeper affordability. The premise of smaller market units resulting in lower rents is a leap of faith this community can’t afford to take, given the number of projects enrolled in this “pilot”.
The development team has yet to commit to a ban on undergraduate student rentals and also should express their commitment to banning short term rentals.
The project represents a case study of transiency, that neither builds a sustainable community nor promotes civic engagement as a value-added benefit.
Anthony D'Isidoro