Development at Cutter and Summer (next to Rosebud)

[hikermtnbiker.livejournal.com]

Are folks aware of the 4 story, mixed use development planned for the corner of Cutter and Summer next to the Rosebud? Many of the local residents only recently found out about it and are understandably upset.

The plan is to tear down the old gas station and the adjacent 2 family. The building will be 48 feet high (think One Davis) and will consist of 1st floor retail, 2nd floor office and  6 2-bedroom apartments on the 3rd and 4th floors. There will be an underground parking garage (as they will use the entire lot) that will exit onto Cutter. We are really appalled at the size of this building which will dwarf the adjacent  buildings on Summer / Cutter, not to mention the added traffic entering and exiting the garage. It is simply too big for this busy corner at the edge of a residential neighborhood.

The developer is asking for 2 special permits from the Zoning Board; one to provide 7 fewer parking spaces than is required by the zoning ordinance and the other to allow construction of a 6 unit dwelling. A group of local residents is urging the ZBA to deny the special permits with the hope that a suitably sized building that adheres to the parking regulations, and better suits the neighborhood, will be built.

If you are also concerned and wish to express your opinion and / or become more informed here is what you can do:

- Write or Fax the Zoning Board of Appeals and ask that they deny the special permits for 377 Summer St.
- Call or email Ward 6 Alderman Rebekah Gewirtz: Rebekah@rcn.com 617-718-0792
- Attend a neighborhood meeting hosted by Rebekah Gewirtz
          This Monday, June 1
          5:30 pm at Ciampa Manor 27 College Avenue
- Attend the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting
           This Wednesday, June 3, 6pm at City Hall in the Alderman's Chambers

To view the plans for the development and to read the Planning Board report, go to the city web site and planning board page and view info for 377 Summer St.

Thanks

Comments

Re: Fewer cars on the street, not fewer cars

[ron_newman]

Indeed. Besides large city parks, Somerville also has no golf courses, large garden cemeteries, or ponds. Boston and Cambridge both have all of these things. Boston even has part of a working farm (Allandale) within city limits.

Re: Fewer cars on the street, not fewer cars

[pierceheart.livejournal.com]

Boston even has part of a working farm (Allandale) within city limits.

Would those be the city limits it gained from Suffolk-cating all the surrounding towns during the water wars in eastern mass?

You're not seriously trying to compare Somerville with annexation happy Boston, in terms of available land, are you?

Re: Fewer cars on the street, not fewer cars

[ron_newman]

Not at all. I'm just trying to explain the primary cause of Somerville's 'most dense city in MA' designation -- the lack of large open spaces such as are found in Boston, Cambridge, and Medford.

(And by the way, West Roxbury and the rest of those towns decided to join Boston by majority vote in a referendum. Brookline's voters defeated the proposition, which is why they still remain separate today.)

Re: Fewer cars on the street, not fewer cars

[pierceheart.livejournal.com]

As someone said earlier in this discussion:

Boston has tons more greenspace than Somerville.

Yes, it does - because Boston was able to annex all the surrounding towns.
Comparing Boston to Somerville in terms of greenspace is an apples and oranges comparison.

Re: Fewer cars on the street, not fewer cars

[ron_newman]

I don't understand your argument. All I am doing is trying to explain how Somerville ended up at #1 in the statistical category of "population density" (i.e. population divided by area).