Eugenia,
You would not say so if the 45 feet building was adjacent to your house.

However, it is a C-1 zoning area.

Please respect C-1 zoning especially for building height, setbacks and open space. Please provide shadow analysis. The trees and grass need sunlight.

B Larkin
Expanded open and green space.

The design does not match the surrounding houses. It is too high. Please respect C-1 zoning.

Christopher Sokolowski
Hi JAS, This needed project is too high for the neighborhood. Please consider removing the top floor from the plan. It dwarfs the houses along Windsor St, and it will be a sheer cliff next to the park space on Broadway. With respect, Christopher S. Cambridge

Rose Haferd
Hello! I support affordable housing. However, please delete the top floor, and scale-down your proposal to respect existing C-1 Zoning heights.

The most needed in the neighborhood is parking space and open space.

Dan Totten
Honestly, community space and open space. I know housing is the answer we’re supposed to give, and affordable homeownership is a top priority. We also need housing for seniors who live in the neighborhood and want to age in place. But not every lot in the neighborhood has to turn into housing- open space and community space are needed, too.

Leah Beckett
Definitely! A thoughtful, modern design would allow for more apartments and more retail / office, both of which (I believe) would contribute to lower residential and commercial rates. It might be difficult to have a charette right now, but I think it could be in the future!

Tall examples that I think would allow this to work:

The most realistic scale for the neighborhood: https://newyorkyimby.com/2020/07/proposed-2-billion-mixed-use-complex-revealed-in-astoria-queens.html

Other realistic scale option: https://www.homestolove.co.nz/real-homes/home-tours/these-wynyard-apartments-show-how-good-high-density-living-can-be

The tower option: https://www.safdiearchitects.com/projects/qorner-tower

The timber option: https://newatlas.com/architecture/cf-moller-timber-tower-sweden/

The out there option: https://big.dk/#projects-ett

It's time to think big and green!

David De Celis
This is a great point Leah. It speaks to smart, long-term growth. Past proposals from the City have hinted at this, and were received with lots of concerns --understandably-- from many of our neighbors and community members living in those lower-density housing units. Lots of folks were concerned about being displaced; and there were fears of too much gentrification. Maybe something like this could work, if properly phased, and with plenty of buy-in from current residents. Something along the lines you suggest could also be a mixed-use development; allowing for affordable, pedestrian-level business/commercial spaces to provide opportunities for local residents. It would also allow a proposal like this one (on Windsor & Broadway) to become less dense, and better reflect the current Zoning/FAR rules.

Leah Beckett
Open space. I believe this parking lot would be an invaluable addition to the Green Rose Heritage Park and help create a zone that doesn’t need to serve as a multipurpose field. While it seems like you are looking for housing to be the solution for this lot, I think taking a long-term approach to redeveloping several blocks in this area would make the city more livable. One big idea includes completely redeveloping the city’s suburban style public housing along Harvard and Washington Streets. The low density, car-centric, Garden City style is at odds with the surrounding area. It would be better designed if the Harvard-Windsor-Washington-Main block were converted into a contiguous park with the Green Rose Park, replacing Harvard Street between Windsor and Moore Streets with a bike and pedestrian path. This would then allow the Harvard-Windsor-Washington-Portland block to redevelop into a more appropriate scale for the city: The huge block could be divided into several smaller blacks, possibly even maximizing space by straightening Washington Street and continuing School Street. The buildings should then favor underground parking instead of surface parking lots and have retail / commercial space on the ground floor, especially on Main Street. Instead of 3 story buildings with basement units, they could be taller and feature common spaces on different levels and usable green roofs for an architecturally interesting, urban upgrade.

PETER MARTIN
Considering the site fits only 12 at grade parking spaces now, I am puzzled as to how each unit will have a parking space - Total 15. The design drawings appear to show a 'closed' first floor level facing the park [maybe to conceal at grade parking?] which if it is the case, is not great urban design practice. The little piece of residual park space shown landscaped would probably not make the pedestrian experience feel any safer. The site is I believe 4175sf, so at 300sf per unit, [my reading of the zoning ordinance*] it can only support 13 units. I am also puzzled by the response of the design to set backs. As a corner lot, I thought Zoning treated the site as having two rear yards?? *In the interests of a meaningful public design review process, I feel it would be very useful for the community, particularly those people not familiar with the complexity of the zoning ordinance, if the project information clearly stated where it does not meet the typically required dimensional standards. At first glance the building looks too bulky for the site and it would particularly negatively impacts the neighbors on Windsor as well as exacerbate local parking problems. Providing affordable housing is a worth endeavor, but I believe Area 4 is already doing well on that account.
My suggestion is that it gets smaller - 8 units at FAR 1.75 like the neighboring area. Minimum 8 parking spaces.