Need information regarding Cambridge MA.
Feb 1st, 2012, 10:42 PM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Need information regarding Cambridge MA.
I'm in a bit of a bind. I need information regarding so-called "rough" areas in or around Cambridge MA. I, however, am from Detroit originally, so whenever I look at these places on Google street view, they all look quite nice. Granted, I am looking on street view, so there's no assurance that I'd ever see an area that is truly run-down. I've never bothered looking at Detroit to see what bits they've left out, so I have no clue how inclusive street view actually is.
Here's the thing, I'm not going to Cambridge, nor do I think I'll ever make such a trip. However, a book I'm currently working on requires me to find an area where most of the homes are in at least a semi-distressed state, so that a home in immaculate condition would truly stand out as unusual. The trouble with seeking such information on forums is that everyone comes from different backgrounds, and thus we all have very different views of what "run-down" actually looks like. That's why I'm hoping that people from around there, preferably more than one, would be willing to give me some insider information.
So, what's your take?
1.) Where would you never like to visit, let alone live?
2.) If you currently live in a hard area or if you came up in a hard area, what was/is it like?
3.) If you had to rate a particular area 1-10, what area or areas would qualify for a rating between 0 and 4?
4.) Do you have any picture of, or can you get pictures of, any areas that may qualify for a 0-4 rating?
I'd love to hear back from you, whomever you may be.
Take care,
Impetua.
Here's the thing, I'm not going to Cambridge, nor do I think I'll ever make such a trip. However, a book I'm currently working on requires me to find an area where most of the homes are in at least a semi-distressed state, so that a home in immaculate condition would truly stand out as unusual. The trouble with seeking such information on forums is that everyone comes from different backgrounds, and thus we all have very different views of what "run-down" actually looks like. That's why I'm hoping that people from around there, preferably more than one, would be willing to give me some insider information.
So, what's your take?
1.) Where would you never like to visit, let alone live?
2.) If you currently live in a hard area or if you came up in a hard area, what was/is it like?
3.) If you had to rate a particular area 1-10, what area or areas would qualify for a rating between 0 and 4?
4.) Do you have any picture of, or can you get pictures of, any areas that may qualify for a 0-4 rating?
I'd love to hear back from you, whomever you may be.
Take care,
Impetua.
Feb 2nd, 2012, 01:21 AM
#2
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are right about "rough" being in the eye of the beholder. I still have a hard time believing that some parts of LA are slums because to my East Coast/Southern mind, slums don't have single family homes with palm trees and grass in the front yard.
Cambridge is a pretty safe place, even in the poorer areas. There is property crime but relatively few muggings and almost never murders. Much of Cambridge (and Somerville next door) is composed of wooden three decker tenements built between 1890-1925 to house workers. It is very densely settled and three deckers sometimes look slummy to people who are not used to them, but they are not defined that way and may have been upgraded inside to luxury standards.
In general, the rougher areas are near housing projects. Anecdotally, the worst is in northwest Cambridge, near the booming Alewife T stop (Whole Foods, etc), but these are high rise horrors from the 60's, like Glasgow or Cabrini-Green. It would not have a house in immaculate condition because it is not a single family area.
I lived across the street from public housing on Putnam Avenue, but we lived in a Harvard student housing complex, and the rest of the neighborhood, much of it three-decker tenements, was highly upwardly mobile, so the kind of house you are describing would fit in perfectly, sadly for your book.
The only place you might find what you are looking for is in the neighborhood adjacent to the public housing located on Main Street to the East of Central Square. MIT has done a tremendous amount of redeveloping south of the Square toward the East, but the neighborhood north of Main strikes me as still a bit rough. However, all of Cambridge is a pretty good place to live, and all areas have some gentrification going on, both white incomers and African American and Jamaican residents.
I hope Gail will see this, because her work takes her to places of all kinds and she has a good eye for what is rough and what only looks rough to outsiders.
Cambridge is a pretty safe place, even in the poorer areas. There is property crime but relatively few muggings and almost never murders. Much of Cambridge (and Somerville next door) is composed of wooden three decker tenements built between 1890-1925 to house workers. It is very densely settled and three deckers sometimes look slummy to people who are not used to them, but they are not defined that way and may have been upgraded inside to luxury standards.
In general, the rougher areas are near housing projects. Anecdotally, the worst is in northwest Cambridge, near the booming Alewife T stop (Whole Foods, etc), but these are high rise horrors from the 60's, like Glasgow or Cabrini-Green. It would not have a house in immaculate condition because it is not a single family area.
I lived across the street from public housing on Putnam Avenue, but we lived in a Harvard student housing complex, and the rest of the neighborhood, much of it three-decker tenements, was highly upwardly mobile, so the kind of house you are describing would fit in perfectly, sadly for your book.
The only place you might find what you are looking for is in the neighborhood adjacent to the public housing located on Main Street to the East of Central Square. MIT has done a tremendous amount of redeveloping south of the Square toward the East, but the neighborhood north of Main strikes me as still a bit rough. However, all of Cambridge is a pretty good place to live, and all areas have some gentrification going on, both white incomers and African American and Jamaican residents.
I hope Gail will see this, because her work takes her to places of all kinds and she has a good eye for what is rough and what only looks rough to outsiders.
Feb 2nd, 2012, 02:38 AM
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Akislander, thank you for taking time to give me some info. I don't think it's all that sad for my book, though; as Cambridge doesn't necessarily have to be the precise location. It could easily be within 15 to 45 minutes drive. Possibly in Boston proper? A short enough distance so that one might make a reasonable commute to MIT if need be.
Any suggestions within a broadened area? =)
Any suggestions within a broadened area? =)
Feb 2nd, 2012, 04:30 AM
#4
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remembering that this is one person's impressions, here are some significant areas of gentrification in which someone from MIT might live (hey, I know some people from MIT who do live there) and experience conflict if they gentrified too much.
1. South End, gentrified by gay pioneers in late 1970's. Decreasing pockets of rough neighborhood ever since, but some left on both sides of Mass Ave toward Boston City Hospital. Wonderful brick row houses, no single family houses that would stand out as such. Two public housing projects. Great place to live, but youor kind of conflict unlikely.
2. Jamaica Plain (JP), again gentrified by gays and progressives but more recently a substantial current conflict over replacing a "community" market that served the large Latino population with a market for the gentrifiers . It could be Whole Foods; if not, it is something like that. Charges of insensitivity and cultural colonialism. The edges of this area toward the Orange Line and the commuter rail tracks is less gentrified. Housing stock is frame three deckers and what are called locally Philadelphia style houses: two to four flats in a blocky frame structure. A considerable number of single family houses, though. Not great transportation to MIT but lots of value attracts academics.
3. Mission Hill, Roxbury, Dorchester spread across a large area, basically from Brookline to Boston Harbor. Culturally diverse, lots of white flight in the past, urban pioneers of all races and cultures (Vietnamese, for example) taking advantage of cheap housing stock. Mission Hill I always found scary, but it is very near the famous hospitals and Harvard Medical School and is thus changing.
4. Mattapan is south of Roxbury. It went from primarily Jewish in the 1960's to mostly African American because of block busting by rapacious real estate people who scared out whites, bought their houses for a song, and then resold them to African American and Caribbean American people at a huge profit. But there is a lot of entrepreneurial spirit in this area, so there are many interesting new businesses, and it is becoming popular with AA middle and upper professionals because there is a lot of attractive housing, a wonderful park and zoo, strong churches, etc.
4. Chelsea has a substantial latino community, Charlestown and Southie are primarily ethnically white areas (the first two convenient to MIT) but all have strongly resisted gentrification. I can see your kind of conflict taking place in any of these three towns. To understand these areas of Boston, try to see the movie "Town" from netflix or your local library. I know Townies (not incomers) who have told me that the movie is incredibly accurate and who can identify some of the actual characters being portrayed (the Florist, for example). A great location for a character who bikes to MIT from a house that infuriates the locals because it makes the area unaffordable for them, and biking to work is the kind of snotty thing those quiche-eating snobs do to show up working people who can't afford cars and are ignored by the city. That kind of thing.
1. South End, gentrified by gay pioneers in late 1970's. Decreasing pockets of rough neighborhood ever since, but some left on both sides of Mass Ave toward Boston City Hospital. Wonderful brick row houses, no single family houses that would stand out as such. Two public housing projects. Great place to live, but youor kind of conflict unlikely.
2. Jamaica Plain (JP), again gentrified by gays and progressives but more recently a substantial current conflict over replacing a "community" market that served the large Latino population with a market for the gentrifiers . It could be Whole Foods; if not, it is something like that. Charges of insensitivity and cultural colonialism. The edges of this area toward the Orange Line and the commuter rail tracks is less gentrified. Housing stock is frame three deckers and what are called locally Philadelphia style houses: two to four flats in a blocky frame structure. A considerable number of single family houses, though. Not great transportation to MIT but lots of value attracts academics.
3. Mission Hill, Roxbury, Dorchester spread across a large area, basically from Brookline to Boston Harbor. Culturally diverse, lots of white flight in the past, urban pioneers of all races and cultures (Vietnamese, for example) taking advantage of cheap housing stock. Mission Hill I always found scary, but it is very near the famous hospitals and Harvard Medical School and is thus changing.
4. Mattapan is south of Roxbury. It went from primarily Jewish in the 1960's to mostly African American because of block busting by rapacious real estate people who scared out whites, bought their houses for a song, and then resold them to African American and Caribbean American people at a huge profit. But there is a lot of entrepreneurial spirit in this area, so there are many interesting new businesses, and it is becoming popular with AA middle and upper professionals because there is a lot of attractive housing, a wonderful park and zoo, strong churches, etc.
4. Chelsea has a substantial latino community, Charlestown and Southie are primarily ethnically white areas (the first two convenient to MIT) but all have strongly resisted gentrification. I can see your kind of conflict taking place in any of these three towns. To understand these areas of Boston, try to see the movie "Town" from netflix or your local library. I know Townies (not incomers) who have told me that the movie is incredibly accurate and who can identify some of the actual characters being portrayed (the Florist, for example). A great location for a character who bikes to MIT from a house that infuriates the locals because it makes the area unaffordable for them, and biking to work is the kind of snotty thing those quiche-eating snobs do to show up working people who can't afford cars and are ignored by the city. That kind of thing.
Feb 2nd, 2012, 04:35 AM
#5
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remembering that this is one person's impressions, here are some significant areas of gentrification in which someone from MIT might live (hey, I know some people from MIT who do live there) and experience conflict if they gentrified too much.
1. South End, gentrified by gay pioneers in late 1970's. Decreasing pockets of rough neighborhood ever since, but some left on both sides of Mass Ave toward Boston City Hospital. Wonderful brick row houses, no single family houses that would stand out as such. Two public housing projects. Great place to live, but youor kind of conflict unlikely.
2. Jamaica Plain (JP), again gentrified by gays and progressives but more recently a substantial current conflict over replacing a "community" market that served the large Latino population with a market for the gentrifiers . It could be Whole Foods; if not, it is something like that. Charges of insensitivity and cultural colonialism. The edges of this area toward the Orange Line and the commuter rail tracks is less gentrified. Housing stock is frame three deckers and what are called locally Philadelphia style houses: two to four flats in a blocky frame structure. A considerable number of single family houses, though. Not great transportation to MIT but lots of value attracts academics.
3. Mission Hill, Roxbury, Dorchester spread across a large area, basically from Brookline to Boston Harbor. Culturally diverse, lots of white flight in the past, urban pioneers of all races and cultures (Vietnamese, for example) taking advantage of cheap housing stock. Mission Hill I always found scary, but it is very near the famous hospitals and Harvard Medical School and is thus changing.
4. Mattapan is south of Roxbury. It went from primarily Jewish in the 1960's to mostly African American because of block busting by rapacious real estate people who scared out whites, bought their houses for a song, and then resold them to African American and Caribbean American people at a huge profit. But there is a lot of entrepreneurial spirit in this area, so there are many interesting new businesses, and it is becoming popular with AA middle and upper professionals because there is a lot of attractive housing, a wonderful park and zoo, strong churches, etc.
4. Chelsea has a substantial latino community, Charlestown and Southie are primarily ethnically white areas (the first two convenient to MIT) but all have strongly resisted gentrification. I can see your kind of conflict taking place in any of these three towns. To understand these areas of Boston, try to see the movie "Town" from netflix or your local library. I know Townies (not incomers) who have told me that the movie is incredibly accurate and who can identify some of the actual characters being portrayed (the Florist, for example). A great location for a character who bikes to MIT from a house that infuriates the locals because it makes the area unaffordable for them, and biking to work is the kind of snotty thing those quiche-eating snobs do to show up working people who can't afford cars and are ignored by the city. That kind of thing.
1. South End, gentrified by gay pioneers in late 1970's. Decreasing pockets of rough neighborhood ever since, but some left on both sides of Mass Ave toward Boston City Hospital. Wonderful brick row houses, no single family houses that would stand out as such. Two public housing projects. Great place to live, but youor kind of conflict unlikely.
2. Jamaica Plain (JP), again gentrified by gays and progressives but more recently a substantial current conflict over replacing a "community" market that served the large Latino population with a market for the gentrifiers . It could be Whole Foods; if not, it is something like that. Charges of insensitivity and cultural colonialism. The edges of this area toward the Orange Line and the commuter rail tracks is less gentrified. Housing stock is frame three deckers and what are called locally Philadelphia style houses: two to four flats in a blocky frame structure. A considerable number of single family houses, though. Not great transportation to MIT but lots of value attracts academics.
3. Mission Hill, Roxbury, Dorchester spread across a large area, basically from Brookline to Boston Harbor. Culturally diverse, lots of white flight in the past, urban pioneers of all races and cultures (Vietnamese, for example) taking advantage of cheap housing stock. Mission Hill I always found scary, but it is very near the famous hospitals and Harvard Medical School and is thus changing.
4. Mattapan is south of Roxbury. It went from primarily Jewish in the 1960's to mostly African American because of block busting by rapacious real estate people who scared out whites, bought their houses for a song, and then resold them to African American and Caribbean American people at a huge profit. But there is a lot of entrepreneurial spirit in this area, so there are many interesting new businesses, and it is becoming popular with AA middle and upper professionals because there is a lot of attractive housing, a wonderful park and zoo, strong churches, etc.
4. Chelsea has a substantial latino community, Charlestown and Southie are primarily ethnically white areas (the first two convenient to MIT) but all have strongly resisted gentrification. I can see your kind of conflict taking place in any of these three towns. To understand these areas of Boston, try to see the movie "Town" from netflix or your local library. I know Townies (not incomers) who have told me that the movie is incredibly accurate and who can identify some of the actual characters being portrayed (the Florist, for example). A great location for a character who bikes to MIT from a house that infuriates the locals because it makes the area unaffordable for them, and biking to work is the kind of snotty thing those quiche-eating snobs do to show up working people who can't afford cars and are ignored by the city. That kind of thing.
Feb 2nd, 2012, 06:34 AM
#6
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 23,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it does not have to be Cambridge, I would pick Chelsea (used to work there). It somehow has avoided gentrification in almost the entire city - perhaps because one can not gentrify the fact that planes from nearby Logan are overhead. Still a fair amount of street crime, gangs, sirens at all hours of day or night. Lots of small apartment buildings and many tiny-lot triple deckers, many of which seem to have perpetually dangerous-looking porches.
Further out, Lawrence might also fit your description. I do nursing home visits there and it remains the only location in which there are a few places I will not go alone during daylight. However, there are some nice neighborhoods with cute little, well-kept houses. The thing about Lawrence is that in this economy there are way too many young men hanging around on the street during the day who appear to be up to nothing good. Consistently the worst or next-to-worst education system in the state, the last 3 school superintendents were indicted, and the current and several past mayors have all sorts of legal clouds hanging over them.
Further out, Lawrence might also fit your description. I do nursing home visits there and it remains the only location in which there are a few places I will not go alone during daylight. However, there are some nice neighborhoods with cute little, well-kept houses. The thing about Lawrence is that in this economy there are way too many young men hanging around on the street during the day who appear to be up to nothing good. Consistently the worst or next-to-worst education system in the state, the last 3 school superintendents were indicted, and the current and several past mayors have all sorts of legal clouds hanging over them.
Feb 2nd, 2012, 11:47 AM
#7
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This question makes me a bit uncomfortable because you ask where would you never want to live never mind visit. There are a few streets in the Boston area that you might not want to visit--but that depends on the person who is the subject of the book.
Chelsea is not upscale, yet a have a good friend who grew up there and whose family still lives there--on a peaceful quiet stable street.
Feeling unsafe in an area has to do with the criminal element who may stake out that area for themselves. Not from poor families who live there because they can't afford anywhere else.
So, I don't quite understand what you mean. Many people working at MIT would probably live on that side of the river. Crosstown transportation isn't convenient. And most people would probably avoid driving there if they lived close by.
But you could make up any mythical street in an area where "gentrification" hasn't taken hold. If you can't visit, you may be better off just making a place up--otherwise it just won't ring true. Just be vague, like saying: "one of the blocks in the South End where the brownstones haven't been snapped up by condo developers."
Otherwise you could check some real estate sites and see the average selling prices of various areas.
Off topic for Ackislander: You are right, Whole Foods did open in JP, taking over a supermarket that had gone out of business. Trust me--the previous supermarket was so vile, almost no one bought food there. The majority of the neighborhood was all for Whole Foods coming in, recognizing that WF doesn't gentrify a neighborhood but follows the gentrification. WF hired most of the laid-off workers (at a higher wage with health benefits) and has given some major financial grants to the neighborhood food kitchen. So here's hoping they do well.
Chelsea is not upscale, yet a have a good friend who grew up there and whose family still lives there--on a peaceful quiet stable street.
Feeling unsafe in an area has to do with the criminal element who may stake out that area for themselves. Not from poor families who live there because they can't afford anywhere else.
So, I don't quite understand what you mean. Many people working at MIT would probably live on that side of the river. Crosstown transportation isn't convenient. And most people would probably avoid driving there if they lived close by.
But you could make up any mythical street in an area where "gentrification" hasn't taken hold. If you can't visit, you may be better off just making a place up--otherwise it just won't ring true. Just be vague, like saying: "one of the blocks in the South End where the brownstones haven't been snapped up by condo developers."
Otherwise you could check some real estate sites and see the average selling prices of various areas.
Off topic for Ackislander: You are right, Whole Foods did open in JP, taking over a supermarket that had gone out of business. Trust me--the previous supermarket was so vile, almost no one bought food there. The majority of the neighborhood was all for Whole Foods coming in, recognizing that WF doesn't gentrify a neighborhood but follows the gentrification. WF hired most of the laid-off workers (at a higher wage with health benefits) and has given some major financial grants to the neighborhood food kitchen. So here's hoping they do well.
Feb 6th, 2012, 02:24 PM
#8
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I'm late to the game but an interesting question I couldn't pass up. I appraised real estate all over eastern Massachusetts for 20 years and have a good working knowledge of the look and feel of just about every town in eastern Massachusetts. IMO, the places close to downtown Boston proper look fairly good when compared to places further out from Boston such as Lawrence, Brockton and Springfield. If you are from Detroit, which I've never been to, there is nothing anywhere in Boston that comes close to the entire abandoned neighborhoods you'd find there.
