Suffolk Downs Redevelopment | East Boston/Revere

FYI: Big meeting/presentation on this tonight at East Boston High School.

(Will cross-post in events)
 
Was curious about if/how HQ2 factors into this. There's 22 mentions of Amazon in the document. It looks like they've got a generational view of how long it will take to build out the site, although the document does mention this on Page 3-6:
The Master Plan Project has been designed to allow for the accommodation of Amazon HQ2, including the Phase 1 Project office development that is proposed as part of what the Master Plan Project proposes to be a larger initial approximately 1.4 million square foot phase of mixed use development in Boston adjacent to the Suffolk Downs MBTA Station. If Amazon chooses the Project Site for its second headquarters, then Amazon’s requirements are more likely to dictate the pace of build-out which may then be less than 20 years.
Click to expand...

I must say it's refreshing how transparent and professional HYM, City of Boston, and the Commonwealth have been with regards to the whole HQ2 process and particularly with the future land use of Suffolk Downs. Even if Amazon goes elsewhere, I think all involved with HQ2 Boston did a model job compared to other cities in contention.
 
 
Last night's meeting at East Boston High School was thinly attended and very few questions of substance were asked. The most thoughtful, from one of my neighbors, was a push for an increase in the percentage of affordable units (currently the City-mandated 13%) and the set-aside for seniors (currently 10%). The response from Tom O'Brien (who I really do like) seemed a bit disingenuous: "These are expensive buildings, and those percentages are as tight as we can afford." I was also disappointed by HYM's proposal to widen the stretch of Route 1A between Boardman Street and Winthrop Avenue (Route 16); this seems like an invitation to a hyper-localized object lesson in capacity-induced demand, an increase only in the speed and efficiency that motorists experience prior to getting stuck in traffic at Bell Circle.

The Traffic & Transportation Planning Meeting is slated for 10/30. I intend to be there with open eyes and ears, and a growing list of questions. To be clear, I'm not putting all of this on HYM: the Cities of Boston and Revere, MassDOT, and (to some extent) the MBTA need to actively participate in the solution.

I view the BPDA public meeting process as an obstacle to a better dialog and greater solution, because it fails to involve (and hold to account) state agencies that impact the overall conditions beyond the Suffolk Downs PDA. As we all know, weak county governments and stunningly toothless regional planning initiatives have gotten us all stuck in this traffic. Given that this is a once in a century opportunity to develop a large parcel to the benefit of the entire region, there needs to be a broad and open discussion between HYM, the BPDA, MassDOT, the MBTA, and Massport.
 
The urban design of the area reminds me of the old Fenway, which I like. But the architecture reminds me of the new Fenway, which is boring and monotonous at this scale.
 
I think this looks really good. You have to remember its a new neighborhood built from scratch. Therefore its going to look like the new fenway area, suffolk downs, the seaport etc... I think it looks great for being an entirely new built neighborhood. You really cant ask for much more than this, its full of retail, housing, offices, parks, has great scale, and the blue line/highways giving it access. I hope this is built as shown.
 
I'd like to see greater provision for transit circulation from Rt1A to the Blue Line, particularly if they ever do something with the old RR right of way at the water's edge on the Chelsea River (such as bringing a SLG type bus up along it)
 
I am actually very nearly shocked.

Everything varies between good and spectacular....

stick n move said:
I think this looks really good....
Click to expand...


"Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?"

said no one ever after one of your reviews. :)
 
This is a wonderful expansion from Assembly, to Northpoint, to Seaport sq, to here. At Assembly they were figuring out the Boston style of neighborhood from scratch architecture. It was good and is still being improved, but some of the architecture like at the lego building is extremely cheap. Still it all left a good template which you can walk around inside of and plan how to improve upon it. It needs more retail that is also spaced apart from parking garage entrances better in some places, the parking garages need to be hidden much better, and it needs to connect to its surrounding area much better as well instead of having a strip mall at the end. Its a nice area though and more importantly it sparked something that now is being improved upon and replicated to great success all around the city. Allston yards will be yet a later and even more improved upon version when that is built. Assembly is also still getting better because there are always open lots and nooks and crannys that more can be added to making neighborhoods full and lively. The median art in the Seaport is another example. The biggest mistake at Assembly was the waterfront, this is a huge miss as waterfronts are usually where the best face is but for some reason they dumped all the open garages and building stilts and other things on that side. Oh well this is/was really a living test grounds.

Northpoint essentially wrapped it all up and showed on a small scale how it can be done right. Now Suffolk Downs will show it on a large scale with great architecture, hidden parking, wonderful integration into the surrounding neighborhood, retail/office/condo mix which is much more even. Overall just the culmination of many different attempts have lead to a better product every time which in real life is going to lead to great neighborhoods. Then after this improved style of build from scratch neighborhoods is moving along here yet even more things they find will carry over to Allston yards as well.
 
Last edited:
The Urban streetscape design is a step up. Which is a win in my opinion. Architecturally speaking, it is what it is. From a city and urban planning standpoint, there's some potential.
 
I'm glad this plan is integrating real climate change adaptation (although they incorrectly call it mitigation..) which seems to have been a huge misstep for the seaport plans. It seems well integrated into the plan as well. This area looks fairly vulnerable based off the flood maps on boston's climate ready website.

Design wise I think its pretty much a bigger Assembly Row but did we expect anything creative and contextual? And yeah ditto on the need for more affordability..
 
Globe; City aims to strike a balance as major development plans for Suffolk Downs move forward

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2018/12/12/suffolk/MgLP4xVHBT2hFleCkoUknL/story.html

By Tim Logan GLOBE STAFF DECEMBER 13, 2018

Suffolk Downs won’t be home to Amazon’s second headquarters. But it will, if plans pan out, grow into an enormous new neighborhood, with room for tens of thousands of residents on the edge of East Boston.

The debate over what that neighborhood might look like, and who might get to live there, is heating up.

A master plan for the 161-acre horse track is grinding its way through City Hall, with advocates and activists watching warily while one of Boston’s best-known developers tries to capitalize on what he calls “an opportunity for something really wonderful.” When the plan is done, likely by next summer, it will lay out rules for density, open space, affordable housing, and other details of a project that will likely take two decades to build.
contd
 
I think I've said this before, but I really wish there was some restoration of the Belle Isle Inlet as part of the development plan. I would have loved to see some larger riparian buffers from the channel edge (in exchange for added density in the development), and maybe some changes to the inlet's geometry (greater sinuosity) to better mimic natural estuarine systems. Some salt marsh creation along the margins would be great for water quality. Belle Isle Marsh is pretty degraded, and decisions we make upstream can have great impacts on the marsh. Not to mention the resiliency benefits (if you believe in sea level rise/climate change). With restoration, I think it would serve as an even greater asset for the community as a resource for passive recreation than as currently designed.

Once this development is created, there won't be another opportunity. But reactive decision making is humanity's specialty.
 
Money said:
I think I've said this before, but I really wish there was some restoration of the Belle Isle Inlet as part of the development plan. I would have loved to see some larger riparian buffers from the channel edge (in exchange for added density in the development), and maybe some changes to the inlet's geometry (greater sinuosity) to better mimic natural estuarine systems. Some salt marsh creation along the margins would be great for water quality. Belle Isle Marsh is pretty degraded, and decisions we make upstream can have great impacts on the marsh. Not to mention the resiliency benefits (if you believe in sea level rise/climate change). With restoration, I think it would serve as an even greater asset for the community as a resource for passive recreation than as currently designed.

Once this development is created, there won't be another opportunity. But reactive decision making is humanity's specialty.
Click to expand...

From what I can tell from the plans though they are not only preserving what is still there but also making *some* improvements, along with designing with sea level rise in mind. Basically, better than what we've got, and where we can't exactly dump fill into water to create land these days, I'm not particularly opposed to this either. I'm 100% for cramming development near transit and urban centers and preventing sprawl from intruding upon the still existing wetlands that haven't been developed upon already.

Also for knows how contaminated the soil is closer to those tanks, it's probably not that ecologically friendly to let too much of that mingle with coastal water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top