Search results

Modest older homes are already getting demolished, though. With demand for suburban living what it is, the land under those cheaper homes is sometimes worth 4-5x the home itself, so the pressure for redevelopment is high. In a lot of suburbs, you can see modest homes getting torn down in favor...

While I understand it would be cost-prohibitive, it would have been awesome if they branched the community path at the elevated viaduct and kept it elevated as a bridge over McGrath.

My understanding of the situation is that they are specifically looking to completely divest from the north-of-Stuart buildings and consolidate into the smaller footprint of their main building to support the shift from in-person to hybrid work. However, there are certain uses currently housed...

Looks like development has finally begun on this site. I think most recent documents show 44 -> 48 units and 4 -> 5 stories (view from Parker St, brick chimney is part of the building to the left of the proposed building in the render)

https://mass.streetsblog.org/2026/10/09/boston-will-begin-construction-next-week-on-safety-improvements-at-scene-of-louisa-gags-homicide Right on schedule!

Is that going to be a valet-only parking garage?

Agreed. I think if more retail is desirable, it would be much nicer to close off Revere Beach Blvd south of Revere St and turn it into a boardwalk-esque area with shops + entertainment, rather than trying to put lipstick on the Route 1A pig.

Most aren't specific to Boston, but I'll drop a few: Interactive population density (with population weighted densities for urban areas) - https://luminocity3d.org/WorldPopDen/#11/42.3494/-71.0603 High-rises documented by municipality - https://skyscraperpage.com/database/state/79 Walksheds and...

I am well aware of the benefits of mixed-income buildings. But the city could get more affordable units using those payments to subsidize units in older buildings while still ensuring economic diversity within buildings/neighborhoods.

Even so, ZERO chance it would be approved these days if it were being proposed for the first time. People just hate change.

It seems asinine to me that payments in lieu of affordable units are not a by-right option for all projects. If we as a city are going to be such a hardass about the affordability % reqs, the LEAST we should be doing is offering that flexibility.

And you don't think there's ANYTHING that zoning/planning regulators could change to make it cheaper.....

They need to open one in Boston.

I wonder if there is any intent behind the liveries in the render. All-purple trains would look so good

If you use the 300-meter definition of a supertall, the only place in Back Bay you could build that high would be between Hynes and Mass Ave; maybe 40 or 50 Dalton would be candidates.

Terminating at Ash st also gets you the benefits of 1) saving a bunch of $$$ with an at-grade station and no need to worry about grade crossings through Reading center 2) great location for TOD and even an out-of-the-way park + ride right off 128

Perhaps I worded it incorrectly. What I meant was more "density needed to be cost-effective", not "density needed to support". Regardless, what I said before still applies: Now, this is an old analysis with what I could only describe as an opaque methodology and suspect rigor, but it has some...

Specifically around station areas (not including peripheral industrial, low-density commercial, parks, etc.) its definitely closer to 20k if not above. But yes. At modern construction costs, it could possibly be difficult to justify building parts of even some of the existing lines if they...

Much of that development has been south of Rt 2 or west of 128. Downtown Lexington is nowhere near the 30k-40k/square mile population density needed to support heavy rail and won't ever be.

Adjusting the outer lanes of Rt 2 would be enormously expensive because of all the exit/entrance ramps and frontage roads. And all that for... a multi-use path directly adjacent to a high-traffic road? Ew.