1 - 101 Main St. | Broad Canal Zoning + Development | Cambridge

B

bigpicture7

Senior Member
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
3,746
Reaction score
8,606
Mods, I couldn't identify a previous thread on this, so please move if this is redundant.

There was a community meeting in early December on a zoning & (re)development proposal for the Broad Canal area in Cambridge.

See CorUrbanize site here: https://courbanize.com/projects/broadcanal/updates

Video overview from community mtg:

Some take-aways of what's being proposed:
  • Likely (some) demo of middle parking garage and construction of new building between 1 and 101 Main (from Beals & Assoc. @ Community Mtg.):
img1.png


I believe the glass building rendered above is just a placeholder, as the presentation seems to imply actual height would be between 250' - 350'
  • Retail/activation of the southern side of the canal
  • Retail/activation of the Main St. side of the complex
Again, apologize if this is redundant with material others have posted. I wasn't at this community mtg, so I'm curious if others know more.
 
Last edited:
We're really building up the density in Kendall lately. This building will fit quite snug between the two.

Though in the conceptual phase, looks like some enhancements are planned around the Broad Canal, including a potential bridge over the canal.
1610322217980.png

1610322352671.png
1610322388087.png
 
RandomWalk said:
Too bad they couldn’t re-skin the extant buildings.
Click to expand...

Seriously.

But, the reason they're no considering it is because the windows are already floor-ceiling so there's little market-value to doing so. I used to work in that building on the 17th floor. It's a nice building besides the exterior.

Just wait another 30-40 years and it will all need to be replaced anyways.

Edit: Floor to ceiling in some key areas. I've forgotten that it's more like waist high in a lot of places.
 
Last edited:
meddlepal said:
Seriously.

But, the reason they're no considering it is because the windows are already floor-ceiling so there's little market-value to doing so. I used to work in that building on the 17th floor. It's a nice building besides the exterior.

Just wait another 30-40 years and it will all need to be replaced anyways.
Click to expand...

I just wish they could do something with the ends of the 1 & 101 buildings that face Kendall and that face Boston. They can leave the expansive sides that face Main St. as-is. As the developer knows, these parcels are inevitably a "gateway into Cambridge."

I also hope the new middle building ("51 Main" I think it would be) can break the plateau of the others; not for sake of height, but just to break up the block.

Based on the presentation, I generally applaud the goal of activating along the canal and Main st. This could be a win for the Kendall area.
 
Suffolk 83 said:
To be fair, that stretch of main street is an apocalyptic hellscape that few dare walk along
Click to expand...

It certainly was, but...
Now that the Longfellow restoration is (very nicely) done with new sidewalks and bike lanes, a lot more people enjoy walking across (and therefore past these buildings). This applies to both inbound/outbound sides of the bridge, as they recently installed a new pedestrian cut-through just prior to the Red Line portal. This is less of a dead-end than it was.

Secondly, if you view the above presentation, it is clear that this is as much (if not more) about activating the canal side as the Main St. side. Right now the south bank of the canal is a wasteland, but as curcuas mentions, they are talking about installing a pedestrian pass-through at 51 Main, and installing a pedestrian bridge across the canal (see Stefal's images). It seems that the thought is to create a new boardwalk with shops/etc on the south side of the canal that is easily accessed from multiple points. I don't know if this will work, but it's an intriguing idea.
 
Last edited:
Wow, they're finally add a final tower there. That is the last available parcel on this stretch. With this, MXD, and MIT's projects including the Ragon expansion, every parcel from the Longfellow Bridge to Windsor will be filled.

That arcade would be amazing.

This is an excellent project. My only complaint is the choice of a glass tower instead of a (partially matching) brick/glass structure.
 
A zoning petition was submitted for this project last week.

From the project's CoUrbanize site:
We are excited to announce that we have now submitted a Zoning Petition to the Cambridge City Council. The Zoning Petition outlines the proposed Broad Canal Subdistrict for consideration by the City of Cambridge. Acceptance of the petition and resulting creation of the Broad Canal Subdistrict will pave the way for an improved One and 101 Main Street and activated Broad Canal.
Click to expand...

If I am interpreting this petition correctly, a building of up to 350' could be permitted if certain conditions are satisfied.
 
bigpicture7 said:
A zoning petition was submitted for this project last week.

From the project's CoUrbanize site:
​

If I am interpreting this petition correctly, a building of up to 350' could be permitted if certain conditions are satisfied.
Click to expand...
Conditioned on being distinctive.

In the Broad Canal Subdistrict, no more than one building shall be allowed to exceed two hundred fifty (250) feet in height. In reviewing a Development Proposal or Final Development Plan including a building that exceeds two hundred fifty (250) feet in height, the Planning Board shall give consideration to a building that is designed to be a distinctive architectural landmark. In no event shall any building having a height in excess of three hundred fifty (350) feet be permitted.
Click to expand...
Bolding mine.
 
I think 'distinctive' is a very charitable word for this infill tower, but it certainly stands out among its neighbors and breaks up a bit of the monotony of the block as it is today. I think it'll be most effective at doing that in this angle from Boston:
1615336226456.png


Always love to see parking go away, especially in a building that's built like it's in Stanford, CT, which is FILLED with office landscrapers over massive parking podiums like this.

Ditto to all the comments about improving this bit of Main Street. Plenty of people walk here, especially now that the Longfellow Bridge construction is long finished. The significant road diet resulting in the buffered bike lane also accommodates a lot of bike traffic now that it actually feels safe from drivers speeding off the downhill slope of the Longfellow. They mentioned in the meeting video coordinating with Cambridge DPW on improvements here, which would be welcomed, especially if it means being able to move the curb out without disturbing the trees that provide a really generous canopy on this block.
 
DigitalSciGuy said:
I think 'distinctive' is a very charitable word for this infill tower, but it certainly stands out among its neighbors and breaks up a bit of the monotony of the block as it is today. I think it'll be most effective at doing that in this angle from Boston.

Always love to see parking go away, especially in a building that's built like it's in Stanford, CT, which is FILLED with office landscrapers over massive parking podiums like this.

Ditto to all the comments about improving this bit of Main Street. Plenty of people walk here, especially now that the Longfellow Bridge construction is long finished. The significant road diet resulting in the buffered bike lane also accommodates a lot of bike traffic now that it actually feels safe from drivers speeding off the downhill slope of the Longfellow. They mentioned in the meeting video coordinating with Cambridge DPW on improvements here, which would be welcomed, especially if it means being able to move the curb out without disturbing the trees that provide a really generous canopy on this block.
Click to expand...

Well said; regarding your first point, however, the building as-rendered is nowhere near 350', so I don't think that's what's being referred to as 'distinctive' in the zoning petition document cited above. I think the document is saying that IF the building were to rise to near/at that height it would need to be distinctive (whatever that means exactly).
 
bigpicture7 said:
Well said; regarding your first point, however, the building as-rendered is nowhere near 350', so I don't think that's what's being referred to as 'distinctive' in the zoning petition document cited above. I think the document is saying that IF the building were to rise to near/at that height it would need to be distinctive (whatever that means exactly).
Click to expand...
"Distinctive" is paired with 'landmark", which I daresay is a synonym for iconic. Nothing in the renderings approaches 'iconic', nor do I think the renderings were intended to depict such.

I think the city deliberately set a high bar, sort of 'Hey Mr. Developer, you can get an additional 100 feet for a design that's 'in your face, Boston!' (I wonder if you could see a 350 foot building from the top floor of Boston City Hall.) Pair an iconic building with an iconic bridge. Hell, give him 400 feet if the developer can do that!
 
stellarfun said:
I think the city deliberately set a high bar, sort of 'Hey Mr. Developer, you can get an additional 100 feet for a design that's 'in your face, Boston!' (I wonder if you could see a 350 foot building from the top floor of Boston City Hall.) Pair an iconic building with an iconic bridge. Hell, give him 400 feet if the developer can do that!
Click to expand...

Which is why I don't see the developer attempting that goal... iconic costs money and would likely sacrifice square footage for another hundred feet... its probably not enough of a carrot to justify it.
 
Your typically only get iconic architecture with bespoke, long-term owner occupied buildings.
 
"Iconic" for Kendall and Cambridge either means:
1) a slightly less boring typical glass tower
2) an actually innovative designed community processed down to banality
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top