Assembly Square Infill and Small Developments | Somerville

Because like 150 people used to go to Anthony’s and a few thousand used to park for $5. Nostalgia and cheap parking drive so much of the median take on new developments.

Both are good, both should have more housing, Silver Line should’ve been light rail. Making these huge stretches open to the public massively improve life for locals and visitors alike.
 
#bancars said:
Good write up on the area:

www.bostonglobe.com

Ten years after opening, Assembly Row booms on - The Boston Globe

The massive mixed-use complex has transformed its corner of Somerville and is spinning off smaller projects all around it.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
Click to expand...

I enjoyed reading the article and always chuckle at the comments section. I remember the area well since I moved to Somerville in 1987. There was the Assembly mall and movie theater in that area, and that was about it in the late 80's. It's SO MUCH better now.

  • Build the 2nd entrance to the Orange Line that allows people to exit to the park and future pedestrian bridge.
  • Build the Pedestrian connection to the Encore Casino with an architecturally stunning design.
  • Rebuild the Draw 7 park into a showstopper destination that you would find in Brooklyn or New Jersey on the waterfront.
    • The backside of Assembly Row seems to have turned its back on this park. The view from the park is all parking garages at Assembly. Plus, it's NOT easy to access from the development. Believe me, I tried!!!!
  • Build more housing!

Then, I think you would really have something. :) However, I like it as it is today too.
 
Bill Blass said:
How come the reaction to Seaport is so much more negative vs. Assembly?
Click to expand...
I don't want to sound to hard on the Seaport, but I can think of a few reasons Assembly has been turning out nicer, in my opinion.

Assembly feels a lot more pedestrian friendly. Basically everything is tree-lined. It's mostly wide sidewalks. There's narrow space for cars, so cars go slow, there's less traffic, it's quieter and easier to cross the street. By contrast, Seaport has a lot more wide arterial streets that are loud and less pleasant to walk around. Also, Assembly seems so much more dense with ground floor businesses. Each new building is designed to have that basically all the way around the ground floor, and most of the storefronts aren't giant, so there's a variety of things on each block. The Seaport has pockets of that, but a lot of the Seaport feels really sparse. A lot of the new buildings dedicate a ton of ground floor space to big lobbies (that no one uses), loading docks, and parking ramps. Those aren't fun things to walk around, so fewer people do, and the neighborhood ends up less lively. And also, Assembly is packing in way more residential above all that, along with office buildings. The more housing is good in itself, but also likely makes it easier for all those ground floor businesses to stay open later and for the streets to stay pleasantly busy more of the day. Assembly really seems like the closest we can get to the kind of urban density that hasn't been built in this country in 100 years. Seaport just isn't.
 
Bill Blass said:
How come the reaction to Seaport is so much more negative vs. Assembly?
Click to expand...
The biggest reason I can think of is that the Seaport is essentially a city-center neighborhood whereas Assembly is not. It's an extension of downtown Boston. Assembly is much further outside of the city center and is part of an entirely separate municipality. And while both developments transformed underutilized land into vibrant urban spaces (and deserve kudos for doing that), the bar was higher for the Seaport because the real estate is far more valuable and the area far more visible. The Seaport was always going to develop into something more considering where it is located. It's too central and too tied into downtown Boston not to. That's not necessarily true of Assembly.

On a personal level, I'd much rather eat, drink, shop (for the most part), and live in the Seaport than Assembly. But I have some major gripes about the lack of transit in the neighborhood itself, the exclusivity, the corporatization of the businesses, etc. I think it could have been better considering where it is. On the other hand, Assembly still feels like an outlet center with a smattering of residential and office/lab spaces to me. It has the OL, but it's physically disconnected from much of the rest of Somerville, and too large a percentage of the area is vacant lot or strip mall. But I still consider it a big win because it took a disconnected chunk of underutilized land and turned it into a place where people want to be. That took some effort.
 
Last edited:
ritchiew said:
I don't want to sound to hard on the Seaport, but I can think of a few reasons Assembly has been turning out nicer, in my opinion.

Assembly feels a lot more pedestrian friendly. Basically everything is tree-lined. It's mostly wide sidewalks. There's narrow space for cars, so cars go slow, there's less traffic, it's quieter and easier to cross the street. By contrast, Seaport has a lot more wide arterial streets that are loud and less pleasant to walk around. Also, Assembly seems so much more dense with ground floor businesses. Each new building is designed to have that basically all the way around the ground floor, and most of the storefronts aren't giant, so there's a variety of things on each block. The Seaport has pockets of that, but a lot of the Seaport feels really sparse. A lot of the new buildings dedicate a ton of ground floor space to big lobbies (that no one uses), loading docks, and parking ramps. Those aren't fun things to walk around, so fewer people do, and the neighborhood ends up less lively. And also, Assembly is packing in way more residential above all that, along with office buildings. The more housing is good in itself, but also likely makes it easier for all those ground floor businesses to stay open later and for the streets to stay pleasantly busy more of the day. Assembly really seems like the closest we can get to the kind of urban density that hasn't been built in this country in 100 years. Seaport just isn't.
Click to expand...
Interesting perspectives. But the density of the Seaport area is much higher than Assembly. Those 20 story buildings (one or two? in Assembly) need more loading docks and parking ramps and arterial roads (particularly since we screwed up the transit option in the Seaport). Assembly has a single transit station as a destination -- Seaport actually needs multiple transit stations to move people through the district.

Assembly feels to me like the kind of faux town center they build all over the south and southwest. Seaport is a new urban neighborhood. (And the only reason why it isn't denser with more height is Logan.)
 
Last edited:
This ^^^ is very much my take on both, as well. Assembly is a pre-fab outdoor mall, very non-city in character, and very homogeneous. Seaport -- whatever the critiques (too expensive, too elitist, not enough transit options, too many "glass boxes," too "squat") -- has distinct and differing character from one area/building to the next and is a true urban neighborhood that's becoming moreso by the week.
 
ritchiew said:
I don't want to sound to hard on the Seaport, but I can think of a few reasons Assembly has been turning out nicer, in my opinion.

Assembly feels a lot more pedestrian friendly. Basically everything is tree-lined. It's mostly wide sidewalks. There's narrow space for cars, so cars go slow, there's less traffic, it's quieter and easier to cross the street. By contrast, Seaport has a lot more wide arterial streets that are loud and less pleasant to walk around. Also, Assembly seems so much more dense with ground floor businesses. Each new building is designed to have that basically all the way around the ground floor, and most of the storefronts aren't giant, so there's a variety of things on each block. The Seaport has pockets of that, but a lot of the Seaport feels really sparse. A lot of the new buildings dedicate a ton of ground floor space to big lobbies (that no one uses), loading docks, and parking ramps. Those aren't fun things to walk around, so fewer people do, and the neighborhood ends up less lively. And also, Assembly is packing in way more residential above all that, along with office buildings. The more housing is good in itself, but also likely makes it easier for all those ground floor businesses to stay open later and for the streets to stay pleasantly busy more of the day. Assembly really seems like the closest we can get to the kind of urban density that hasn't been built in this country in 100 years. Seaport just isn't.
Click to expand...

Seaport is 20 times larger and has far greater foot traffic.

And Seaport Harborwalk vs. ?.

Game. Set. Match.
 
shmessy said:
Seaport is 20 times larger and has far greater foot traffic.

And Seaport Harborwalk vs. ?.

Game. Set. Match.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, the Harborwalk is great. And 20 times larger sounds high, but I take your point.

And that size disparity makes it kind of hard to even compare a large-ish development to a whole new neighborhood. But my point, in part, is this: If Seaport is 20 times bigger, then hopefully it would have 20 times as much "city stuff." Hopefully it has 20 times as much of that stuff that make cities great places to live, work, visit, and explore. But in a lot off ways, I don't think it does. Seaport certainly doesn't have 20 times as many new housing units. It doesn't seem to have 20 times as many bars, restaurants, stores, or other ground floor businesses, and so it feels kind of sparse. It doesn't have 20 times other basic amenities, like transit capacity, or medical services, or (maybe) public spaces. Seaport absolutely has 20 times as much office space, which is great, but that hyper focus has made the neighborhood predominantly for 9-5 office workers and leaves the whole area quiet a lot of the time. Seaport easily has 20 times the car traffic, which is bad. As for foot traffic, I really don't know. I visit these places, but not regularly. I'm usually kind of surprised how quiet Seaport is, considering it's right downtown, and surprised how busy Assembly is, considering it's not.

Again, I don't want to sound too negative about Seaport. I'm still amazed how much is there compared to the vast parking lots I remember. And I don't mean to set this up as some competition versus Assembly. I hope they both keep growing and succeed. But I think I can see some of the reasons Assembly gets pretty consistent praise, while Seaport gets more criticism.
 
Without going into all the urban theory, in terms of perception: the Globe dedicated a Spotlight series to trashing the Seaport and calling it racist. Hard to come back from that. The difference in tone in its treatment of Assembly is both striking and absurd.
 
Equilibria said:
Without going into all the urban theory, in terms of perception: the Globe dedicated a Spotlight series to trashing the Seaport and calling it racist. Hard to come back from that. The difference in tone in its treatment of Assembly is both striking and absurd.
Click to expand...
Thanks for pointing that one out, I read it. Of course the solution it suggests is that if only developers were more diverse then things would be better. Not sure why they would charge less money for rent depending on their race. But hey its the Globe.
 
Biggest differences: Assembly is full of North Shore suburbanites who want to "live in the city". Seaport is pretty much full of North *and* South Shore suburbanites going out on the town and then driving back with "nouveau riche" Bostonians living there.

Seaport's street network was never really resized from its industrial/maritime history and then when you added the Big Dig Pike extension, FHWA brain went "brrrr (must keep highway traffic moving at all costs)". This means the arterials have to provide capacity for so so many cars for the peak hour but are oversized for a lot of the rest of the day. Assembly never did have to ensure that the interstate didn't have any back-ups at all since it wasn't an interchange-oriented development/neighborhood.
 
Longfellow said:
Thanks for pointing that one out, I read it. Of course the solution it suggests is that if only developers were more diverse then things would be better. Not sure why they would charge less money for rent depending on their race. But hey its the Globe.
Click to expand...

Well, part of the point was to promote Massport, which is very proud of its program to select diverse development teams for its parcels (good for them, of course).

as02143 said:
Biggest differences: Assembly is full of North Shore suburbanites who want to "live in the city". Seaport is pretty much full of North *and* South Shore suburbanites going out on the town and then driving back with "nouveau riche" Bostonians living there.

Seaport's street network was never really resized from its industrial/maritime history and then when you added the Big Dig Pike extension, FHWA brain went "brrrr (must keep highway traffic moving at all costs)". This means the arterials have to provide capacity for so so many cars for the peak hour but are oversized for a lot of the rest of the day. Assembly never did have to ensure that the interstate didn't have any back-ups at all since it wasn't an interchange-oriented development/neighborhood.
Click to expand...

It's a little bit of a hard comparison to make, though, since Assembly doesn't really have a street network - it has Grand Union Boulevard and what are essentially driveways for parking garages, plus an outdoor mall called Assembly Row... Somerville's master plan does have more of a vision for a grid, plus rebuilding/rightsizing Middlesex Avenue (which is probably wide enough for six lanes at present), but we aren't there quite yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top