Cambridge Crossing (NorthPoint) | East Cambridge/Charlestown | Cambridge/Boston

Actually, the only buildings currently under construction at Northpoint are Sierra and Tango. The enormous structure you're thinking of is the Archstone Smith Apartments across the street. Watching all three buildings going up at once is quite spectacular though.
 
LeTaureau said:
Actually, the only buildings currently under construction at Northpoint are Sierra and Tango. The enormous structure you're thinking of is the Archstone Smith Apartments across the street. Watching all three buildings going up at once is quite spectacular though.
Click to expand...

well ill be.
 
What a nice day for walking today was.. this is the "Tango" building



"Sierra"



And this last one was taken from the roof of a garage

 
I guess we'll have Charles River Park on both sides of the river now.
 
Hmmm....

So, is that SMMA project actually outside the "NorthPoint" area? The developer is "Catamount Holding", which I don't think is the developer of the other buildings.

Perhaps other developers are riding coattails?
 
Re: Northpoint residential project

JS38 said:
Project I found online in the Northpoint area. Not sure if this is up to date,
but if so interesting to have Arqitectonica working in Boston. Building itself reminds me of the McLaren in South Boston. Anyways, the link is here:
http://www.smma.com/portfolio/portfolio.cfm?menu=commercial&project_id=27
Click to expand...

Notice there is a building "V' in the model at the current Lechmere station site.

Some more info & pics can be found here:
http://www.arquitectonica.com/flash.htm
click on projects/residential/22 Water
 
About the potential tunnel for McGrath Hwy from the Cambridge Chronicle:
http://www.townonline.com/cambridge/homepage/8998959752855683071

Emotions ran high at the East Cambridge Planning meeting last week during a discussion of City Councilor Tim Toomey?s council order to depress a section of highway so pedestrians can cross safely. Toomey representatives say depressing the highway and building a pedestrian crosswalk at ground level is the safest solution to the problem and will add greenery to the area....
 
I think thats a good idea. I know I am not looking forawrd to going from the new lechmere to galleria.

Of course, the owners of galleria would support this tunnel proposal
 
Coasting to a halt? Court ruling may slow Cambridge project
By Scott Van Voorhis
Boston Herald Business Reporter
Tuesday, February 13, 2007 - Updated: 12:49 AM EST


A ruling by the state?s highest court has thrown a monkey wrench into a plan to transform a stretch of East Cambridge into a new, upscale neighborhood.

More than a year after Cambridge and state officials gave a green light to the 45-acre NorthPoint project, the state?s Supreme Judicial Court yesterday ordered the plan?s developers back to the negotiating table.

The court ordered NorthPoint?s developers to seek a license under Chapter 91, which governs coastal building. The SJC ruled that state environmental regulators were mistaken when they waived that requirement.

The decision could have ramifications for development projects along the Bay State?s coastline, many of which also received such waivers that now appear invalid, waterfront development watchdogs said.

?For the NorthPoint project, it has significant implications, and for other projects as well,? said Vivien Li, executive director of the Boston Harbor Association.

The ruling covers several acres of the NorthPoint development, though it does not affect the project?s initial phases, which include two new condo buildings and a new Lechmere MBTA station. But the initial phases are just the start of a grand plan by Boston-based Spaulding & Slye Investments and a New Hampshire firm that envisions 20 buildings on 19 blocks.

The court ruled that several acres in the planned NorthPoint development, while not directly fronting the Charles River, are nonetheless part of a ?tidal? area that included a Charles tributary. The ruling, in turn, offers a much more expansive definition of what areas should be covered by the Chapter 91 rules.

The coastal building rules, while lauded by environmentalists, are bemoaned by developers, who complain of long delays and heavy restrictions.

In the Hub, a number of planned projects on the East Boston waterfront may now face problems as a result of the court ruling, observers said.



Link
 
If this was already aribitrated (which i believe it was) this sets huge precedent. Appears to be a reversal of res judicata.
 
Deval says coast is clear: After court ruling, gov moves to aid projects
By Scott Van Voorhis
Boston Herald Business Reporter
Friday, March 2, 2007 - Updated: 12:57 AM EST


Gov. Deval Patrick signaled yesterday he will come to the rescue of Cambridge?s giant NorthPoint project and several other developments endangered by a recent state court ruling.

Administration officials filed legislation that would effectively reverse a recent state Supreme Judicial Court decision - one that threatened to trigger extensive coastal building reviews for NorthPoint and other developments.

However, Patrick?s newest legislative drive - which would restore rules exempting near-waterfront projects from coastal building review - outraged critics of the NorthPoint proposal, who pointed out that two key administration officials previously held top jobs on the Cambridge project?s development team.

Daniel O?Connell, Patrick?s economic developer and housing czar, is a veteran real estate executive who previoulsy led the NorthPoint team. Greg Bialecki, appointed to be the administration?s real estate permitting guru, was the project?s lead attorney.

?I am outraged,? fumed Richard Clarey, a member of the Cambridge activist group that won the NorthPoint case and a lawyer. ?They are helping themselves.?

Meanwhile, John Moot, president of the Association of Cambridge Neighborhoods, argued the Patrick administration?s proposal would cripple his group?s hard-won efforts to force changes in the NorthPoint plan.

The neighborhood group contends the ruling by the SJC gives it leverage to force NorthPoint?s developers to increase the amount of parkland and civic space in the city neighborhood-sized project. The SJC found that NorthPoint, while not directly on the water, is still subject to coastal building regulations because much of it would be built on ?filled tidelands.?

NorthPoint is just one project endangered by the court ruling, which could affect an array of projects, from new towers proposed for North and South stations to new development around Fenway Park [map], said Ian Bowles, secretary of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. Even long-established buildings are now subject to ?title uncertainty? in the wake of the court ruling, he argued.

?This is not about one project,? said Kyle Sullivan, a spokesman for the governor?s office. ?The SJC ruling had a statewide impact.?



Link
 
The neighborhood group contends the ruling by the SJC gives it leverage to force NorthPoint?s developers to increase the amount of parkland and civic space in the city neighborhood-sized project.

Good for Gov. Deval. Seriously, how much parkland do these neighborhood groups want? As it is, it seems like the amount of open space in NorthPoint goes above and beyond the norm. Can anyone answer this question....where do these "community activists" get the money to fund their lawsuits? It does take time and lots of money to take these things to court.
 
very good. that ruling was bad news for economic development.
 
However, one thing the neighborhood should get from the developer is a traffic tunnel for O'Brien Highway (Route 28), so that people don't have to walk across 8 lanes of 55-mph traffic to get to the relocated Lechmere T station. I hope whatever bill the Legislature passes carves out an exception for this.
 
I am sure their were plans for something like that anyways, as i don't think the galleria owners would have it any other way.
 
No, it's something the neighborhood wants, but it's not something NorthPoint developers have offered. The SJC ruling gave the neighborhood some leverage, and I'd hate to see it suddenly thrown away by legislative action.

Burying this part of the highway would help knit NorthPoint to the existing East Cambridge neighborhood, and is a much better idea than a pedestrian bridge or pedestrian tunnel.

You'll hear more from Rep. Tim Toomey about this.
 
Ron Newman said:
Burying this part of the highway would help knit NorthPoint to the existing East Cambridge neighborhood, and is a much better idea than a pedestrian bridge or pedestrian tunnel.
Click to expand...

OK, so why don't you lobby for the state Highway Department or the town of Cambridge to allocate some money to bury that part of the highway?

That is what people in normal states do. They don't try to use extortion to get developers to do things for them.
 
Ron Newman said:
However, one thing the neighborhood should get from the developer is a traffic tunnel for O'Brien Highway (Route 28), so that people don't have to walk across 8 lanes of 55-mph traffic to get to the relocated Lechmere T station. I hope whatever bill the Legislature passes carves out an exception for this.
Click to expand...

They are already getting a brand new T station from the developer. As it stands, this is a brownfields development, the city is benefiting just from the reclamation of previously unusable land. Do you want to crush the chances of redeveloping this area of the city by burdensome/unnecessary public demands?

There needs to be a better balance of public interest/private interest in the region in order for progress to be made. Congrats to Deval for taking a step in the right direction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top