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

It seems like EF and G are under construction (or at least pile driving), but those don't add to 900ksf- do we [Ivyhedge?] know where Sanofi is going?
 
I know no one cares about traffic but what is the plan for Gilmore bridge? It’s always so backed up.
 
617 said:
I know no one cares about traffic but what is the plan for Gilmore bridge? It’s always so backed up.
Click to expand...

There is no plan for Gilmore Bridge traffic. Boston and Cambridge do not address vehicular traffic. Period. Ever since the Expressway revolt/cancellation in the late 60's, the widening or building of roads simply doesn't happen. Which is understandable, given that it would only induce more traffic usage, thus perpetuating the congestion. Better to expand the transit system.
 
Charlie_mta said:
Better to expand the transit system.
Click to expand...

I agree, but the devil is in the details. What transit expansion would accommodate current users of this bridge? Extend the one of the Lechmere buses (69, 87, etc) to Community College? Continue build out of Urban Ring elements (ie extend the SL3 busway to the Orange Line)? Add an infill CR stop at Sullivan? GLX + Porter extension? An infill Lowell Line stop in Somerville along the GLX? Bus lanes on North Washington Street? N-S Rail Link? Red-Blue Connector?
 
bigeman312 said:
I agree, but the devil is in the details. What transit expansion would accommodate current users of this bridge? Extend the one of the Lechmere buses (69, 87, etc) to Community College? Continue build out of Urban Ring elements (ie extend the SL3 busway to the Orange Line)? Add an infill CR stop at Sullivan? GLX + Porter extension? An infill Lowell Line stop in Somerville along the GLX? Bus lanes on North Washington Street? N-S Rail Link? Red-Blue Connector?
Click to expand...

Rather than looking at solutions for particular locations, a system-wide approach of expanding transit and reducing congestion would improve inner-metro transportation overall. A light rail urban ring, the Red-Blue Connector, the GLX, improved bus routes, increased bus-only lanes, would all help greatly. Politicians need to have the courage to remove parking and travel lanes in favor of bus-only lanes and light rail lines.
 
Charlie_mta said:
Rather than looking at solutions for particular locations, a system-wide approach of expanding transit and reducing congestion would improve inner-metro transportation overall. A light rail urban ring, the Red-Blue Connector, the GLX, improved bus routes, increased bus-only lanes, would all help greatly. Politicians need to have the courage to remove parking and travel lanes in favor of bus-only lanes and light rail lines.
Click to expand...

Not that I disagree that the transit system needs to be broader before people will really start leaving their cars, but in this particular case there is a transit infrastructure solution: Green Line on the Grand Junction. It wouldn't solve the problem completely (and I don't have the demand model to show exactly where all the cars on the Gilmore are coming from or going to) but connecting Assembly, Sullivan, and Kendall with a light rail line would seem to serve the most likely desire lines.
 
Connecting community college to lechmere and Kendall and even Kenmore would be nice...but they won’t do anything. Even the green line extension is going to fall short...would have been better to continue to route 16 and porter on each branch respectively.
 
jpdivola said:
Well in so far as height is a conduit for density. It reminds me of much the DC area development where it is too large scale and master planned to feel organic, but not dense enough to feel vibrant after house. A couple towers would help in that regard.
Click to expand...

meddlepal said:
Pseudo-urbanism. This kind of development sucks.
Click to expand...

^ Agreed. The street interface is very bleh. I can imagine these buildings undergoing a similar lobby/ground level facade as several buildings are seeing downtown with cafes and retail spaces either being built into existing lobbies (225 Franklin, 100 Federal) or capacious lobbies being shrunk to accommodate street-activating retail (33 Arch St).

CSTH said:
Screen-Shot-2019-01-02-at-4-53-14-PM.png
Click to expand...

LOL where on earth did they get those 3D train models? They look like some old Eurasian long-haul/sleeper trains and one of them is definitely a freight train...

Charlie_mta said:
Rather than looking at solutions for particular locations, a system-wide approach of expanding transit and reducing congestion would improve inner-metro transportation overall. A light rail urban ring, the Red-Blue Connector, the GLX, improved bus routes, increased bus-only lanes, would all help greatly. Politicians need to have the courage to remove parking and travel lanes in favor of bus-only lanes and light rail lines.
Click to expand...

^ This. Basically, the road diets for McGrath Highway in Somerville and Rutherford Ave in Boston have had their transport departments pointing at each other as a reason not to reduce their sizes and crosstown connectors like the Gilmore Bridge become the linchpin in the argument for maintaining massive arterials. The only real way to alleviate the problem is to have a comprehensive view of the network, bolstering the quality of non-driving modes, and knowing that taking space from cars does make the traffic 'disappear'. This 2008 CTPS study of Rt28 [PDF] posits that the bridge is likely a regional distributor of local traffic (local transit network need) and traffic coming off/going to I-93 to/from places not well connected to it (regional transit network need). Vehicular travel patterns have likely changed a bit since then and certainly will with this continued development, but it speaks to a potential market for infill stations here and at Sullivan in the regional rail network to nudge the commute calculus for those who otherwise have no better transit connection than bearing sitting in traffic, which sadly may be more time-effective for them. For local needs, it gives a congestion-free, off-street network connection to Porter and West Cambridge that supplements the Green Line at the new Lechmere. For regional needs, it gives Fitchburg, Haverhill, Newburyport, and Rockport communities more direct access to these job centers and local transit without having to go all the way to North Station and double-back on Orange, then possibly have another 5-10min walk and/or bus connection.
 
DigitalSciGuy said:
LOL where on earth did they get those 3D train models? They look like some old Eurasian long-haul/sleeper trains and one of them is definitely a freight train...
Click to expand...
probably from the same place they got the car models with really old German plates!
 
Gameguy326 said:
If there's one company I'm most excited about these days, it's Signage.
Click to expand...

Me too. Much more exciting than the usual render bs-artistry, by which I would have expected "biotechly," or "healthling" or "DNAnlysis" or the like.

That coupled with bizarre collection of trains. This one's a winner.
 
Ruairi said:
probably from the same place they got the car models with really old German plates!
Click to expand...

Maybe the red car is just visiting from Stuttgart. Quite a drive, but I've seen cars and campers German plates on roads in this area (as well as during a visit last month to Death Valley).
 
The narrow crowded walkway on the Gilmore Bridge, and then the very long, wide railway corridor extending unbridged towards the horizon, screams out for a pedestrian bridge crossing a couple of blocks west of the Gilmore. It would create a walking connection between East Cambridge/NorthPoint and Charlestown.

Also, that middle building looks nightmarishly like the O'Neill, LOL.

Screen-Shot-2019-01-02-at-4-53-14-PM.png
 
Charlie_mta said:
The narrow crowded walkway on the Gilmore Bridge, and then the very long, wide railway corridor extending unbridged towards the horizon, screams out for a pedestrian bridge crossing a couple of blocks west of the Gilmore. It would create a walking connection between East Cambridge/NorthPoint and Charlestown.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not a bad idea, though dips uncomfortably into the territory of getting someone to pay for it and the state to agree to the new crossing spanning BET's lead tracks. I think it'd be a good ped/transit connection to BET for employees (are they including a connection from NorthPoint to BET?) though what would it connect to on the Charlestown side other than the back-side of BHCC?
 
DigitalSciGuy said:
Actually, that's not a bad idea, though dips uncomfortably into the territory of getting someone to pay for it and the state to agree to the new crossing spanning BET's lead tracks. I think it'd be a good ped/transit connection to BET for employees (are they including a connection from NorthPoint to BET?) though what would it connect to on the Charlestown side other than the back-side of BHCC?
Click to expand...

I cannot recall for certain, but I think someone asked about that at a meeting a year or two ago and DivCo stated that the impediments to its construction were many (mostly because of some restriction on the span's terminal points and where the columns and pier caps would need to be vis-a-vis the tracks below. I don't think they studied it, though. Sounded more like a "yeah, never gonna happen" response.
 
Two bland placeholder-named streets are being renamed to honor Cambridge women:

DivcoWest, the developer behind the new 43-acre mixed-use
development Cambridge Crossing (CX), in partnership with the City of Cambridge, brought the renaming of two streets before the City Council, which voted to approve the change Monday evening, in response to the direction around creating improved wayfinding and more consistent street names. To honor two visionary women crucial to the City’s history, they are proposing that North Street becomes Jacobs Street, and North Point Boulevard becomes Morgan Avenue. The new names will reflect prominent African-American women with ties to Cambridge who were involved in the suffrage movement, Harriet A. Jacobs and Gertrude Wright Morgan.
Click to expand...

press release (PDF)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top