Dorchester Bay City (nee Bayside Expo Ctr.) | Columbia Point

DBM

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
1,054
Reaction score
353
Because this region employs 2 architecture firms.
I appreciate how depressing it is a tiny handful of firms--CBT, Elkus Manfredi, etc.--seem to monopolize all of the gaudy, attention-grabbing tower proposals.

But why let that distract us from the underlying reality--that Boston is a hotbed and global mecca for architecture/design?

There's a reason Sasaki decided to move from the boonies of Watertown to the heart of the city. I could list 20 architecture/design firms in DTX alone. Add up whatever architecture/design clusters there must be in Back Bay, North Station, Cambridge--the list must be massive.

And think about how uniquely conducive the Boston ecosystem is to all of the engineering firms that architects must partner with. Add it all together, and it's a much more compelling narrative than the cynical and *intellectually impoverished* hot take that only a handful of firms can flourish here.

(Also remember: big change coming any minute now! ;))
 

Highwayguy

New member
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Messages
64
Reaction score
80
I don't think it's any private entity's responsibility to fix the local roads and subway system.
If the proponent wasn’t proposing underground parking under literally every building (net 3000 new spaces) I would agree with you. Their own analysis predicts the addition of 1500 new peak hour vehicular trips, enough to overwhelm Columbia point even if the roadway network wasn’t already stillborn. Since they are choosing to incentivize vehicular travel by providing those spaces, l think it is completely reasonable for the proponent to pay (more) for mitigation.

Typically, developers pay for the design and construction of mitigation measures, but that $14 million is for design costs too. So that $14 million would net about $11 million in built improvements.

Or put another way, just under three new red line cars. Not trains, cars. Except that $14 million is to be split four ways between the City, DCR, MassDOT (Highway) and MBTA. So assuming an even split the T would get the money to build 80% of a new red line car. How so very generous.
 

Highwayguy

New member
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Messages
64
Reaction score
80
Another thing to note is that their congestion analysis doesn’t look as bad as actual operations since the existing network operates at LOS E or F already. If one just glanced at the results, a degradation of one letter grade from an E to an F or holding constant at an F doesn’t look that bad. But just like on a test, there’s a huge difference between receiving an F for a 59% or for a 10%.

One of the central tenants of traffic engineering is that congestion increases exponentially per vehicle added to a facility past critical density. So 1500 vehicles added to a network past critical density is, well a 10% on your midterm.
 
Last edited:

Blackbird

Active Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
695
Reaction score
829
If the proponent wasn’t proposing underground parking under literally every building (net 3000 new spaces) I would agree with you. Their own analysis predicts the addition of 1500 new peak hour vehicular trips, enough to overwhelm Columbia point even if the roadway network wasn’t already stillborn. Since they are choosing to incentivize vehicular travel by providing those spaces, l think it is completely reasonable for the proponent to pay (more) for mitigation.
That's a good argument! I'm all for less parking at the site!

When a new IKEA moves in they generally shell out for intersections and traffic mitigations
Source?
 

Highwayguy

New member
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Messages
64
Reaction score
80
Its required per the enviromental impact process. Per DOT's TIA guidelines, DOT may require mitgation measures if,

"Generation of 2,000 or more new ADT by motor vehicles on roadways providing access to a single location or Generation of 1,000 or more new ADT by motor vehicles on roadways providing access to a single location and construction of 150 or more new motor vehicle parking spaces at a single location."
 
Last edited:

Blackbird

Active Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
695
Reaction score
829
Its required per the enviromental impact process. Per DOT's TIA guidelines, DOT may require mitgation measures if,

"Generation of 2,000 or more new ADT by motor vehicles on roadways providing access to a single location or Generation of 1,000 or more new ADT by motor vehicles on roadways providing access to a single location and construction of 150 or more new motor vehicle parking spaces at a single location."
Wouldn't DBC check those same boxes?
 

Top