RandomWalk
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
- Messages
- 3,024
- Reaction score
- 4,269
Lab buildings without parking don’t find tenants.
Lab buildings without parking don’t find tenants.
Sure, so cut the lab space (and parking) in at least half while keeping the same footprints/heights, and make the rest housing. Lab floor-to-floor height is ~15', while housing is ~10', so you'd get 50% more square footage with the same proposed footprints and heights.
I get that Somerville wants to maximize its tax revenue at all costs (and thus skews heavily towards building labs), but a) this isn't a great spot for one, and b) we desperately need more housing!
Sadly, the City doesn't get to dictate what property owners get to build in quite that way.
Sure it does.Sadly, the City doesn't get to dictate what property owners get to build in quite that way.
So youIt is insane to me that Somerville endorses the amount of proposed parking with barely a second thought, especially given how "transit oriented" the City purports to be. As I wrote above, Medford Street, lower McGrath, and Somerville Ave. are already bumper-to-bumper during rush hour at the future Milk Square intersection:
View attachment 34335
There is no way that this choke point could accommodate an influx of an additional 588 cars exactly when it is busiest. While this mitigation is a step in the right direction,
View attachment 34334
it does nothing to solve the root problem, namely the amount of traffic entering the site in the first place.
Reading between the lines here, you must not drive? (because that would be addressing the root problem, yes?) It is certainly unfortunate that not everyone is afforded that luxury.It is insane to me that Somerville endorses the amount of proposed parking with barely a second thought, especially given how "transit oriented" the City purports to be. As I wrote above, Medford Street, lower McGrath, and Somerville Ave. are already bumper-to-bumper during rush hour at the future Milk Square intersection:
View attachment 34335
There is no way that this choke point could accommodate an influx of an additional 588 cars exactly when it is busiest. While this mitigation is a step in the right direction,
View attachment 34334
it does nothing to solve the root problem, namely the amount of traffic entering the site in the first place.
I know it's not directed at me (one car family in east somerville).Reading between the lines here, you must not drive? (because that would be addressing the root problem, yes?) It is certainly unfortunate that not everyone is afforded that luxury.
It seems notable that Somerville actually zoned this site for 1,000 spaces.
nobody from topsfield will be working in these buildings if it takes them 30 minutes do drive from the bridge at McGrath/Highland to their workspace a half mile away.Labs generate tax revenue, while demanding fewer services than residential. They also offset the tax burden on residential properties. All for the low low price of buckets of parking for the scientists who want to live in Weston, Ipswich, Topsfield, or Carlisle.
nobody from topsfield will be working in these buildings if it takes them 30 minutes do drive from the bridge at McGrath/Highland to their workspace a half mile away.
I'm encouraged that they're actually planning the street system. In Massachusetts that level of planning has historically has been absent.Sure it does.
Look at the way they're insisting on complying with a future grid that's probably 20 years away.
True, It could all be fine, and this particular project being just off McGrath will probably fare better than most.I realize you're talking about hypothetical future conditions, but I make this drive every day I go to the office, and the only thing that gridlocks it is either construction equipment or vehicle delivery blocking lanes.
Also, it's worth noting that McGrath Highway itself has plenty of capacity - it's just uselessly hoisted up into the sky. Making the merge onto McGrath NB from Washington the road behind me is always so wide open I need to remind myself to check behind me.
You've noted your concern that this project will be finished before Grounding McGrath, but it will also exist for many years afterward, and the problems on this corridor are with the infrastructure, not the demand.
That plan view ^of the development shows a "McGrath Boulevard", the McGrath Hwy after grounding, which appears to be a solid ribbon of pavement with no greenway or paths, and includes two bus lanes running down the center. I'm hoping this is not the current official plan. Previous versions I'd seen show a roadway but with a greenway and paths running alongside it.
Has MassDOT said anything about minimum lane capacity for a boulevard yet?
Sadly, the City doesn't get to dictate what property owners get to build in quite that way.
Recommended approval from City of Somerville: https://s3.amazonaws.com/somervillema.gov.if-us-east-1/s3fs-public/2023-02/McGrath 200 Staff Memo.pdf
Interesting part of this memo is the detailed discussion of street grids with Grounding McGrath. They request a change to expand the width of the internal alleyway so that it can become an extension of Medford or Poplar streets down the line.
Heres MassDot's preferred alternative from 2013. Four thru lanes in each direction. Wider than Revere Beach Parkway at Wellington:Are you referring to a specific decision-making process? My understanding was that MassDOT had advanced a preferred alternative for this corridor that still stands...
They should really re-think this. This 4 lane design is currently the layout a little way further down the road at Foss Park and it is not any more pedestrian friendly than the overpass.Heres MassDot's preferred alternative from 2013. Four thru lanes in each direction. Wider than Revere Beach Parkway at Wellington:
They should really re-think this. This 4 lane design is currently the layout a little way further down the road at Foss Park and it is not any more pedestrian friendly than the overpass.