General Infrastructure

[George_Apley]

^ That street grid Dave posted is pretty super as it is isn't it? Put one or two buildings on each plot and they're HUGE.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Here's the one I did a couple years ago on another thread. Orientation is South/BU ↑, North/Harvard ↓, East/downtown ←, West/Allston →. Direction arrows shown on all lanes. Pike on top, Cambridge St. in the middle. Red land is redevelopable, orange land is closed-off ramp dead zone, green land is parks for general lack of room/street access for redevelopment.

The direct Storrow/SFR interchange flyovers I draw here are wayyyy far-fetched for this particular realignment project, so let's assume for argument's sake that this is not part of the plans and that the Cambridge St./Storrow intersection interface stays the same configuration. So imagine this instead on the map:

-- Without the Storrow EB-to-Pike onramp cutting across the Beacon Park engine yard.
-- Without the Pike WB to SFR WB flyover cutting across the Beacon Park engine yard.
-- With the Pike onramp from SFR, offramp to the SFR intersection, and offramp to the Cambridge St. Allston direction restored in as-is condition.
-- With the Cambridge St.-to-Pike onramp from the Allston side restored more or less as-is, but packed a lot closer to to the onramp from the other direction to free up more land.
-- The red-shaded land between the Doubletree and the current/as-is ramps reverts back to orange (dead space).


OK...so mentally keeping that in mind. . .
-- Keep the Pike-to-Storrow EB direct onramp shown here tracing around Beacon Park loop. They can add that even today in the existing configuration were it not for Houghton Chemical's back driveway and freight siding. So all that's keeping them from doing a major de-clogging of the SFR intersection by peeling out Storrow EB traffic is making Houghton Chemical take a hike to the 'burbs.
-- Beacon Park engine yard can remain a railroad facility instead of getting bisected.
-- A small slice of the Viaduct on the curve is retained as the Pike WB exit ramp. Say they demolish the entire elevated EB carriageway on the curve and get rid of the third set of pilings on the WB carriageway to shrink the remaining 'legacy' viaduct's width to 2 lanes repurposed as an offramp. Basically, if you stay in what is today's WB right lane and take the exit, you will be traveling on entirely repurposed/shrunken 'legacy' infrastructure despite the major realignment elsewhere. Should save some money.
-- When the old alignment is torn town, level the embankment and shorten up the hill Cambridge St. climbs so there's more street-interfacing land to develop on both the Beacon Park side and the Cambridge St.-Rotterdam block. String together a street grid accordingly.
-- The high-speed toll gantries are concentrated in one place by the Cambridge St. bridge, and you get free movements from downtown to the exit to encourage more local usage of the Pike. It's only traffic heading to/from Newton that has to pay.



Hopefully that makes sense. I'm not about to go and redraw this thing sans the fanciful Storrow flyovers because it was a PITA to do last time and I'm just not that good at Photoshopping stuff.

 

[davem]

-- The high-speed toll gantries are concentrated in one place by the Cambridge St. bridge, and you get free movements from downtown to the exit to encourage more local usage of the Pike. It's only traffic heading to/from Newton that has to pay.[/QUOTE]

^THIS

As for the block size on my map, its basically the back bay street grid. I think its 200 something feet from sidewalk to sidewalk with a 20' alley bisecting each parcel, but I'm not 100% since I can't find the file.

As for the N/W streets, they are pulled through from existing ones in Allston. The really wide, landscaped one leading to the BHS is out of Harvard's old IMP, not my idea.

 

[Equilibria]

be great if we could get a street grid like that here. Have a feeling Harvard/Seaport-esque super blocks are in store though.

Remember that Harvard owns all this land. It's entirely possible given the speed of their projects in Allston that this stays completely empty for decades once the highway moves. That's one of the reasons I incorporated this site into my 2024 Olympic Plan - put something useful there for 5 or so years until Harvard's ready to figure out what to do with it.

 

[mass88]

Why is this state so opposed to using flyover ramps and stacked interchanges?

I am wondering is this will take away from rebuilding the 93/95 interchanges in Woburn and Canton.

 

[davem]

Remember that Harvard owns all this land. It's entirely possible given the speed of their projects in Allston that this stays completely empty for decades once the highway moves.

I couldn't agree more. They don't even know what they are doing with the Sears and Coke parcels on the opposite side of Cambridge St. This is a land holding, plain and simple. Selling it to Harvard was a mistake.

With Genzyme right there, the science school moving to this side of the river (if that's still the plan), the proximity to Kendall, and the gobs of developable land in Allston this really could have been the seaport take two. Instead it's likely to turn into a litter strewn field, ruining the potential of Cambridge st, and indeed Allston to return to its 20th century prosperity.

Even if that did not happen, I wish BU had gotten it. They DO need the space, and have been steadily building while Harvard releases rats and landbanks. Selling to BU could have also opened up the potential for them to build a real campus, as well as sell some of their more distant holdings in Audubon Circle and the far side of Kenmore to be put to better use.

 

[The EGE]

BU doesn't want to expand west except for athletic facilities. All the academic buildings are on East Campus; Audubon Circle is much closer than Packards and doesn't require crossing the BU Bridge intersection.

 

[ant8904]

BU doesn't want to expand west except for athletic facilities. All the academic buildings are on East Campus; Audubon Circle is much closer than Packards and doesn't require crossing the BU Bridge intersection.

Do you actually know that or just speculating based on New Balance and East Campus? Perhaps part of the that trend is because East campus is only spacious enough for build academic buildings. Not to mention the most campus-like and recent dormitories are on the west.

Combine that with BU history of failed attempts to get a real campus (stopped by things like the Great Depression and State taking for Storrow Drive), it possible to speculate BU's hopes was the land would allow a real campus. Also the train yard more logically fit to BU than Harvard. That area can actually connect, there's currently no real connection to Harvard.

 

[George_Apley]

It's maddening that land-banking is allowed for more than x-years after undeveloped land is bought. Neither Harvard nor any other developer should be allowed to sit on land for decades without putting forth both a master plan and a reasonable time table. At a certain point they should have to put-up or put it on the market.

 

[The EGE]

Do you actually know that or just speculating based on New Balance and East Campus? Perhaps part of the that trend is because East campus is only spacious enough for build academic buildings. Not to mention the most campus-like and recent dormitories are on the west.

Speculation based on personal experience. The east and south campus dorms and apartments are very popular even though the StuVi/etc dorms are rather nicer - simply because you can be in CAS, COM, Photonics, or the Cummington Street classrooms in 5 minutes or less. From West, it's a 15-20 minute walk or waiting for overcrowded buses.

The core academic buildings are on east; there's only so much housing they can put in West before folks start grousing. No one minds the athletic facilities in West because the athletes generally live there anyway.

 

[Matthew]

Interesting quote from a BU official I heard recently, they want to "de-car the Central Campus over the next 15-20 years."

 

[cozzyd]

I.e. close Comm Ave to through traffic? I guess one can take Beacon + Mountfort...

 

[choo]

It's maddening that land-banking is allowed for more than x-years after undeveloped land is bought. Neither Harvard nor any other developer should be allowed to sit on land for decades without putting forth both a master plan and a reasonable time table. At a certain point they should have to put-up or put it on the market.

I empathize with the frustration, but you can't do that. That's like being able to move into your neighbors house because the don't build a pool.

 

[Matthew]

I.e. close Comm Ave to through traffic? I guess one can take Beacon + Mountfort...

No, I think he was referring to the surface parking lots mostly. They are not being replaced, and that's intentional.

 

[CSTH]

Interesting quote from a BU official I heard recently, they want to "de-car the Central Campus over the next 15-20 years."

Perfect. The answer is to cover the pike with a boulevard from the cottage farm bridge to beacon st or brookline ave, and then take the cars off off comm ave. Just like that scheme we got all excited about for the pru-93 section a few months ago.

 

[George_Apley]

I empathize with the frustration, but you can't do that. That's like being able to move into your neighbors house because the don't build a pool.

Um that's not really a good analogy because that's not at all what I described. But yeah, obviously it couldn't be for normal plots. It would have to be a regulation against the large scale, multi-acre, land-banking of developers who have put forth no plans for improvement, nor a workable timetable. This sort of shit might be okay in the suburbs and exurbs, but it's not okay in a city. All sorts of kinks and layers would obviously need to be ironed out.

 

[choo]

^ The most logical route would be through eminent domain. Here there is precedent for taking land declared blighted (which I think is the case you are making for landbanked acres of a old rail facility- so not a bad case) and selling it for other private development in the name of economic development. That is essentially the famous case out of New Haven.

I don't like the idea of landbanking, but institutions like Harvard and BU are largely locked into the area (to the benefit of the whole region), but to constrain their capacity to grow long term could potentially hurt over the long term. Few things in this country have lasted/will last as long as a Harvard backed development.

 

[Matthew]

What would help: switching from Property to pure Land value tax. Applies to vacant lots since they are not part of the educational mission.

 

[George_Apley]

What would help: switching from Property to pure Land value tax. Applies to vacant lots since they are not part of the educational mission.

Is this one of those things that makes a lot of sense, but no one is talking about actually trying?

 

[davem]

I don't like the idea of landbanking, but institutions like Harvard and BU are largely locked into the area (to the benefit of the whole region), but to constrain their capacity to grow long term could potentially hurt over the long term. Few things in this country have lasted/will last as long as a Harvard backed development.

The issue is that Harvard owns all the land on the north side of cambridge street too, which is right next to the HBS and science project. They don't even know what they are doing with THAT land within the next decades, so who knows how long it will take to do something with Beacon Park.

The best solution might be to force them to enter into a long term lease on the property (possibly through the threat of ED), so the land is used for SOMETHING, but should they still need the land 40, 60, 80, 100 years down the line they have the option to not renew the lease.