Porter Square Infill and Small Developments

RandomWalk said:
If they could work out a parking light redevelopment that put in multiple buildings, that would be ideal. Alternatively, putting the parking underground would be an improvement over the existing setup.

Unfortunately, the easement for the Red Line probably makes any substantive changes nearly impossible to achieve.
Click to expand...
I don't think the Red Line is much of an impediment. The building with the CVS is new-ish, built in the 90s, right on top of the Red Line. (It used to just be more surface parking). So building is possible. If you wanted to put in an underground parking garage, it still shouldn't be a problem. That's the deepest train station in the T, about 100 feet deep, which should be plenty out of the way.
 
RandomWalk said:
If they could work out a parking light redevelopment that put in multiple buildings, that would be ideal. Alternatively, putting the parking underground would be an improvement over the existing setup.

Unfortunately, the easement for the Red Line probably makes any substantive changes nearly impossible to achieve.
Click to expand...
The Red Line is really deep through there, so maybe two levels of underground parking could be fit in where the existing lot is, for both the existing retail stores and any new residential development on top of the underground parking.
 
It's still not an easy garage to place underground - there is a sizeable ventilation system that will have to be worked around, one way or the other. Not impossible, but also not the most free of obstructions..

This could easily support a few hundred low-parking units. I think you'll need some parking if you intend to keep a grocery store on site (I selfishly recommend to maintain at least the grocery store, since there aren't many others around within walking distance of my house, and this one's already a little bit of a walk)..

I don't think we'll see anything on this lot any time soon. I believe it swapped hands to another Retail REIT company that has a reputation for holding properties and not doing much else other than retail, so as long as they can make some money off the leases here, I don't think they'll be doing much.

A developer is going to take a TON of risk if they want to substantially develop this further than something like 3 single-family homes (even that might be a challenge). A low-rise lab building was shot down next to this site, and you're going to be dealing with likely the most NIMBY group in the metropolitan area. I wouldn't risk my money on that...


(Small side rant, there were a lot of posters pasted up last year about how Cambridge wasn't considering the residents' right to park by putting in a bike lane on Mass Ave... Every time I walked by one of them, there were maybe only one or two parked cars, and even now, with the bike lane and the decreased parking, there are plenty of open spots to park on the side streets and Mass Ave.)
 
There’s quite a bit of open land around such an important station that has red line and commuter rail access and possibly even future green line access as well. Behind the mall is a massive parking lot, one block up from the intersection is a strip mall with a huge parking lot, there’s 2 empty lots directly across the street from the mall, and 2 buildings south from that on mass ave is a single story retail building. That’s a huge amount of under utilized space directly on an important transit hub.

I know it was discussed in other threads, but mass ave is another example of a main thoroughfare that has a surprising amount of single story retail buildings going up and down the street. They all have from 3 to even up to 8 story buildings on either side of hem, so these are the perfect places to add density that seamlessly blends into the existing fabric of the city. More importantly in the near term the best use of resources would be to try to densify porter in the places that are empty lots directly around the station, but after that they really need to try to incentivize those single story retail buildings to add like 5 stories of residential above them. They really could make a massive dent in the housing shortage while essentially keeping the look and feel of the city the same for ppl who are so worried about this by just adding a few floors of housing above each of these single story retail buildings.
 
The little apartment building next to the shopping mall is getting a new friend.

Edit: plans can be found here at the links about 22 White Street: https://www.cambridgema.gov/historic/permitsapplications/projectplansandstaffreports

Didn’t realize this is where the yarn shop had been, I was inside the demolished building once. The new building really demonstrates the inanity of requiring two stairs for a five-story, four-unit building. Such a huge waste of space and added expense, for negligible additional fire safety.


IMG_6637.jpeg
 
Last edited:
stick n move said:
but after that they really need to try to incentivize those single story retail buildings to add like 5 stories of residential above them.
Click to expand...
What form do you think those incentives should take? I'm all for increasing density, but I get nervous when a spot I like is forced to "temporarily" close for construction.... temporary often becomes permanent. Are there instances where cities/states will, say, subsidize the businesses during construction on the condition that they reopen after construction?
 
stick n move said:
There’s quite a bit of open land around such an important station that has red line and commuter rail access and possibly even future green line access as well. Behind the mall is a massive parking lot, one block up from the intersection is a strip mall with a huge parking lot, there’s 2 empty lots directly across the street from the mall, and 2 buildings south from that on mass ave is a single story retail building. That’s a huge amount of under utilized space directly on an important transit hub.

I know it was discussed in other threads, but mass ave is another example of a main thoroughfare that has a surprising amount of single story retail buildings going up and down the street. They all have from 3 to even up to 8 story buildings on either side of hem, so these are the perfect places to add density that seamlessly blends into the existing fabric of the city. More importantly in the near term the best use of resources would be to try to densify porter in the places that are empty lots directly around the station, but after that they really need to try to incentivize those single story retail buildings to add like 5 stories of residential above them. They really could make a massive dent in the housing shortage while essentially keeping the look and feel of the city the same for ppl who are so worried about this by just adding a few floors of housing above each of these single story retail buildings.
Click to expand...
Didn't Cambridge pass something about 20-25 stories in squares like Porter? I don't know where that would be feasible - Maybe Lesley's parking lot is the only property big enough?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top