Seaport Square (Formerly McCourt Seaport Parcels)

SeamusMcFly said:
I think I indicated what is the rule in the 128 area not the exception you indicate above, which is as yet unbuilt.

I recently worked on the Biogen headquarters, that they are smartly moving back out of.

I would shoot myself working in that environment. The cube farm on a 80,000 sq. ft. floor plate is awful and monotonous. The in house cafeterias and cafes and gyms are not enough to make me feel like I have options. These are more ways to keep you in the building. They are like the subsidized food at 245 Summer or 1 Financial. They are nice but they are really to keep the workers at their stations and take shorter breaks.
The development in Weston being one instance. The others along the highway are not much different besides when they are vacant looking for a mega tenant.

You can put lipstick on that particular pig if you believe in it. I know you're metro west so it affects you. The point is, that many people should not have been put there. Boston and Cambridge were big bucks (still are), and this was seen as a cheap solution to build the gigantic floor plates desired by some management. Awful location that forces thousands of people to drive to work, and typically to drive long distances because the population in many of these places does not support the influx of workers.

These corporations belong in metro areas with multiple public transportation options.
Click to expand...

Seamus -- a lot of suburban mega-floor plate buildings came about not because of the desire for "cube-land" but rather because of manufacturing effeciencies or requirements -- for example the following local companies with "mega-floor plate" buildings:
Polaroid,
Raytheon,
DEC,
Western Electric,
Gillette,
Intel,
Astrazeneca
03023321212102200

and recently Shire (site of the former Raytheon Hq in Lexington @ Rt-2/Rt-128 corner)
03023321210323221


Many of the older big floor plate buildings have evolved into being the hosts for "cube-land" or telecom and server farms

However -- the real reason why many were built in the 1950's , 60's, 70's and 80's is that the "greatest / boomer" familes wanted to live in the suburbs -- keeping the city at arms length -- readily accessible if needed

If you had suggested in the 1990 - 2000 time-frame that a company such as Raytheon (with its origins in Cambridge) move back to Cambridge a la Biogen -- the leadership would have suggested that you get back on your meds
 
I know why and who was out there. I would ask where half of those companies you listed are today? Because half of them do not exist, another 1/4 are a shadow of their former glories or have moved from those digs, and some are barely holding on in this area. Yes, plenty of other things are the reasons for this.

I'm not talking about the history of these locations and designs. Unless I'm looking at not repeating history.

I know all about Shire as we have been doing all the work out there. Besides the revenue and these being excellent jobs for us where we have a great relationship with the company, I don't support the location or the idea of a campus (at least not a suburban campus). I spent a lot of time at the Roche campus in Nutley, and it was depressing and cold. No matter how green the grass, or how many daffodils were in bloom, it was like a large college campus with no students. There is no reason to go outside, so you don't.
That is the problem. Not as the business planners see it, because it keeps employees inside and working. But, it leads to depression, drops in productivity, etc.
Biogen being headqauarted in Cambridge makes all the sense in the world. Suggesting Raytheon consolidate all it's efforts (in it's heyday) in Cambridge does not. All of Biogen is already in Cambridge, why have the suits 15 miles west if all the action is in town?
I'm not sure if you are arguing to a point or just giving a history lesson which is not applicable to the discussion
 
TheRifleman said:
Especially when your trying to develop millions of Square Ft in commercial & residential space on a first rate location with serious expansion.

But what do I know.......I'm just a blogger who has no life.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure. What do you know? Have you ridden the Silver line? What is the problem with it between SS and WTC? This is where all the major development is and will be. How does it fail by being a bus? It's not a bus obviously in the normal sense that it is stuck in traffic. It's on a dedicated underground road.

Downstream of this the SL starts sucking a bit, but from SS to Courthouse to WTC it works quite well. Yes that's only 3 stops, but so is Park St to Boylston to Arlington (and if we discount Boylston like I think many do Copley is the 3rd stop.) Or better yet SS to DTX to Park Street. Does being a train make those short but important rides that much better than the SL being a bus?

The SL is a huge underachiever at this point, but I see no reason it won't be a huge success (operationally not financially) once there is significant build out in the area.
 
The Silver Line today has nothing to do with anything. It will be operating under capacity (e.g. enjoyable) for at least another decade.

But if you don't plan 10-20 years in advance of that day, you miss the boat.

I made the same point to people enjoying Liberty Wharf and then extolling the success of the Seaport based on wildly successful experiences today. The important measure is the big picture planning -- the streets, street level activation inland, land uses (e.g. overcoming barriers to signficant residential development), transportation, etc. Call me Debby Downer, but we're rapidly falling short.
 
SeamusMcFly said:
Downstream of this the SL starts sucking a bit, but from SS to Courthouse to WTC it works quite well.
Click to expand...

I agree the SL is most valuable for these three stops, primarily, since the airport continuation really stinks (rode that yesterday and raised my blood pressure significantly). Two resulting observations:

1) Stub-ending at SS really limits it - there should be a continuation either underground or overground to link directly with other lines or more specifically to link towards the Back Bay

2) If these three stops are most important, and airport segment is a joke, why not install rail through this section of the seaport - which could be a GL branch connected in to the mainline - and run a separate diesel/CNG bus shuttle from South Station to the airport which gets directly into the TWT without any power-changing and looping/orbiting mess.
 
Sicil, your posts lately have seemed like a beaten man! Buck up!
How can you say the Silver Line has "nothing to do with anything"? I don't understand the comment. It's a major mass transit investment in the area.
 
Shepard said:
I agree the SL is most valuable for these three stops, primarily, since the airport continuation really stinks (rode that yesterday and raised my blood pressure significantly)
Click to expand...

Just curious, who do you think the airport segment of the SL really stink?
 
I assume you are asking why it stinks? It is really just frustrating that it has to switch modes (time suck) but even more so that it has to back track from silver line way into and out of the tunnel for its route. I think demand for the airport overwhelmingly comes from south station, I would like to see them run express south station to airport runs (maybe stopping at the WTC and courthouse) and bypass the SLW loop entirely. makes the trip much more efficient, can still get people to the seaport via WTC and courthouse. Then if someone really needs to get to SLW they can take the SL2- same as if they had to go to the design center.

It's that SLW loop where you drive by the tunnel ramp that really makes me frustrated.
 
Sicilian said:
The Silver Line today has nothing to do with anything. It will be operating under capacity (e.g. enjoyable) for at least another decade.

But if you don't plan 10-20 years in advance of that day, you miss the boat.

I made the same point to people enjoying Liberty Wharf and then extolling the success of the Seaport based on wildly successful experiences today. The important measure is the big picture planning -- the streets, street level activation inland, land uses (e.g. overcoming barriers to signficant residential development), transportation, etc. Call me Debby Downer, but we're rapidly falling short.
Click to expand...

Sicil -- when did the Back Bay develop and when did the Green Line go under Boylston -- it certainly preferable from a constructuion schedule to dig before or while you are building -- but its certainly not imposssible to dig afterward

As far as the Silver Line is concerned the one thing needed to be done immediately is to dig under D street to allow a closed loop to operate from South Station to Silver Line Way

This provides 3 key immediate and long-term advantages to the overall SPID and Silver Line system:

1) high frequency as needed closed loops of purlely electric buses from South Station to Silver Line Way (Under)
2) evenutally the Silver Line to Logan could be isolated from the local traffic with a direct connection to the Ted
3) enables digging some additional underground branches to the Silver Line such as a connection via the BCEC to a Silver Line Station at Broadway -- as the Greater SPID -- aka the G-SPID develops over the coming years
 
Shepard said:
1) Stub-ending at SS really limits it - there should be a continuation either underground or overground to link directly with other lines or more specifically to link towards the Back Bay

2) If these three stops are most important, and airport segment is a joke, why not install rail through this section of the seaport - which could be a GL branch connected in to the mainline - and run a separate diesel/CNG bus shuttle from South Station to the airport which gets directly into the TWT without any power-changing and looping/orbiting mess.
Click to expand...

I think any rational person would agree with these observations. The value of the line would improve exponentially if your second point were implemented.
 
Just wanted to add D St to S Station is at most a 15 minute walk. I do it twice a day, to and from work. So the area hardly dependents on the SL to succeed.
 
The express bus route should be: South Station (Summer Street), dedicated surface bus lane on Summer to stop again at BCEC, left on D (priority signal), right on Haul Road, then into the "State Police Only" entrance directly into the TWT. This would get passengers from the airport downtown in half the time as the current SL setup.
 
HenryAlan said:
I think any rational person would agree with these observations. The value of the line would improve exponentially if your second point were implemented.
Click to expand...

Henry -- No one is going to connect the Silver Line to the Green Line in the next 20 years.

SL Phase 3 that was to have linked the Wash St. SL to the South Station SL is deader than the proverbial doornail

No -- the key to transit in the SPID is to take the SL in the South Station to SL Way as its own line --much like the Mattapan High Speed Trolley at Ashmont or the electric buses out of Harvard Sq.

Then the obvious problem is mixing the surface traffic with the SL main (e.g. South Station to World Trade and on to SL Way) -- this is akin to the mixing of Green Line Main with the surface street running on Huntington, Comm and Beacon

In fact fixing the SL D St mistake is quite easy and affordable -- just dig under D St. and continue the tunnel to a new station under SL Way a SL Way (Under) for electric SL vehicles only. Note that this potentially could ultimately retrofit the SL South Station to SL Way for rail.

By extension the closed loop would also fix the Green Line - at Kenmore the core Green Line trains would loop back with both Comm and Beacon and potentiall others looping on the surface loop. A transfer would need to happen at Kenmore -- but the advantage is that the surface vehicles scheduling and traffic issues could be completely isolated from the underground vehicles and the main line.
 
I have no clue what you're talking about regarding Kenmore. In terms of linking the SL tunnel into the Green Line I'm still proposing this, which I think yields the most obvious bang for buck.
 
Cliff Clavin said:
Just wanted to add D St to S Station is at most a 15 minute walk. I do it twice a day, to and from work. So the area hardly dependents on the SL to succeed.
Click to expand...

To the majority of people, walking 15 minutes in the rain, sleet, or snow sucks. Twice a day really sucks. Mailmen might do it, but they don't exactly like it.

It's a pleasant walk when it's nice out. But, an additional 15 minutes on a commute every day is a quarter hour I could be sleeping. Dependable mass transit is a huge necessity to the success and development of the area.

People work until what 65 now before they can retire? I don't see too many seniors or the handicapped enjoying your 15 minute walk so much.
 
SeamusMcFly said:
To the majority of people, walking 15 minutes in the rain, sleet, or snow sucks. Twice a day really sucks. Mailmen might do it, but they don't exactly like it.

It's a pleasant walk when it's nice out. But, an additional 15 minutes on a commute every day is a quarter hour I could be sleeping. Dependable mass transit is a huge necessity to the success and development of the area.

People work until what 65 now before they can retire? I don't see too many seniors or the handicapped enjoying your 15 minute walk so much.
Click to expand...

I wonder how Americans got to be so obese.
 
Last edited:
Oh you know the answers. Doesn't change that you're not going to build a successful new neighborhood by forcing people to walk 15 minutes, or to drive their cars and lock the place up.

I walk from SS to my office everyday regardless of the weather. But, that's a 5 minute walk, I'm youngish and inshape(ish), and there's no reasonable alternative.

I will bypass the red line and walk to park street to get to school.

That being said, the 1000's of workers expected may not see things the same way as you and I. I'm pretty sure the elderly and disabled I mentioned earlier are already on board with my previous sentiments.
 
Shepard said:
1) Stub-ending at SS really limits it - there should be a continuation either underground or overground to link directly with other lines or more specifically to link towards the Back Bay
Click to expand...

I have now taken to getting on the Green or Orange Line to transfer to the Blue and then getting on the shuttle from the Airport station rather than just going to SS and waiting on the SilverLine. It is much quicker and that's a real shame.
 
For most city people, a 15 min walk is nothing. That's practically next door.

Ain't no thang!
 
AmericanFolkLegend said:
I wonder how American's go to be so obese.
Click to expand...

I know for me, 15 minutes saved means 15 more minutes at the gym. But yes I prefer a shorter walking commute, only because I wouldn't need to leave my house 15 minutes earlier to catch the bus or train. I don't mind the walking itself and I'm pretty sure a lot of people don't when they can do it in their spare time as oppose to because it's their only option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top