Bridge the Gap: Davis Square

Even though the T is a perpetually cash-strapped authority, the MBTA (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority) curiously lacks the motive to innovate. Why, for instance, have they not built a taller facility for its one-story Red Line station entrances at Davis Square, when surrounding buildings are all at least a few stories tall?

Davis Square is the bustling central business district of the thriving City of Somerville, and the T could build additional stories atop its entrances in order to rent to a supermarket (Trader Joe’s) and build apartments to increase the supply of housing in the neighborhood. This would create jobs, provide a better transit experience and improve the dynamism of Davis Square.

Conveniently, as a state authority, the T does not even need to obey municipal land use or zoning regulations and that station would have all the real estate revenue necessary for maintenance, just as the Green Line Extension would have ample funding if developers contributed to construction costs in exchange for building tall along the route and atop the future station structures. Indeed, this is how the proposed light rail in Brooklyn and Queens in New York City would primarily be funded, with ample new housing to be built in order to meet demand and alleviate (at least some) valid affordability and displacement concerns.

But unfortunately, the T does not have a developer mindset, and it is hard for it to coordinate with private partners. Plus, local residents would surely (and sadly) object to change and to increased density. Even though the city is growing and demand needs to be met in order to combat displacement, politicians tend to bow to the fears of current residents, without considering the voices of those that would like to move into the community.

And to be fair, even if the T maximized its limited assets for transit-owned development, it would still be quite marginal and it would still need plenty of additional funding from the Commonwealth. Many of the T’s real estate assets are in far-flung locations, where the costs associated with decking atop active operations would make joint development infeasible. Yet in Davis Square, there is arguably no valid excuse.

As a public authority, the T is risk-averse, and even though it does not legally need to follow municipal zoning regulations, it has no motive to innovate. Also, as aforementioned, the T is controlled by politicians that easily bow to Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) activists. These so-called progressives are strangely against progress.

Yes, increased density could mean increased congestion, which is a valid concern, though building atop a rapid transit hub would be the best place to alleviate vehicular congestion concerns. And the region is growing regardless of whether or not buildings become taller; in fact, if they don’t become taller, housing costs will continue to rise while poorer people continue to be displaced.

Change is constant, but we must plan for it, and renew, enhance and expand so that Boston can continue to prosper into the 21st century and beyond; building an underground North-South Rail Link and a Red-Blue Connector, for instance, in order to bridge the gap and fill the void.