New Balance to Build Train Station as Part of Its Boston Headquarters

Another corporate sponsor is making a major investment in rail transit.

First Apple helped finance the rehab of an “L” stop in Chicago. Now New Balance is paying to build a passenger rail station that will serve its headquarters in Boston’s Brighton neighborhood, reports Nicole Anderson at Network blog the Architect’s Newspaper:

A rendering of the new $16 million train station New Balance is financing for the city of Boston. Photo: ##http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/archives/49928?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AN_blog+%28A%2FN+Blog%29## Architect's Newspaper##

It has been five decades since there has been a commuter rail station in Brighton, but this will soon change. MassDOT Secretary Richard A. Davey and New Balance Chairman James S. Davis announced this summer that they will build a new Worcester Line commuter station, and just a few days ago, the sports apparel company gave word that it is slated to open in 2014.

The station, New Brighton Landing, will be part of New Balance’s $500 million development complex that will serve as the company’s headquarters and also include a hotel, a sports facility, retail space, and parking. Elkus Manfredi Architects and Howard/Stein Hudson Associates will design the 250,000-sq-ft headquarters.

In June, MassDOT said that New Balance has agreed to “fund all permitting, design, and construction costs for the station and fund annual maintenance costs” for the $16 million New Brighton Landing station.

The area around the station is being branded as a 14-acre, mixed-use “health and wellness district,” which will include the company’s headquarters, shopping and other amenities. Compare that to the California employers we wrote about yesterday that spend their resources subsidizing solo car commuting.

Elsewhere on the Network today: Biking Toronto reports that while protests continue — a physician was arrested during demonstrations yesterday — city officials are moving ahead with a controversial bike lane removal. This Big City looks at how climate change is affecting cities around the world, beyond Hurricane Sandy. And Systemic Failure shares research that casts doubt on the value of sharrows, even showing they can make streets less safe than no cycling treatment at all.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

What If “Commuter Rail” Was for Everyone, Not Just 9-to-5 Commuters?

|
Rhode Island has been investing in commuter rail — long distance service connecting Providence to Boston and towns in between. But lackluster ridership at a new park-and-ride rail station at the end of the line (by a Walmart!) is sapping support for much more useful investments, reports Sandy Johnston at Itinerant Urbanist. Anti-rail critics are piling on. The libertarian Rhode Island Center […]
At Bourg-la-Reine, outside Paris, the rail station is surrounded by dense, mixed-use development and walkable streets. Image: Google Maps

What American Commuter Rail Can Learn From Paris, Part 2

|
In Europe it's common for regional rail systems to get ridership comparable to that of the subway in the central city. But in America, this is unheard of. One reason for the discrepancy is land use: American commuter rail stations are typically surrounded by parking, while in the Paris region you see a different pattern with ample development next to suburban train stations.

Miami’s Golden Opportunity to Bring Commuter Rail Downtown

|
Opportunities like this don’t come around very often. Traffic-clogged Miami is tantalizingly close to a commuter rail extension that would link its northern suburbs to the heart of downtown. But the city needs to secure $30 million in the next few months to make it happen. The region has a commuter rail line called Tri-Rail that runs 72 miles north to […]

The Case for Letting States, Not Cities, Shape Development Near Transit

|
A bill circulating in the Connecticut legislature — HB 6851 — would give state officials greater control over development near transit stations. The measure has met with some resistance because it would weaken powers that have traditionally belonged to local government. But Sandy Johnston at Network blog Itinerant Urbanist says that in Connecticut’s case, that’s probably a […]