The Kensington | 665 Washington Street | Downtown

Re: Residences at Kensington

It will be interesting to see what the new renderings look like ...


Builder says work on apartments to start in spring if city OK?s increase
By Casey Ross
Globe Staff / September 29, 2010


After a seven-year delay, the developer of a 29-story residential complex in Chinatown says construction will begin next spring if the city approves a one-third increase in the number of apartments on the property.

Kensington Investment Co. now wants to build 395 apartments in a pair of towers at the corner of Washington and LaGrange streets, the site of the former Gaiety Theatre. The theater was torn down in 2004 to make way for the development, but Kensington has struggled to secure funding.

In a new filing made public yesterday, the company said approval of the additional apartments ? a prior plan called for 300 units ? will allow it to ?re-enter the financial market with a project tailored to the real estate market of the forthcoming decade.??

Kensington executives declined to comment beyond their filing with the city, which indicated the company plans to close on financing to begin construction between April and June of next year. When the project was first approved in 2003, it was valued at $115 million.

The firm is the latest developer to try to revive a large project in the city by proposing construction of apartments, the only product type that lenders have been willing to finance in recent months. The owners of the nearby Filene?s block are also pitching apartments for that property, as are builders of proposed developments near North Station and in the Seaport District.

?If you are looking at new development, the only thing you can get financing for is multifamily rental,?? said David Begelfer, chief executive of NAIOP Massachusetts, a commercial real estate association. ?I would like to say it?s the sweet spot in the market, but it?s really the only spot in the market.??

Kensington?s revised proposal was welcomed yesterday by the Boston Redevelopment Authority, which has been pushing to revive stalled projects. ?This project will greatly benefit the city with the addition of hundreds of new construction jobs, taxes, and almost 400 new units of housing,?? BRA director John Palmieri said.

The apartments would be contained in a pair of towers joined over a common ground floor with space for a lobby, a restaurant, and offices. The project includes upgrades to Boylston Square and Liberty Tree Park.

The new plan also calls for a reduction in parking spaces to 160 from 245. The spaces would be spread among two underground levels and three above-ground levels.


Link
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

I say yes. The city needs more apartment and less condos.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

Two towers rather than one? If so, any previous renderings are irrelevant.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

^^ Here here, personally I think more apartments in general is a good thing. There is a sizable portion of Americans who IMO would be happier renting and having more cash to do some living with.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

Presuming that the new design isn't horrible (which is a dangerous assumption, I know), I like the new scope and direction of this project. The relatively small amount of space designated for retail doesn't deter me, as one other poster already suggested, because I'm not so sure that this would be the best place to try and promote retail. I like the move to rental as well (particularly in this economy), as it seems like the Boston real estate market has been saturated with over-priced upscale condos, for now. I think more people will be eager to rent at this point in time as GW2500 said, as it will provide them with a little extra cash to address other needs and desires in the short run. Until this economy improves, high-priced condos I believe are a turn off. And even after we recover, after the massive housing bubble we just saw, is it a sure thing that Americans are going to rush back to these expensive homes and condos?

I'm going to reserve final judgment until I see the new renderings (I liked the original design), but on a basic level I like these adjustments.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

That rendering is yet another example of something I've questioned for a while about Boston hi-rise condo/apartment buildings. Why not balconies? The Millennium condo tower is pretty massive so I'm assuming there's more than two or three condos (at least on the lower, non-penthouse floors) and only has a couple of balconies per floor that are pretty small. Are there city by-laws preventing it?

It's just from my perspective, one of the few advantages that living in a condo has over something a little closer to terra firma is the ability to step out on your balcony and take it a 180-270˚ view with some fresh air and a nice breeze. I wouldn't want to live in a building where other than a couple of windows opening about 4 inches I need to take an elevator in order to get some air.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

This project has always been apartments from the beginning. The proposal briefly contained a minor number of condos in the top floors, but it was always mostly rentals.

Jackson said:
...The relatively small amount of space designated for retail doesn't deter me, as one other poster already suggested, because I'm not so sure that this would be the best place to try and promote retail...
Click to expand...

BosDevelop said:
what retailer in their right mind would open an establishment in that alley? Perhaps more importantly, what financial institution would loan money to a retailer to build out space in that alley? They would almost have to give the space away rent free to attract any retailer that has a chance at drawing in foot traffic.
Click to expand...

Why? This area is densely populated, has huge foot traffic and has always been lined with small retailers--still is for the most part. If retail can't be supported here, it can't be supported anywhere in Boston.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

Briv, perhaps I am confusing my locations at the moment. I haven't lived in Boston in a long time (even though I have every intention of coming back...I'm in central PA for school) so my memory of some areas is becoming a little fuzzy. I'll take your word (as well as everyone else's on this board, seeing as most of you still work/live in Boston) when you refresh my memory of certain neighborhoods. In regards to the retail aspect, I guess I have forgotten exactly how much retail is in that specific area. Still, the 7,000 square feet or so of retail space doesn't deter me that much.

In terms of the apartments, I know that there was always supposed to be a great deal more apartments than condos, but I still like the idea of replacing those limited number of condos with apartments. I think apartments would be more viable at this point in time.

Also, what I forgot to mention before was the decrease in parking, which I really like. If the new design isn't terrible (no guarantee), then I would be all for this project.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

briv said:
This project has always been apartments from the beginning. The proposal briefly contained a minor number of condos in the top floors, but it was always mostly rentals.





Why? This area is densely populated, has huge foot traffic and has always been lined with small retailers--still is for the most part. If retail can't be supported here, it can't be supported anywhere in Boston.
Click to expand...

The nearby St. Francis House probably has something to do with driving people away. Only recently did a restaurant open up at the Archstone across the street and the former temporary library is still empty. If anything, that retail space will turn into another Asian-cuisine restaurant, 4 years from the end of construction.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

I'm excited over the prospect of this project finally happening, and that apartment-dwelers are not being looked upon as the scum of the earth, as so often happens.

As for the building itself, the rendering looks pretty dated. It's the Millennium Towers crossed with a generic office building from 1986.

I'm honestly surprised that there was no proposal to punch through the basement wall and offer direct access to Chinatown station. At least to the outbound side. Developer-funded renovations would have been welcome - and needed. Much more so than the streetscape improvements we're getting on the surface.
 
Last edited:
Re: Residences at Kensington

If you look at the economics of home ownership - it locks people into a plot of land and their jobs for at least 3 years (more now if they're underwater), which is the antithesis of the benefit of being a young professional who doesn't want to be a career employee of the firm they initially are hired on at or perhaps even stay in the same city.

I'm glad to see continued interest in building apartments. Helps keep the prices low elsewhere - supply and demand and all that.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

Also, keep in mind that condos made sense when people could get mortgages for nothing down. They were handing them out like candy. That ain't the case anymore and it mis much harder for a young 20-30 something to come by one these day.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

A rise in the number of apartments in this city could have another benefit as well: we could keep more of the students.

Boston and Cambridge are home to some of the best universities in the world, and combined they have thousands upon thousands of young, bright minds that could undoubtedly contribute a lot to this city. However, as several of you have pointed out already, condos these days aren't conducive to this market. An influx in apartments could help entice some of these bright minds to hang around because it would give them a far more affordable housing option than any new condo development would.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

vanshnookenraggen said:
Also, keep in mind that condos made sense when people could get mortgages for nothing down. They were handing them out like candy. That ain't the case anymore and it mis much harder for a young 20-30 something to come by one these day.
Click to expand...

Good point. It's hard to afford East Coast city living these days. Boston is almost more expensive than New York. Prices in the Upper East Side are similar to prices in Brookline and Cleavland Circle. I feel that people in their 20s and 30s prefer Cambridge and Somerville these days.

Let's see a new rendering!
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

Plans for new Kensington Project move forward amid allegations of zoning irregularities and corruption
by Alissa Greenberg on December 17, 2010

On November 30, a night when there was not supposed to be a meeting at all, a knot of people sat together in a Chinatown conference room. There had been six similar meetings in October, where voices were raised and arguments broke out, and the hosts have most likely been hoping that the tumult was not finished. Instead, they got more of the same on a smaller scale? a microcosm of the tensions that continue to plague Chinatown?s Kensington project.

The project?s history is complex: on December 10, 2001 the Kensington Corporation approached to the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) with a plan to demolish the existing buildings between Washington and LaGrange Streets in Chinatown, including the historic Gaiety Theater, and build a 30-story condominium building in their place. Filing for a zoning exemption (also called a Planned Development Area or PDA designation), Kensington encountered significant opposition from Chinatown citizens fearing further neighborhood gentrification.

Two years later, two local associations and several City Counselors sued Kensington, alleging that the corporation did not own the necessary acre for a PDA designation. Although the case did not advance?the judge ruled that only neighbors of the would-be site had grounds for a suit?the project stalled as the economy tanked. The building was resurrected in September, changed now to rental units, and the conflict reignited.

Because of the 2003 lawsuit?s failure, Kensington still has a PDA for the project, a privilege that comes with responsibilities. Companies with PDAs must contribute to their proposed communities, and Kensington has already promised $7.35 million to Hong Lok House to create 75 units of low-income senior housing, as well as $400,000 to renovate the Liberty Tree Plaza, $300,000 for Boston Common, and $50,000 for renovations to the Paramount Theater.

Two factions challenging Kensington?s current proposal were both present at the November 30 meeting. The Friends of the Gaiety Theater has objected to Kensington?s project since its first iteration, on the grounds that it does not comply with zoning rules covering Boston?s cultural districts. In a letter to the BRA in November, Steven Landrigan cited the Boston Zoning Code stating that individuals building on any lot ?containing a portion or all of a former site of a theater? must replace that theater with a ?cultural facility of a condition, size, and type which is appropriate,? or ?substantially rehabilitate?an existing theater.? The group claims that the proposed Paramount Theater renovations are not substantial enough to be considered legally compliant. They insist that despite the lapse of a decade since the Gaiety?s demolition, Kensington would need to invest in a new theater of similar caliber in order for the project to continue legally.

Landrigan and Stephen Jerome, a fellow Gaiety Theater enthusiast, were both present for the November 30 meeting, and Jerome represented his organization with in-depth questions about plans for the preservation of Chinatown?s buildings and a suggestion for the future of artifacts saved from the Gaiety?s demolition. In response, J. Ralph Cole, who was representing Kensington, explained that restoration projects will take place parallel to the new building?s construction and said he would be ?happy to entertain? the idea of an exhibit of Gaiety artifacts before their placement in an exhibit in the finished tower. Jerome also suggested that Kensington might sponsor a Chinatown branch of the Boston Public Library as a gesture of good will, but this idea met a lukewarm reception.

Another major focus of the meeting was continued allegations of BRA cronyism in relation to Kensington?s PDA status. Landrigan, a representative of this group as well, explained by e-mail, ?The Kensington project is a prime example of the corruption that has existed between the BRA and developers during the Menino administration?Kensington does not have one full acre, which is 43,560 square feet. Kensington describes its Project Site as 30, 227 square feet?Totally illegal.?

He reiterated this point when the PDA was mentioned at the November 30 meeting. Shirley Kressel supported him, accusing Kensington of falsely claiming control of public roads around the building site in order to round out the required PDA acre. Tensions came to a head when Landrigan and Kressel confronted Cole and BRA representative Tai Lim and Kensington?s legal counsel stepped forward to answer. ?Sit down!? someone from the audience yelled, ?I want to hear from the developer or the BRA, not from a lawyer!?

Kressel?s and Landrigan?s accusations of corruption could have consequences not just for the project but for Chinatown, as well. If Kensington loses its PDA designation, it will no longer need to contribute to the city?s zoning fund, wiping out the contributions to Hong Lok house and other community beneficiaries. ?If given the options available now: (1) an empty lot vs. (2) new development with community benefits, I believe that the positives outweighs [sic] the negatives,? wrote a community member who preferred to remain anonymous.

A translator working at the meeting, who also requested anonymity, agreed, stating, ?Everyone is getting tired of these meetings. They?re just so happy to have the $7 million coming.?

The meeting also featured updates on environmental and traffic planning and an upcoming review by the Boston Civic Design Commission. According to the newest plans, Boylston Square will be open on both sides to pedestrians and to trucks serving the China Trade Center. Despite previous plans, paths through this area will not be bordered by bushes, in order to maximize pedestrian safety at night. And although shadow studies by the BRA showed ?negligible increase in shadow? with the new plans, Kensington will also need to order new wind and ground water retention studies and LEED inspection. All of these tests will happen in the coming months as the new building is critiqued by the Boston Civic Design Commission.

Whether or not Kensington retains its PDA, agrees to increase its donations to the Paramount Theater, or addresses its corruption allegations, one question remains. While most of the meeting was fraught with whispers, the room grew quiet when Jerome asked the question on everyone?s mind: with the current economy, is there any danger of Kensington pulling out?

Cole answered swiftly. ?We are planning to put our money where our mouth is and soon. We will be making a 7 million dollar payment to Hong Lok and we wouldn?t be doing that if we weren?t prepared to move forward.?

Alissa Greenberg is a Sampan correspondent.
http://sampan.org/2010/12/plans-for-...nd-corruption/
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

The Paramount Theatre project is finished, so I don't see how it has any bearing on this project at all. If the developer wants to help renovate an existing theatre instead of building a replacement for the Gaiety, he'll have to find an different one.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

The old rko/essex would be great place for concerts/
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

Exactly how much demand does Boston have for a theater. What's the point of building a theater if all the surrounding theaters have to compete for the scarce shows that are available? The more important question that should be raise is the justification of a new theater and a study done to show that if built that the theater won't sit empty for a good portion of the year.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

This may be true, but the zoning for that parcel requires that a theatre either not be demolished, or be replaced in kind.
 
Re: Residences at Kensington

Ron Newman said:
This may be true, but the zoning for that parcel requires that a theatre either not be demolished, or be replaced in kind.
Click to expand...

But what's the point of building something that would be scarcely use? Replace it with a library or something more useful. The requirement is dumb if the theater is not utilized enough and it would be probably more efficient if they build something else.


Also, this scenario is only based off that there are in fact, not enough shows for the number of theaters because all this wouldn't matter if there were enough business around (which I don't know.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top