Bulfinch Crossing | Congress Street Garage | West End

[DZH22]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Well, 5% is 5%. 5% less money to spend on materials, and 5% less tax revenue for the city. It was thrown away for no good reason.

How would you like to take a 5% pay cut? It's only 5%.

 

[type001]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Hyperbole.

Re-read DZH22's comment. He is pining for a phallus, that is all. He presented no case whatsoever linking the size of this building with Boston's economic future and neither did you. The suggestion that the fate of Boston hangs on 72 feet of an office building is absolutely absurd. The notion that there is nowhere left in this city to build an iconic tower is equally absurd.

You're wrong. He is not pining for a phallus. Most of us got the underlying theme and I merely ran with it and I presented a very good case. But I will elaborate for you.

For each new development proposed, chopping off 15-18% is a very large percentage of lacking office space that greatly affects the continuing GDP growth especially given the rapid growth of a majority of cities. Spread that percentage around to the majority of proposals and what-could-have-beens and see what I mean.

And if you don't think that a shiny tall tower is not going to attract a lot of talent, you're fooling yourself.

 

[Equilibria]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

This project never sold me based on height. It could have been fifteen stories all around and I would still cheer the destruction of the garage, the renewal of Congress Street and its numb urban renewal side streets, the addition of residential into the heart of the city, a real Haymarket headhouse, a really fantastic plan to make the most of a pedestrian Canal Street extension, and... oh, did I mention the destruction of the garage?

If you're looking for height, just be thankful the proposal is as tall as it is. If you're looking for the things that actually matter to the city (as opposed to those who view the city from a cruise ship) then just be thankful full-stop.

This is true, and frankly 2 years ago we'd all be cheering that they "only" had to chop it down to 525' to get it approved... the CSC and Millennium towers have made us a little spoiled lately. Nonetheless, this site represented both an opportunity to replace a true eyesore and hideous affront to urbanity with some semblance of public space (which it still does), as well as a location for a statement building which didn't sit on a flightpath.

What's offensive about the NIMBY opposition to height here was that it didn't come from the neighborhood - at least Tent City is next to the Copley Place Tower - but from a completely different group of residents who live a half-mile away and are pretty roundly hated around these parts anyway for having the gall to sully the former West End with their presence and lifestyle.

Frankly, I also think this would be easier to take if the rendering looked remotely interesting. No one's really complaining about Copley Place at this same height since it's sculptural and will contribute to the skyline in more ways than elevation. This is a glass box. I'm quite vocal about not expecting every last building to be a work of art, but this is an incredibly visible location and the tallest building in the surrounding area. It might have improved things if they had NOT simply taken the massing model and said "yeah, that looks fine. No need to waste any more time on it."

 

[type001]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

The latest proposal cuts total square footage by about 5 percent. Tall buildings got a bit shorter, shorter buildings got a bit taller.

The residential portion got taller (which I admit, is great for multiple reasons). But the office component got the brunt of it. Losing that 15-18% is going to hurt most in the long run.

 

[kz1000ps]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Well, 5% is 5%. 5% less money to spend on materials, and 5% less tax revenue for the city. It was thrown away for no good reason.

How would you like to take a 5% pay cut? It's only 5%.

Right, it's that simple. You know developers routinely propose more than they intend to build, correct?

 

[fattony]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

I'll tell you I don't appreciate that wording.

Fair enough, I didn't need to go there. It was not intended to be personal.



The economics of cities are not lost on me. There is a such thing as over-building, right? I'm not at all suggesting that this proposal was too big before getting cut, but its not like bigger is always better. The developer almost certainly anticipated community pushback and may very well have ended up with exactly what they wanted.

It is unfortunate that rampant NIMBYism is part of the Boston development environment, but we really don't know what it would be like without it. Maybe initial proposals would be smaller if they weren't seen as the first round of negotiation? I think you give the NIMBYs too much credit if you think they are actually outsmarting the developers.

And I think you are fooling yourself if think Boston would be Manhattan if only the development process ignored community busy-bodies. This is an excellent regional capital and I love living here, but it is not ever going to be a world capital full of epic, iconic buildings. Not being grandiose does not relegate us to insignificance or economic ruin.

 

[stick n move]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

We need these towers along with the other new proposals to each be getting taller and taller than the rest of the buildings already in downtown including Filenes, SST, garden garage towers, so the day when we eventually get a supertall the entire skyline doesnt looks like a bunch of 300 footers when they are half the size of the new tower.

 

[DZH22]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Right, it's that simple. You know developers routinely propose more than they intend to build, correct?

It's a 5% cut off a project that was already scaled down once. How much did we lose the first time around?

Most developers also don't intend on replacing one of the largest structures in the city either. It's not like we can just snap our fingers and remove the garage for free. Every floor lost lowers revenue, profit, taxes, and the benefit of added space in a city that is very constricted for it.

Boston doesn't have the luxury of just saying "oh we'll make up that 5% on the next empty plot of land." Instead we are at the point where to build something, we need to lose something first. Like the Dainty Dot. Like the Shreve Crump and Lowe building. Like the buildings Fidelity is trying to drop their new HQ's on. Every lost opportunity just speeds up the demolition of another part of Boston's urban fabric.

 

[stick n move]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

^ Theres plenty of room for development. There is a huge parking lot next to the zakin bridge by the garden and there is no common, runways, or north end, to worry about shadows or height limits. Also all sides of the garden are going to be built up. Government center could fit a couple towers. The aquarium garage needs to go and then theres a big plot right there. Not to mention the dainty dot was supposed to be a part of 120 kingston so atlantic wharf style developments could be built in dozens of places in Boston. South station should be getting covered and a tower. Chinatown has quite a few empty plots. The USPS can be knocked down and built up with no history to be lost. Theres another empty plot on the left of the kensington. The winthrop garage needs to go. The hancock garage also needs to go and can be built up. The pike can be covered by the hancock and also by the pru.

 

[kmp1284]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Why does the parcel in the second draft look so much bigger than in the third draft? It can't just be the angle can it?.

In the original plan, the project was to expand beyond the garage parcel to the block bound roughly by New Sudbury, Hawkins, New Chardon and Bowker. I remember Mumbles or some other asshack throwing a fit at the time over the money they had just spent renovating the police station, even though the original proposal would have contained space for a brand new facility.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Agreed.

Never forget:

As someone who believes Boston, Amsterdam, Paris and San Francisco are cities.....and Dubai isn't - - let me just say I am thrilled THAT never got built.

That doesn't add to any urban fabric any more than Detroit's Renaissance Center.

 

[davem]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Sudbury and Dot Ave should have a competition for streets most destroyed by the feds.

 

[FortPointGuy]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Sudbury and Dot Ave should have a competition for streets most destroyed by the feds.

Wow that's a pretty big toss-up. What I'd give to just be able to ride a bike from Broadway to South Station via Dot Ave...

 

[shmessy]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

This project never sold me based on height. It could have been fifteen stories all around and I would still cheer the destruction of the garage, the renewal of Congress Street and its numb urban renewal side streets, the addition of residential into the heart of the city, a real Haymarket headhouse, a really fantastic plan to make the most of a pedestrian Canal Street extension, and... oh, did I mention the destruction of the garage?

If you're looking for height, just be thankful the proposal is as tall as it is. If you're looking for the things that actually matter to the city (as opposed to those who view the city from a cruise ship) then just be thankful full-stop.

+1,000

 

[shmessy]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

You're wrong. He is not pining for a phallus. Most of us got the underlying theme and I merely ran with it and I presented a very good case. But I will elaborate for you.

For each new development proposed, chopping off 15-18% is a very large percentage of lacking office space that greatly affects the continuing GDP growth especially given the rapid growth of a majority of cities. Spread that percentage around to the majority of proposals and what-could-have-beens and see what I mean.

And if you don't think that a shiny tall tower is not going to attract a lot of talent, you're fooling yourself.

Please. It was 5% in this case, not 15-18%. A moyel - - not Lorena Bobbitt.

If you are serious about economic competitiveness, Boston's GDP would be better served by a REAL Silver Line and a North-South Station connector, not Detroit's Renaissance Center......or the W Hotel.

I'm just as offended as anyone else when I see a 4-8 story landscraper in Boston (hello, Victor, Merano, Tip O'Neil Building, etc.). But real subway transport and ground floor retail (instead of fortress, windowless brick walls) will create more life and economic activity in Greater Boston. Developing North Point, the Mystic River waterfront, the South Bay and Fort Point Channel (let's kick the USPS and Gillette to the curb, please!) will go further than concentrating visually impressive 100 story buildings on the Greenway.

Get the MBTA financially solvent, lengthen platforms and run the trains until 2:30 am 7 days a week and the supertall buildings will bloom. Building the supertall doesn't create growth.

 

[DZH22]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

If you are serious about economic competitiveness, Boston's GDP would be better served by a REAL Silver Line and a North-South Station connector, not Detroit's Renaissance Center......or the W Hotel.

The building complex will be built by private developers. The mbta upgrade is reliant on the government and tax money. That's a big difference, and there's no reason to argue one against the other. They are mutually exclusive. Boston could get both, if only it wanted to.

 

[DZH22]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Fair enough, I didn't need to go there. It was not intended to be personal.

Water under the bridge. Obviously I'm one of the posters who gets as heated as anybody on this forum.

I don't think this project is ever going to happen anyway. As with all the grand proposals in Boston, the battle will continue until it becomes financially untenable. There's no reason to believe that we won't be having these same discussions 5, 10, 20 years in the future about the same projects that are all "right around the corner." NIMBY's will find reasons to continue to oppose this, and everything else that eclipses 25 floors.

 

[kingofsheeba]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Water under the bridge. Obviously I'm one of the posters who gets as heated as anybody on this forum.

I don't think this project is ever going to happen anyway. As with all the grand proposals in Boston, the battle will continue until it becomes financially untenable. There's no reason to believe that we won't be having these same discussions 5, 10, 20 years in the future about the same projects that are all "right around the corner." NIMBY's will find reasons to continue to oppose this, and everything else that eclipses 25 floors.

It all depends on who is Mayor. If, by some fluke, do voters vote Consalvo or Ross, then yes. I, COULD see a moratorium on new construction. Those two cater to NIMBY's like nobody else. Menino couldn't even cater to NIMBY's the way that Consalvo and Ross have. We could even see a moratorium on current construction (Fenway Triangle, Berklee Tower, Landmark Center, etc, etc). The problem with Consalvo and Ross is that they're pandering too much to the NIMBY's and even the nimbiest of NIMBY's are getting turned off from what I've heard (And No...I haven't been talking to Ned Flaherty). Beyond their anti-development stance, they don't have anything else to offer. Which is why, I can understand your cynicism given Boston's track record over the past twenty years. I'm going to be the optimist for once. This project will get built. It's going to be marginalized to an extent, but it will get built. No power games, here my friend.

 

[Matthew]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

Uh, WTF? Ross = moratorium how? Fenway Triangle, Landmark Center, and Berklee Tower are all in Ross's district.

I know people who worked with Ross on getting those developments in the works. He's far from anti-development.

 

[Ron Newman]

Re: Congress Street Garage Development

let's kick the USPS and Gillette to the curb, please!

Uh, let's not kick Gillette out please? They provide jobs manufacturing useful products, and seem quite profitable. We don't have a lot of this kind of industry left.