MassDOT Pike Parcels 12 - 15 | Boylston St. and Mass. Ave | Back Bay

odurandina said:
DD,

with the piles already in, won't they just be dropping the chords or fully assembled trusses onto the columns during the late hours for minimal disruption?
Click to expand...

Key word in your question is "dropping".

Yes, I suspect these decks would be brought in as significantly pre-fab sections and set in place during off hours. But there are constrained surface streets in all directions, and no big ready-made assembly areas adjacent to the future deck. So they can't pre-fab the entire block like they do with some rural or suburban overpasses that have convenient assembly areas right next to them, and whatever pre-fab sections come in will come in on city streets, with all the constraints they entail (even in the wee hours). So we're talking multiple lifts of deck segments, not one big lift. And each one means a Pike closure - no such thing as a guaranteed perfect lift, there's always a risk that "dropping" happens a la "oops"/kaboom. I know, such disasters are rare, but the potential harms mean there's always going to be a full closure for hours. And all of us who occasionally fly at odd hours can attest, the MassPike has no complete down time any more.

And before those lifts, the prep work at the top of pilings, to prepare the connections to the lifted in segment, they will require safe zones for workers and motorists, so that anything dropped does not go through a windshield.

I think datadyne's right, we're not talking 36 months of lane closures, but we're not talking trivial disruptions, either. For regular Pike users, it'll suck. for occasional Pike users to Logan (me for instance), we'll have to pay close attention to construction schedules before setting up the taxi.

I also agree that the end result will be worth it.
 
Yes, Kevin was on point.

meeting was quite dull until the end.

Breakfast at Tiffany's. :)
 
cjbski said:
So what's the next step?
Click to expand...

BCDC meeting was very straightforward. i have the notes around someplace. ....upon walking across the plaza, i spotted a wallet which contained 4 new 100 dollar bills, some loose cash and ID. No luck procuring the person's #. Then came the lousy weather.

Weather cleared. And i was successful in reuniting the wallet with young lady owner (Dorchester). Then rushed off to the neighborhood meeting.

The neighborhood meeting was the usual. Very dull. But ended with David Manfredi smiling when someone asked if we could do away with the low tower, give some open space, and go a bit taller (850~925' or something).
 
So did David Manfredi take the person serious when asked do go away with the low tower?
 
“height that will destroy the fundamental design of the neighborhood.”

What neighborhood? The cars driving on the pike at 70mph?

No news here.
 
The neighborhood that also just happens to have the two tallest buildings in new england right next door.
 
Yes, but what about THE CHILDREN.

I'm guessing the complainers are from Comm Ave and Marlborough St just to the north. It makes sense, and is expected, even if they're unjustified.
 
Honestly, those of us who care about this need to start showing up at these meetings (at least I am going to try to). I am not going to name names, but I noticed in the twittersphere that some of the same people who were complaining about 115 Fed are complaining about this. That actually relates to a different hypothesis - that there are generically anti-development folks out there, not just angry neighbors. How can you be a neighbor of both 115 Fed and this? Either that, or, (conspiracy theory) some of these folks have ties to certain developers and are actually trying to slow down or sabotage the developments of their rivals, but they masquerade as community group members...it's not out of the realm of possible...

...or, (backing away from conspiracy theory), there are generically anti-development people who are trying to squash anything they sense might be a precedent.

Boston, I love this place, but it is ridiculous sometimes.
 
I may be alone with this opinion, but I think these towers are a miss. I love the location, the idea, the density, and the height - but the design is doing nothing for me. The smaller tower looks like they put little effort into it (not unlike 30 Dalton) and for such a potentially prominent corner, it should have some redeeming qualities besides the podium.

The taller tower is a bizarre combination of other buildings that I do not think come together cohesively. The idea of a twisting tower is interesting and could be executed well, but this seems to half ass it and kind of twists but also doesn't really want to call attention to itself and therefore does not commit to the full potential. The crown is the same as Millennium Tower (sloped with the highest point in one corner), which seems uninspired. The second photo from the Bisnow article also shows random vertical lines in the facade (seems to be a reference to 1 Dalton), but they aren't cohesive to the front of the structure. The second photo also looks to have a slanted facade change (could be related to the twist?) that looks like the back is attempting to be some weird geometric shape that, again, seems to have nothing to do with the front of the tower. And the balcony placement in the second photo is awful.

Again, I may be alone in this opinion, but I think this site deserves something more interesting than a random collection of other buildings' features.
 
They should have said, "we can do 1 tower at 825' with a plaza, or do these 2 lesser buildings." . The new decking scheme is ambitious. i attended the last two meetings and did what i could to keep the negativity at bay and the 'win factor' at the base in the conversation. i was unable to attend yesterday. i fell behind on a project i'm working on related to this problem. i was afraid something like this might happen.

This is an incredible parcel for height. We're seeing strong political resistance at Winthrop Square. If we can't do it here, then where? Kenmore Square? Chinatown? The West End? We've already learned the maximum occupiable height before thermonuclear war is about 420'. Charlesgate is going 367' and there's pushback

even on that.
 
Last edited:
600+ right on this corner seems excessive personally. I'd like too see the dev chop about 200-300 ft off and increase size of the smaller building to compensate.
 
I'm glad you stopped by. You know, i must admit; last April i had begun to have my doubts. Shirley Kressel had been banished, 1 Bromfield, and 2 Charlesgate West came about, then SST, and now this.

But then, the grounds beneath the Back Bay volcano began to stir. What a difference a few months makes.

No Copley Tower. No end in sight for the 115 Federal St saga. 1 Bromfield in danger of fading to become a distant memory..... Yeah, you remember. You remember how in the fall of 2015, i had begun posting in just about every Globe article that we were just about done planning and permitting tall highrises in Boston; like, as in shrinking to none. And they way i came across. What an ass. And now look at what's happened. People like Galer, and Ryan and anyone else who votes against a perfectly reasonable, great urban proposal for density where it should be: right next to two skyscrapers in a big American urban core that barely has any tall buildings.

Yes, cross this off the list. And by doing that, you've canceled all advanced decking plans for the unification of these 2 parcels + that 1/2 parcel. Now nothing is getting decked. Not an inch. The developer can now walk away from the project and consider doing some apartments in Hyde Park.

That leaves us with
115 Winthrop Square 725'
1 Bromfield St 709'
Harbor Garage Tower 600'

Except if, Parcel 15 is gone, by applying your Boston no-go-for-height logic (near anything that trumps height) 1 Bromfield is also a goner. Then, i eagerly await anyone who can suggest any parcel where we can build even a 600' tower. If this holds out to be true, do i still get slain for saying, 'we're just about done building seriously tall shit....' ??

Or for just being the first turdwagon to say it?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top