Alexandra Hotel Renovation | 1769 Washington St | Roxbury

Gotta get the misaligned windows gloop onto even the smallest project.
 
Why did they shrink the glass hotel portion? These developers are insane.
 
curcuas said:
Why did they shrink the glass hotel portion? These developers are insane.
Click to expand...

Construction costs, interest rates, lower demand in light of an economic slowdown to name a few possible reasons. Do you not read the news at all?
 
kmp1284 said:
Construction costs, interest rates, lower demand in light of an economic slowdown to name a few possible reasons. Do you not read the news at all?
Click to expand...
Boston has had one of the tightest, if not the tightest, hotel market in the continental US for years now.

Construction costs would be hard to see given this building is already over 6 stories and needs a gut rehab.

We can be friendly here.
 
curcuas said:
Boston has had one of the tightest, if not the tightest, hotel market in the continental US for years now.

Construction costs would be hard to see given this building is already over 6 stories and needs a gut rehab.

We can be friendly here.
Click to expand...

While that may have been the case in the last few years I’m not sure how one looks ahead and declares the developer “insane” for cutting back without an ignorance of current events or the rosiest rose-colored glasses imaginable. Don’t confuse candor for unfriendliness.
 
The taller portion was originally approved in 2022. They had a long time to get this right. We're better off getting a restoration with the smaller addition than nothing at all, but the chances were there and the taller vision should have been built.
 
The problem with the hotel market in any city is that it isn't evenly distributed - it's all about location. Where this is situated, I can see demand being fairly diffuse, perhaps explaining the downsizing.
 
Stlin said:
The problem with the hotel market in any city is that it isn't evenly distributed - it's all about location. Where this is situated, I can see demand being fairly diffuse, perhaps explaining the downsizing.
Click to expand...
Hotel Alexandra is walking distance from (or very short uber from if you’re lazy or weather is horrific): Northeastern, symphony hall, MFA, prudential center, Berklee, Fenway park, back bay, etc, and is IN the south end with all the restaurants etc that are located there. It’s not like this is in the fringes of W Roxbury near the Dedham line with no obvious “hotspots.”
 
Article from tomorrow's Boston Sun on the project: https://thebostonsun.com/2025/03/13/alexandra-hotel-redevelopment-effort-finds-new-path-forward/

The main takeaways:
  • The revised proposal received "universally positive" feedback from both commissioners and the public at the March 4 SELDC meeting.
  • The previous tower concept (which far exceeded the 70-foot height limit on new construction in the SELD) was considered to be a "major sticking point for some neighbors and other stakeholders."
  • The $6 million grant by the state government to renovate the facade was apparently all that was needed in order for the developers to remove the additional floors from the redevelopment.
  • The BPDA and ISD still need to sign off on the new proposal before the state funding is unlocked.
I know I might be in the minority here but I'm glad the additional stories got nixed. This is well inside the boundaries of the South End landmark district, which is exactly the last place where we should be building modern glass towers. Otherwise, what's even the point of having designated historic areas.
 
chrisbrat said:
Hotel Alexandra is walking distance from (or very short uber from if you’re lazy or weather is horrific): Northeastern, symphony hall, MFA, prudential center, Berklee, Fenway park, back bay, etc, and is IN the south end with all the restaurants etc that are located there. It’s not like this is in the fringes of W Roxbury near the Dedham line with no obvious “hotspots.”
Click to expand...
I mean, that was my point - To elaborate on what I meant by diffuse... as you say, it's not far from several points of interest, but it isn't particularly aligned with any one other than the South End residential neighborhood, which isn't likely to matter to a majority of visitors, by default a hotels guests. By being "not far," from anything, it also isn't particularly close to anything - meaning that unless there's a price/experience incentive, a visitor may see the Alexandria on a map and decide that this is the further, less accessible, and therefore less preferable option. They're not going to know the history - It's not about being in W. Roxbury or South End, it's the lack of a clear alignment of demand from which you can extrapolate stay data. I know folks who have ubered between the Greenway Canopy Hilton and our meeting in Government Center; proximity matters. If the Alexandria is to continue to be an independent hotel as all indications seem to show? It needs to stay booked.
 
Last edited:
Stlin said:
I mean, that was my point - To elaborate on what I meant by diffuse... as you say, it's not far from several points of interest, but it isn't particularly aligned with any one other than the South End residential neighborhood, which isn't likely to matter to a majority of visitors, by default a hotels guests. By being "not far," from anything, it also isn't particularly close to anything - meaning that unless there's a price/experience incentive, a visitor may see the Alexandria on a map and decide that this is the further, less accessible, and therefore less preferable option. They're not going to know the history - It's not about being in W. Roxbury or South End, it's the lack of a clear alignment of demand from which you can extrapolate stay data. I know folks who have ubered between the Greenway Canopy Hilton and our meeting in Government Center; proximity matters. If the Alexandria is to continue to be an independent hotel as all indications seem to show? It needs to stay booked.
Click to expand...
Fair points. I guess my own work- and leisure-travel demands are different (or have been, thusfar). Aside from instances where I *need* to be next to, say, a particular convention center, in either scenario being "fairly close" to a bunch of reasonably interesting/compelling/relevant stuff is sufficient.
 
mssrro said:
The $6 million grant by the state government to renovate the facade was apparently all that was needed in order for the developers to remove the additional floors from the redevelopment.
Click to expand...
This is a really important point. We tend to see these preservation issues as somehow something that the developer should be obligated to fund. But to make that work, the developer needs to build something that may not otherwise fit. As you suggest in your closing point, if we are serious about preservation, we need to take on that responsibility ourselves, as a community. Here we get a nice, new building that generally respects the landmark district, and we also get a rehabbed historically significant building, but only because the state was willing to pay for this.
 
HenryAlan said:
This is a really important point. We tend to see these preservation issues as somehow something that the developer should be obligated to fund. But to make that work, the developer needs to build something that may not otherwise fit. As you suggest in your closing point, if we are serious about preservation, we need to take on that responsibility ourselves, as a community. Here we get a nice, new building that generally respects the landmark district, and we also get a rehabbed historically significant building, but only because the state was willing to pay for this.
Click to expand...
This is an important point. I think financing for subterranean parking, where appropriate, for commercial/residential developments in/near business districts should be approached a similar manner. However, instead of the anticipated public benefit from hotel room tax revenues, localities can consider a partnership that eventually produces some public revenue from the parking facility. It might mitigate some NIMBY arguments
 
There's no hotels really in the South End, which is a pain for locals with family visiting and for tourists who want to stay in a neighborhood, especially given Boston's tight AirBnB rules. People are paying well over 300 a night to stay at a holiday inn off of 93 in Charlestown, near essentially nothing (I have signed those expense reports, this is not exaggeration).

More seriously, I don't understand how the 2022 approval doesn't still apply and why they keep have to dipping back in to the BPDA, costing them time and money, in the same way that has hampered them in the past.
 
-Bldup saying this was approved

Updated Plans Approved for Hotel Alexandra​

“Updated plans have now been approved for the redevelopment of the Alexandra Hotel along Washington Street in the South End. Now the project will create a 68-room hotel spanning 39,300 square feet, incorporating the existing 27,200-square-foot structure with a 12,100-square-foot addition…..”

ALEXANDRA_HOTEL_%281%29.png


Updated Plans Approved for Hotel Alexandra

Updated Plans Approved for Hotel Alexandra
www.bldup.com www.bldup.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top