Avalon Exeter | 77 Exeter Street | Back Bay

[Padre Mike]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

The original context did not include the present Hynes. The old Hynes was set back and the ring road took up much more space in front of it. The statue's context actually was that of looking up at it with the Pru tower in the background surrounded by sky and clouds. I guess the thought was to promote the "soaring achievement" of man in his quest for building to the sky. It was a truly optimistic vision, freqently expressed in the sixties' space race, advancements of the computer age, the IBM "Selectric" typewriter, and dreams of a post-war utopia (remember WWII was only 20 years earlier) where monorails would skirt the skies above cities, povery would be eliminated, decent housing would become available for all (recall that much of Boston's central housing stock was rather slum-like, even the Back Bay!), and moving sidewalks would whisk shoppers from store to store. The whole thing was gloriously summed up in the NY World's Fair and obliterated by the 1968 assasinations, race riots, Viet Nam war, and Watergate.

 

[CDubs]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

^Thanks - I appreciate the explanation! That makes a lot more sense, it always looked to me as if that statue should have a lot more room to soar.

 

[JimboJones]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

So I was over by the Prudential (as I am, every day) and took a couple photos of the location of the new AvalonExeter residential building.

As you can see, that block is already bathed in shade. The new building would not increase the shade at all, or, a little bit. Pretty much, the whole Prudential Plaza (and Boylston Street) is shady for about half the day. (Remember the guy who pulled out of the Mandarin Oriental because he found out his 8,000 square foot condo would be in the shade all day?)

The new residential tower was reduced in height to 27-stories. I don't know whether or not this includes mechanicals; but, as a comparison, the Gloucester rental building, right next door, is 24-stories, by my count.

If you listen carefully to Marty Walz, her main opposition seems to be the design of the residential building, not its height or use.

Final comment period ends Oct. 31, I believe.

 

[bbfen]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

If you listen carefully to Marty Walz, her main opposition seems to be the design of the residential building, not its height or use.

Final comment period ends Oct. 31, I believe.

Final comment period technically ends then, but the vote will be before then. Moot point with the comment period, eh?

Ms Walz is opposed to whatever she thinks will prevent her from keeping her stranglehold on the Back Bay.

 

[JimboJones]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

Proposed Pru projects divide advisory panel
By Thomas Grillo

For the first time in its 20-year history, a panel overseeing Prudential Center expansion can?t reach consensus on future development.

In a high stakes vote last night, the Prudential Project Advisory Committee (PruPAC), barely mustered majority support for a proposal by Boston Properties for a 17-story office tower proposed for 888 Boylston St. Proponents won by three votes.

In a separate ballot, members were evenly split on Avalon Bay?s plans for a 27-story residential high-rise on Exeter Street. The 24-member panel comprised of representatives from community groups and commercial interests, advises City Hall on commercial real estate projects at the Pru.

?For two decades, PruPac votes on projects around the Prudential Center have reached almost unanimous support,? said Betsy Johnson, PruPac?s chairwoman. ?But the opponents dug in their heels very early on the height issue and refused to consider any zoning changes.?

Michael A. Cantalupa, senior vice president of Boston Properties, and Michael Roberts, vice president of development at Avalon, declined to comment following the meeting.

Originally, Boston Properties proposed a 19-story tower while Avalon Bay filed plans for a 30-story apartment building. But Mayor Thomas M. Menino asked the developers to compromise following protests from the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay that the buildings were out of character in the historic district.

The Boston Redevelopment Authority will consider the project at a public hearing on Dec. 4.

 

[ablarc]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

The "historic" district these projects are proposed for is the Prudential Center, and the projects are completely in character with this district.

 

[Boston Needs A ShakeShack]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

This is very surprising to me. NABB and our elected officials fight tooth and nail to stop these perfectly reasonable buildings replacing nothing at all, and they let the Arlington go to the wrecking ball. Sad.

One rep. from NABB told me that, and I'm paraphrasing, that some of the residents near the Exeter residences were concerned about the loss of empty space that they expected to be there when they bought their condos. Yes...they want to preserve the sky.

Our elected officials--Mike Ross, Marty Walz, Bill Linehan, Byron Rushing--voted against almost all of it. Only Linehan cast an approving vote for 888 Boylston. The rest voted against both projects.

Meg Mainzer-Cohen of the Back Bay Association strongly supports both buildings.

The final vote was 13-11 FOR 88 Boylston, 11-11-2 tie over Exeter Residences. What happens now is really up to the BRA.

 

[Beton Brut]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

This is very surprising to me. NABB and our elected officials fight tooth and nail to stop these perfectly reasonable buildings replacing nothing at all, and they let the Arlington go to the wrecking ball. Sad.

Are they putting "Vitamin Stupid" in the Back Bay water supply?

 

[bbfen]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

Are they putting "Vitamin Stupid" in the Back Bay water supply?

No, I privately think they've all sold out to developers who have yet to release public renderings for a grotesque monstrosity west of the Hynes (air rights, the garage and the old church parcel).

In my theory, if these officials and neighborhood "leaders" appear too pro-development now, then later, when Party X comes along with a terrible plan---and enough cash-filled suitcases---they could say, "We've been against unchecked development for years, but this air rights project is a Good Building In Boston!"

Their ignorant followers will barely raise an eyebrow until it's too late, because they "trusted" their leaders to play the game fairly.

If they only knew what was coming.

 

[a630]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

"Yes...they want to preserve the sky. "

Yes of course they do. Assumedly these people bought in towers partially because they wanted views, and the value of their property, both the monetary value and utility, is tied to their view. So it's not strange at all that they want to preserve sky. A building on Exeter at the eastern end of the Pru would block views towards the Hancock and downtown. So you say, okay, it blocks maybe 40% of 20 peoples views.
Well, an old and empirically tested theory of zoning economics explains, that even when the utility of your property is even only partially threatened, or not even directly threatened by a development, for example in this case if your apt faces west, if your property is of a similar character to the threatened property, it is in your interest also to oppose the development. You are sending a clear signal about what people expect out of property like yours. This explains why non-abbutters, sometimes from miles away, inevitably get involved in the development process. PruPac may be sending a signal that the Pru has become, in the eyes of property holders, over-developed. I don't agree with them, and I don't care about their opinions or views of downtown, but I don't think there's anything in the water. It's textbook behavior.

 

[kz1000ps]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

a630, everything you say is true except for the fact that the people complaining aren't necessarily the ones in the existing Prudential/Avalon towers, as those are rentals; it's the people in NABB's district, which is everything north of Boylston Street, that are making the ruckus. Casting any new shadows on the precious and fragile Back Bay is a complete non-starter to them.

Actually, has anyone in the Avalon rentals taken a stand on these developments, one way or the other?

 

[JimboJones]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

A couple of the renters in the Exeter have said they are against the residential building. Presumably, because their views would be (adversely) affected. One of them, a real estate agent, has lived in the building for over 20 years.

If we wait long enough, she'll "be gone" by the time they want to break ground.

 

[kz1000ps]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

Future of new Prudential towers left with BRA, mayor's office

November 16, 2008

The fate of two towers proposed at the Prudential Center now lies in the hands of City Hall officials, but without a clear way forward after the advisory board charged with overseeing the Pru's expansions since 1988 last week failed to reach a consensus for the first time.

The Boston Redevelopment Authority and Mayor Thomas M. Menino will have to decide whether to approve or halt the projects.

"It's the mayor's decision at this point," PruPAC chairwoman Betsy Johnson said in an interview after voting in favor of both projects herself. "Certain people weren't going to change their position no matter what was said."

"Our process was to hopefully end up with a better project for the community; if the project does not go ahead that's due to a lot of reasons, the economy for one," she said. "If the project does go forward it's a better project than it was a year ago."

PruPAC, the Prudential Policy Advisory Committee, has advised the BRA on commercial development at the Pru for 20 years, and has often been charged by community members with working secretly, until now.

The vote "is a testament to opening this up to the public process," said neighborhood activist Shirley Kressel. "What the BRA does with this will be the next test. From the community's point of view, they are overwhelmingly against it."

Representatives from both development teams declined to comment on the vote.

"We still have more process to go," Michael Cantalupa, senior vice president of Boston Properties, said.

PruPAC's 24 members split their vote last Monday on a 311-foot Exeter Street residential tower proposed by Avalon Bay. In the other vote, the panel, made up of representatives from commercial interests and community groups, approved Boston Properties' proposed 242-foot office tower at 888 Boylston St. by only three votes.

The BRA will hold a public hearing on the project at City Hall on Dec. 4.

JUSTIN A. RICE

Link

 

[pelhamhall]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

Since Shirley posts on this board from time to time, I am interested to hear her source for the blanket comment "The community is overwhelmingly against this..."

We have a robust community process that allows neighbors to speak for themselves, so I have a huge issue when unelected persons from the neighborhood attempt to speak for or represent the views of others.

The Back Bay noisy ladies-who-lunch crowd may have the time and energy to fight this project (and let's face it - all projects) but I believe the overall Boston community would be nothing more than ambivalent.

So who is this "community" that Shirley is speaking on behalf of? The one that is so "overwhelmingly" against this project?

Stop 10 random people on Boylston Street, show them the renderings and ask them their opinions - would anyone of them be against this plan or would they shrug and say "New buildings at the Pru? Sure, who cares? That's where tall buildings go, right?"

This is the community that doesn't have the time or energy to even consider attending some meeting where people discuss why they are in favor of buildings or against them. The whole process is just so silly to them - to even consider attending a meeting after a busy day of work to say "that's a nice building, please build it." - the whole process is just so fanciful and silly when you're of the opinion that there is no problem with a city building urban buildings.

So I believe Ms. Kressel's comment should have been "of the crowd that is always very actively against real estate development in this city, it should come as no surprise to anybody that they are also 'overwhelmingly' against real estate development here"

The non-activist, massive majority of Boston's residents and workers are most assuredly ambivalent towards some mid-rises going up in the Prudential Center core.

 

[kennedy]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

Wait a minute, do we actually have a rendering? Someone should so just that-take a poll. Of every project we think is good. And send it to tommy and the BRA

 

[pelhamhall]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

We know what being anti-development in this city looks like... but pro-development in Boston is just a shrug and a "whatever"... it's invisible.

Can you even imagine a regular, working person in the South End or Back Bay taking a few hours out of their day after a hellish day in the office to attend a civic meeting where they will be bored to tears just to support a real estate development?

This is why pro-development voices in this city are silent. You have to be subjected to torture. Example - I convinced some neighbors to come to a civic meeting to support the redevelopment of the Bayside Expo Center, and we had to listen to literal, actual crazy people talk about sewage and back when the Harbor smelled... my neighbors never forgave me for stealing those two hours of their lives and now will never attend another meeting like that. And these are people that support development... so it's kind of a lost cause.

The ladies-who-lunch, the trust-funders and the under-employed have all the time in the world. The rest of us have to earn a living.

Who has the time to go to a meeting to support Boston Properties to build two mid-rise, faceless, no-impact-on-your-life buildings? There is only a certain psychological and demographic profile of the people that attend these meetings, and they are certainly not the pro-progress and pro-investment types, they are the "no change, nothing different, I want my old neighborhood to never change, hey kids - get off my lawn" demographic.

So in conclusion, we're all fucked as long as Tommy is our Mayor - maybe in 8-12 years something will change.

 

[bbfen]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

I pretty much agree, pelhamhall.

I laughed at the earlier post about the resident who lived in the Exeter for 20 years and is growth. People were once very much against residential development over the railyards.

The concept of urban planning over an extended period of time has been a giant success at the Pru, and is in the final stage. What are these people fighting for? I don't know what they think a "win" looks like.

Finally, on the pro-development opinions getting through, I make sure to let NABB, BBA, people at the BRA, and especially, elected officials know how I feel.

When I hear "everyone is against this" or "the entire neighborhood hates this" I make a point to talk to that person. Ms. Kressel and Ms. Walz are the two worst offenders of the EVERYONE syndrome (and I once had a conversation with Jackie Yessian about this problem).

 

[Boston02124]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

Wait a minute, do we actually have a rendering? Someone should so just that-take a poll. Of every project we think is good. And send it to tommy and the BRA

these have been on here for months!

 

[tobyjug]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

I like the way the building in the first rendering blocks the view of Grozny.

 

[kz1000ps]

Re: New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center

..I once had a conversation with Jackie Yessian about this problem.

How reasonable is she to talk to? I once had a pleasant conversation with her back at a meeting for the Apple Store, but at the time we were in agreement on where the process was at, and I didn't know of her standing in the community. So I feel like I don't really know how zealous her anti-development bias is, despite what she says at meetings and in the papers.