11-21 Bromfield Street | DTX | Downtown
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
No because that wasn't the primary objection, and it is not even clear it was a real objection or if it was real, a substantial one. The main thing that killed the original proposal was Midwood's ambition to turn Bromfield into a driveway for their carport.
What blows my mind about the original proposal was they supposedly worked with the BPDA for months prior and then got into the public part of the process and got eviscerated for something they should have been aware would have been a problem originally.
There's enough real arguments for why stuff doesn't get built in Boston but we don't need to pin the height boogeyman on it every time.
Well, there's also this:
http://www.bostonplans.org/planning/planning-initiatives/plan-downtown
"While the agency determines how to address PLAN: Downtown’s legislative deadline, in partnership with the community, we know it will be challenging to obtain the necessary public input before finalizing the plan by July 28."
Now, some of you might be thinking, "July 28, 2021--a mere six months out of date? Not bad for government work!" But no... the reference is to July 28th, 2020. So apparently the whole blueprint that was supposed to help guide Downtown projects like this, hasn't been updated for 18th months and is stuck in unfinished limbo... and now we're in a new mayoral administration.
Ladies and gentlemen, the BPDA.
http://www.bostonplans.org/planning/planning-initiatives/plan-downtown
"While the agency determines how to address PLAN: Downtown’s legislative deadline, in partnership with the community, we know it will be challenging to obtain the necessary public input before finalizing the plan by July 28."
Now, some of you might be thinking, "July 28, 2021--a mere six months out of date? Not bad for government work!" But no... the reference is to July 28th, 2020. So apparently the whole blueprint that was supposed to help guide Downtown projects like this, hasn't been updated for 18th months and is stuck in unfinished limbo... and now we're in a new mayoral administration.
Ladies and gentlemen, the BPDA.
Equilibria
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 6, 2007
- Messages
- 6,959
- Reaction score
- 8,036
Supplemental filing: https://bpda.app.box.com/s/3j4sqwv0jwbsnci55aqobo8doabjmm25
They've trimmed the edges a little.
They've trimmed the edges a little.
Facts are stubborn things: this "baby"--that is, PLAN Downtown--was part of the compromise hammered-out by the state legislature in order to get the home-rule exemption for the new shadows that would be cast by the Winthrop Center tower. Mayor Walsh may have lobbied strongly for it in order to get Winthrop Center built, for the obvious reason. But it really was an imposition by the state, to help appease NIMBY factions, onto the BPDA. Thus, the BPDA had to divert resources from other sectors, to attend to this imposition. Then, the pandemic...
Finding the positive aspects of a proposal?!?!? You've got no business being on aB, sir (or ma'am. I have no idea)!
stick n move
Superstar
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,118
- Reaction score
- 15,010
I like the proposal tbh. Height aside the facade materials and colors look good in this spot in dtx. It fits well into the streetwall, the setbacks are a nice touch too. I bet if it was stretched to 700 feet people would be saying its one of the nicest towers in Boston.
The point is that it’s not stretched to 700 feet.
themissinglink
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2018
- Messages
- 722
- Reaction score
- 2,256
Agreed. The street-level activation is arguably the most important part of this project. DTX will be majorly improved if/when this gets built.
I think the façade looks really good, my main issue with the proposal is that it's supposed to be office space, when we could really use some residential development here.
This is a great location for a taller development, but it would only make sense as a high-rise if it was residences or a hotel, IMO.
Last edited:
Blackbird
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
- Messages
- 1,168
- Reaction score
- 1,660
But that particular positive is such a low bar. There could be street-level activity with what’s there now if the owner wasn’t purposefully keeping it empty and letting it rot.
A quiet corner due to the owner. On a street that historically offered an eclectic mix of storefronts. We don't build eclectic blocks any more. The numbers don't crunch. For better or worse, we now build landscrapers.
Cities need to grow and numbers need to crunch, no argument - but eclectic diversity within a block makes a city more walkable and more interesting. And, brand-wise, more Boston. We can be grateful, I suppose, it's not glass.
Cities need to grow and numbers need to crunch, no argument - but eclectic diversity within a block makes a city more walkable and more interesting. And, brand-wise, more Boston. We can be grateful, I suppose, it's not glass.
HenryAlan
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,901
- Reaction score
- 3,755
Well, that's the reality in Boston. So if you spend all your time disappointed by the lack of 700+ foot towers, every project is going to look bad to you.
I was responding to a comment that said that the design would be one of the best if the city if it were 700 feet tall.
BosDevelop
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2006
- Messages
- 1,496
- Reaction score
- 332
I'll never understand the hype over Bromfield Street (Silvertone excluded). I probably missed the boat though. I went to Suffolk Law from 1998-2001 and there are storefronts on Bromfield that were empty when I started at Suffolk and are STILL empty today. I'm no retail expert but if you can't fill a storefront in nearly a quarter century, you're probably never going to fill them.