45 Worthington Street | 6 (née 35) stories, 141 (née 385) units | Mission Hill

[Arlington]

Edit: Now essentially what ICON can do is say "see, we told you" and encourage the developer to cut back the building to a more reasonable scale with proper contextual urban design.

I hope/think that that's where this is headed.

 

[davem]

It's also possible that the developer drew up a rough scheme of what they wanted and sent it over to ICON for some polish. Doing design in house and then sending it out for a stamp isn't unheard of.

It would explain why the firm didn't have much faith in the design. Hopefully the next iteration will be an improvement. I am, however, worried that the developer has basically salted the earth, and we are either going to get nothing, or a really, really sub-par building.

I just don't understand how the developer could go into this in such a manner. It's become pretty obvious the best way to get something built around here is to go to a community meeting and say "look, I need XXXsq/ft to turn a profit, how can I work with you to make it happen?", not "THIS IS HAPPENING FUCK YOU!"

 

[FK4]

Edit: Now essentially what ICON can do is say "see, we told you" and encourage the developer to cut back the building to a more reasonable scale with proper contextual urban design.

Even though I 100% agree with the setback, my own wish is that the height/scale be preserved, albeit with better design.

 

[datadyne007]

I agree with you that this isn't the best building for this location, but this quote may make it difficult for people to take your argument seriously.

Well that quote you cited was litigated to death all day yesterday while names were slung around at me. My point was that this is a very special location because of its proximity to a conservation district and a situation that I don't think exists anywhere else in Boston for available land. It is a unique case that requires a unique solution. Actually this concept applies to all buildings. A building should always feel as if it belongs there*. I misspoke and should have worded it as "most other locations." I didn't actually mean everywhere else and shouldn't have used "literally everywhere else." I also would not support plopping a 35 story tower in the middle of Bay Village for example. I support towers where they make contextual sense and contribute to the urban fabric from all sides.

*This can be achieved a number of ways and does not mean maxing out heights to existing structures or copying facades. What it means is that it should have dialogue with its context. A contemporary glass and steel building can go between traditional brick/stone ones in a really beautiful way if done right. See: k47, Vienna, Austria - Henke und Schreieck

 

[palindrome]

A contemporary glass and steel building can go between traditional brick ones in a really beautiful way if done right.

 

[datadyne007]

^ Bingo. I still have Vienna on my mind for some reason. Thx for finding a local example.

 

[Deetroyt]

I just don't understand how the developer could go into this in such a manner. It's become pretty obvious the best way to get something built around here is to go to a community meeting and say "look, I need XXXsq/ft to turn a profit, how can I work with you to make it happen?", not "THIS IS HAPPENING FUCK YOU!"

Dave, I wasn't there for the meeting, and you're obviously being facetious with your last sentence, but was the tone of the meeting from the developer really along the lines of "this is what we're doing"?

If so, obviously a huge mistake by the developer. Other developers in the city have gone to community meetings saying things like "this is what we'd have in mind, but by no means is it final, we'd like community input on what the final design would look like".

I find it almost hard to believe any developer in the city would go into it with such an attitude as you're describing, but again, I wasn't able to make the meeting.

 

[DZH22]

I just don't understand how the developer could go into this in such a manner. It's become pretty obvious the best way to get something built around here is to go to a community meeting and say "look, I need XXXsq/ft to turn a profit, how can I work with you to make it happen?", not "THIS IS HAPPENING FUCK YOU!"

The old way was to bend over backward making concessions for the neighborhood. Then people wondered why most of our new buildings were VE'ed until they looked like crap.

The new way just might be FUCK YOU. There's a new sheriff in town, and the incumbents for mayor here have been perennially difficult to unseat. Menino's vision for Boston seems to have little to no bearing on Walsh's, at least at the moment. These neighborhood groups no longer have the clout that they think they do.

If anything, they should set this building back a bit from the street so as not to overwhelm Worthington, and then add 5 more floors to make up for the lost square footage. Street level "peace of mind" in exchange for more height.

 

[datadyne007]

Dave, I wasn't there for the meeting, and you're obviously being facetious with your last sentence, but was the tone of the meeting from the developer really along the lines of "this is what we're doing"?

If so, obviously a huge mistake by the developer. Other developers in the city have gone to community meetings saying things like "this is what we'd have in mind, but by no means is it final, we'd like community input on what the final design would look like".

I find it almost hard to believe any developer in the city would go into it with such an attitude as you're describing, but again, I wasn't able to make the meeting.

Again, I was there and there was a defiant tone. He didn't say it was final, but he didn't seem willing to budge. He kept insisting he needed 385 units on this site and this was how to do it. The neighbors called him out on it multiple times saying that he already owns the land and anything built is simply additional revenue, as well as the density isn't appropriate for Worthington, as it honestly can't handle the traffic loads and even pedestrian loads this building will create. No matter how the building is situated, it will always be addressed as Worthington St according to the design team.

The new way just might be FUCK YOU.

That's not an approach you can take with anything in life as an adult. Seriously. Everyone has to be able to communicate and compromise.

 

[DZH22]

That's not an approach you can take with anything in life as an adult. Seriously. Everyone has to be able to communicate and compromise.

Have you paid any attention to the government for the last 10 years? The people in power don't have to do shit.

Notice how wages have been stagnating as the middle class gets creamed, getting worse and worse each year? There's no compromise there. Many Americans no longer understand that word.

 

[datadyne007]

Have you paid any attention to the government for the last 10 years? The people in power don't have to do shit.

Notice how wages have been stagnating as the middle class gets creamed, getting worse and worse each year? There's no compromise there. Many Americans no longer understand that word.

You just said it yourself. The government is broken right now because no one will compromise. You wish to do the same thing to development?

 

[DZH22]

You just said it yourself. The government is broken right now because no one will compromise. You wish to do the same thing to development?

I don't wish anything. I don't have the power to make the rules. Those that do seem to only use it to benefit themselves.

Which brings me back to my original point. New power, new rules.

 

[whighlander]

I don't wish anything. I don't have the power to make the rules. Those that do seem to only use it to benefit themselves.

Which brings me back to my original point. New power, new rules.

Precisely -- on target as an analysis of Boston circa 2015 to 2025 at least -- to quote the President [who doesn't seem to remember what he said] -- "Elections have Consequences"

Now put that in context of this project:

1) Think back a few years and try to remember who is Marty Walsh ==> Union-Man

2) In this town [just like Steve Lynch's recent speech delivered to Herr Prof. Dr. Gruber] Union-Man ==> Construction Unions

3) Also in this town [for those of you from elsewhere] Construction Union ==> Construction Company ==> Developer -- joined at the hip --& non adversarial

4) Corollary: This is New Era for Development in Boston -- as Mayor Walsh told NE Business [NECN] BRA submissions and approvals are 30% ahead of last year -- the feeding frenzy of the Friends of Tommy

5) Conclusion: This project gets built pretty much as proposed -- perhaps a bit of a small face-saving concession given to the locals -- a few trees in the parking lot

In short -- under the "New Sheriff in Town' [rhetorically] if you can propose it -- He'll approve it! -- Get used to it!!

 

[393b40]

In short -- under the "New Sheriff in Town' [rhetorically] if you can propose it -- He'll approve it! -- Get used to it!!

I think this is correct, though honestly, I'm not convinced it's an entirely good thing. This project and wasn't there another one in the Mission Hill area proposed to be in the 30 story range are going to give us a good feel for what power Walsh is going to concede to neighborhoods in relation to his development-friendly vision for Boston.

If this goes through with little or no modification then "the game" will need to be considered changed.

 

[George_Apley]

I think this is correct, though honestly, I'm not convinced it's an entirely good thing. This project and wasn't there another one in the Mission Hill area proposed to be in the 30 story range are going to give us a good feel for what power Walsh is going to concede to neighborhoods in relation to his development-friendly vision for Boston.

If this goes through with little or no modification then "the game" will need to be considered changed.

That's why I think Westie is wrong. Walsh is not idiot. He knows as good as anyone that he needs to work with neighborhoods in a smart way. I think something very similar to this proposal will be built, but it will be altered in ways that are seen as concessions to the community. The mayor has to be reelected after all, and he needs the neighborhoods to vote for him.

Elections have consequences, but they never make it "my way or the highway" - and only stupid pols don't understand that. Politics is the art of negotiation. Walsh knows it, the neighborhood knows it, the developer knows it. Elected power shifts can change the weights on the scale, but they don't "change the game", certainly not so quickly as folks are thinking.

Can I just say how excited I am that another thread is morphing into Westie's Political Economy Class...

 

[whighlander]

That's why I think Westie is wrong. Walsh is not idiot. He knows as good as anyone that he needs to work with neighborhoods in a smart way. I think something very similar to this proposal will be built, but it will be altered in ways that are seen as concessions to the community. The mayor has to be reelected after all, and he needs the neighborhoods to vote for him.

Elections have consequences, but they never make it "my way or the highway" - and only stupid pols don't understand that. Politics is the art of negotiation. Walsh knows it, the neighborhood knows it, the developer knows it. Elected power shifts can change the weights on the scale, but they don't "change the game", certainly not so quickly as folks are thinking.

Can I just say how excited I am that another thread is morphing into Westie's Political Economy Class...

Busses -- Not saying that the above wouldn't make sense as a possible scenario in a typical American City

However, this is Boston -- the Land of the Pol and the Pol's Cronies
i.e. given the fact very few sitting Boston Mayors are defeated or even seriously challenged tends to produce the "Lord Acton Effect" -- or at least the impression of omnipotence

Besides, this location is too good to pass-up
The lower floors are essentially a dorm for Harvard Medical School and the Interns at the Hospitals
The tops can be lux condos for top docs who want to live with a city vibe across the street from work

 

[JohnAKeith]

Are you guys drunk?? How else can you explain your support for this?

I hadn't heard about this proposal until earlier tonight when I saw a bunch of Tweets from our esteemed elected officials getting their skirts in a bunch over this, going so far as to call it a "skyscraper", so I assumed I'd be mocking them for their feigned outrage.

If only it were so! This is out of scale for the neighborhood, regardless of what's around it or what's a block away or what's ... at the Prudential Center? Are you really using that as a comparison? And, comparing it to buildings built in 1971? I get it, you took a class in architecture. I did, too. We all have the same knowledge, so put that in your pipe and smoke it. You're not telling anyone anything (s)he didn't already know.

Equity wanting to build 2 500-foot towers at North Station - I'm all for it. Towers in the Seaport - I wish they could! Towers surrounding the South End and Beacon Hill - it's happening. At Mass Ave and Boylston? Thumbs up! I just can't see the reasoning for putting this up there. And I support everything, always! (Unless they want tax breaks.)

Can we call it a draw and move on to a project worth sweating over and having a good ol' argument?

Hugs & Kisses,
Mom

 

[JSic]

^Its not 600'. At its height it breaks the area's plateau and will serve as a focal point for the area.

 

[393b40]

^Its not 600'. At its height it breaks the area's plateau and will serve as a focal point for the area.

I am so tired of the skyline fetish that permeates this forum. That should not be the qualification for deciding whether a project is good or not.

Are you guys drunk?? How else can you explain your support for this?

I support it because I support increasing the housing supply in Boston. Short of developers proposing to raze entire blocks of brownstones I am going to support just about anything else.

I think this proposal has flaws, but fixable flaws. The height though, and the density that come along with that are not flaws in my mind.

 

[DZH22]

I am so tired of the skyline fetish that permeates this forum. That should not be the qualification for deciding whether a project is good or not.

It should not be a disqualification either, although it certainly seemed to be for the entirety of the Menino regime. We're just making up for 20 years of lost time here. Of course there are a ton of other factors involved in judging a particular development. (ground floor amenities, quality of materials, traffic issues, "shadows", how it fits into the existing neighborhood, etc) But some of us are excited to see this tangible growth in the form of new peaks in the skyline, and there is no reason to automatically feel the need to rain on our parade.