Arsenal Yards | Arsenal Mall Redevelopment | Watertown

As long as everyone on this forum is functionally unable to understand class society and the material conflict between the capitalist class and the working class, to the point that you will reach for every single imaginary straw available before even considering it, probably.

I also think the blame everything but the people making the profits from the problem attitude of basically everyone else here is a lot harder to take seriously but hey thats just me.
 
First, my comment about costs in Boston is a relative one. IE: why are costs in Boston exorbitantly high in comparison to other American cities? So unless those other cities aren't subject to "capitalist profiteering" the premise of your statement doesn't make much sense. Second, it's highly ironic that you are such an active member of a forum devoted to real estate development...which is, you know, inextricably tied to the opportunity for profit. Granted, our market driven real estate market is not nearly so dynamic as what can be found in the bustling metropolises of Havana or Caracas or Pyongyang ;-)
 
sidewalks said:
First, my comment about costs in Boston is a relative one. IE: why are costs in Boston exorbitantly high in comparison to other American cities? So unless those other cities aren't subject to "capitalist profiteering" the premise of your statement doesn't make much sense. Second, it's highly ironic that you are such an active member of a forum devoted to real estate development...which is, you know, inextricably tied to the opportunity for profit. Granted, our market driven real estate market is not nearly so dynamic as what can be found in the bustling metropolises of Havana or Caracas or Pyongyang ;-)
Click to expand...

You fail to understand the way capital reconstitutes itself. Boom towns are the flip side of collapse in other places. Large influxes of capital are pulled from previous centers (like Detroit for example) that are left to crumble, only to eventually serve as an "empty" shell in which capital can reconstitute itself again. It might not make sense to you if you refuse to read any leftist analysis of society what so ever but it is something that is dealt with quite regularly by anti-capitalist thinkers in a variety of related fields and a lot more compellingly then the quasi-mysticism you all use to explain it. David Harvey for one talks about it quite a lot.

This forum claims to be about architecture but I am glad you admit you are mostly all just developer shills.
 
coleslaw said:
As long as everyone on this forum is functionally unable to understand class society and the material conflict between the capitalist class and the working class, to the point that you will reach for every single imaginary straw available before even considering it, probably.

I also think the blame everything but the people making the profits from the problem attitude of basically everyone else here is a lot harder to take seriously but hey thats just me.
Click to expand...

In other words, you're not interested in influencing anyone, you just enjoy screaming into the wind. Just understand that you're actually doing harm to your cause. Maybe that's your true intention. Who the hell knows?
 
I do harm for my cause in your eyes by simply having it so why do I care what you think, exactly?
 
coleslaw said:
You fail to understand the way capital reconstitutes itself. Boom towns are the flip side of collapse in other places. Large influxes of capital are pulled from previous centers (like Detroit for example) that are left to crumble, only to eventually serve as an "empty" shell in which capital can reconstitute itself again. It might not make sense to you if you refuse to read any leftist analysis of society what so ever but it is something that is dealt with quite regularly by anti-capitalist thinkers in a variety of related fields and a lot more compellingly then the quasi-mysticism you all use to explain it. David Harvey for one talks about it quite a lot.

This forum claims to be about architecture but I am glad you admit you are mostly all just developer shills.
Click to expand...

You're in the "Development Projects" category of the forum. And while architecture is of major concern to most everyone who posts here (see my comments above as example), almost every discussion here is centered around new construction and development.

Not coincidentally, every great neighborhood in this city was created through speculative land development. I have a newspaper in my office from 1826 offering lots for development on Beacon Hill...the South End was a speculative land development venture (in which the developers lost their shirt when a financial panic struck during the project). The point is, capitalism, for all its shortcomings and inequities, gave birth to most every great city and its architecture. What example can we point to by way of counter? What was the architectural legacy of Maoist China? Stalinist Russia? Venezuela? Vietnam? Cuba? If you want to celebrate the architectural heritage of the radical left visit a gulag.
 
With respect, Sidewalks, there are great cities with great architecture from before capitalism.
 
I agree that great cities developed before capitalism, but most of the examples we can point to today are from the era of private enterprise. I suppose there are some remaining vestiges of the feudal era, but those are few and far between. Most of the great cities of Europe were built between 1750-1900, when private enterprise predominated.
 
i don't know about if before capitalism–on the scale to which you probably refer,

but of this we can be sure; cities didn't reach greatness before free enterprise that generally preceded the Industrial Revolution, resulting from greater freedoms coming to Europe from the mid-19th Century democratic revolutions.... Of course, our Republic beat them by decades, *slavery notwithstanding.
 
Czervik.Construction said:
The comments section did not disappoint, as usual. Hilarious stuff.
Click to expand...

Forget the comments, section, the actual comments in the article from officials are bonkers!

Governor’s Councilor Marilyn Pettito Devaney said she worries about firefighters’ safety, since the ladder trucks would not even be able to reach half way up the building.

“They will have to climb up 18 floors carrying their heavy gear,” Pettito Devaney said. “I’m concerned about this building and our firefighters.”
Click to expand...

This is beyond red herring. Has she heard of the Pru? John Hancock Tower? Literally all of Downtown Boston?
 
The significant improvements will be killed.

What motivates the nimby huggin' anti-height puke politicians?

Why do the most fucked up idiots get into politics in the first place?
 
datadyne007 said:
Woah, they significantly altered the unit mix to be more family friendly too...Ratios of 2 and 3 BR that we haven't really seen in the Boston area before. Impressive.
Click to expand...

Among the more preposterous objections to three bedroom units I've come across in my own neighborhood are adult roommates (they might have a car too), and professionals who use a bedroom as a home office (they might have clients who need parking).

And of course there's the unvarnished racism we see around multi-bedroom units in affordable housing developments.
 
This is also the farthest distance from the BPL that an apartment building w/ 122 units

will be built forevermore.

*(i'm too lazy to attempt to prove this–if it's even true. close enough).

One thing is clear: no matter what, this thing must never be more than another ugly squat building.

It's more evidence the housing crisis will never (ever) end.
 
The new tower massing looks great. New landmark for the area. The old massing was good too but this is even better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top