Back Bay Garage Tower | Dartmouth and Stuart | Back Bay

I believe that for a skyline to stand out it simply needs to be varied (though it can be done at night with creative lighting). I've had to do a job in Houston for the past year, and I still, when driving into the downtown, have no real reference point to go by. Minute Maid Park (Astros) and its fun logo on the east side gives one to a point, but that is a sports stadium. Houston has the most uniform and uninspiring and mood depressing collection of hi-rises that I think I've seen across the bigger cities in the U.S., and I've been to nearly all of them. I'm open to more of these stacked buildings, or anything different with this matter. It's why Manhattan is so exciting--assortments, like boxes of Japanese confections. I always know where I am in NY, and gems like the "Jenga Building" and the tetrahedron shaped "Big Building" still get me going.
 
Do they need another lease for the resi buildings? Is this the DOT approval for everything?
 

What would have been Boston's first Jenga building on indefinite hold due to the current office market​

Proposed Back Bay Jenga building


“The Boston Business Journal reports the developer that once proposed some major reconstruction of the space around and above Back Bay station - which would have included a re-do of the station's interior - is continuing to not move forward on its proposal because, well, you know, the office market and all.
When Boston Properties first proposed an office and and residential tower at Back Bay, in 2016, it said it was hoping to begin work in 2017.

But that never happened, and instead Boston University won the race to recreate the 3D puzzle game.”

https://www.universalhub.com/2024/what-would-have-been-bostons-first-jenga-building
 
stick n move said:

What would have been Boston's first Jenga building on indefinite hold due to the current office market​

Proposed Back Bay Jenga building


“The Boston Business Journal reports the developer that once proposed some major reconstruction of the space around and above Back Bay station - which would have included a re-do of the station's interior - is continuing to not move forward on its proposal because, well, you know, the office market and all.
When Boston Properties first proposed an office and and residential tower at Back Bay, in 2016, it said it was hoping to begin work in 2017.

But that never happened, and instead Boston University won the race to recreate the 3D puzzle game.”

https://www.universalhub.com/2024/what-would-have-been-bostons-first-jenga-building
Click to expand...
I hope the (formerly) proposed office building switches to residential or hotel space. Let's also hope it gets redesigned to look a lot better.
 
theSil said:
Bullet dodged. Boston deserves much better architecture at such a prominent intersection.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. I’m not sure how likely it is, but ideally Id rather they bulldoze the garage and start from scratch with something much better akin to parcel 12. Bulfinch crossing is pretty good for what it is, but wrapping the buildings around a garage always ends up with an awkward result especially at ground level.
 
themissinglink said:
I hope the (formerly) proposed office building switches to residential or hotel space. Let's also hope it gets redesigned to look a lot better.
Click to expand...

+1 Bingo. My immediate reaction was the very same as yours. Quit beating heads against the wall re: the 1950's office mentality! The demand from the exploding demographic of retiring baby boomers is to live car free in cities - - Boston in particular due to the plethora of museums, theatres, restaurants and top flight medical centers.

Boston has a built-in advantage competitively vs other cities for the car-free, discretionary income, high taxpaying/low services needing demographic. Yes, 20% to affordable units to keep the city more accessible, etc.

But stop shitting around with the office building dreams. Boston CAN become a 24/7 dynamic city with car-free HUMANOIDS populating the sidewalk cafes, etc. instead of being a sleepy ghost town.

It’s literally right there on a silver platter for the taking!
 
Last edited:
It's surrounded by offices on the Back Bay side and there's resi towers a block on either side. Proven market.

Maybe keep optionality for a big office building on the site.
 
Equilibria said:
That would require people working in offices, which they no longer do.
Click to expand...
I mean that's a ridiculous statement. Office vacancies in the northeast are still below the early 90s recession, the going rents in Boston for class A are more than enough to justify new construction. Random class B and C space not being worth it is a different story.
 
curcuas said:
I mean that's a ridiculous statement. Office vacancies in the northeast are still below the early 90s recession, the going rents in Boston for class A are more than enough to justify new construction. Random class B and C space not being worth it is a different story.
Click to expand...

Understandably, since no one under 60 lived through the 1990-1995 office market crash as an active participant ("survivor"?), there's little discussion/awareness of it. But, since the City's Assessing page displays all office tower assessed values back to FY85, it's very easy to chart/graph this stuff in Excel using a representative cohort of whatever size you wish.

On an inflation-adjusted basis, It's remarkable/astonishing/terrifying what happened:

1.) From 1990-1992, the assessed values of Boston office towers fell 60%. Again, I'll repeat that: 60%.

2.) They stayed in that trough, 60% below their peak 1989 assessed values, for another four years, until 1997.

3.) Although the assessed values did finally start recovering in 1997, on an inflation-adjusted basis, 35 years later, they have still not regained their 1989 assessed values.

So, yes, what's happened so far post-March 2020 in the Boston office market has been a walk in the park compared to that spectacular prolonged bloodbath.

This government publication explains what happened quite thoroughly:

https://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/history/137_165.pdf
 
Equilibria said:
That would require people working in offices, which they no longer do.
Click to expand...
Metrics? I don't buy that. I'd say that trend has come and gone. And, after having worked fully remote for a very long time (and loving it), I wish I DID believe it! 100% of my company's workforce has been required to return to fully in-office work, or hybrid. Anecdotal, sure, but the same holds true for my extended "friend group," with only one exception (also anecdotal, I recognize, but it'd be truly spectacular for 40-60 randomly connected people in metro Boston to be returning to in-office work and have it be completely opposite to some larger trend).
 
Last edited:
DBM said:
Understandably, since no one under 60 lived through the 1990-1995 office market crash as an active participant ("survivor"?), there's little discussion/awareness of it. But, since the City's Assessing page displays all office tower assessed values back to FY85, it's very easy to chart/graph this stuff in Excel using a representative cohort of whatever size you wish.

On an inflation-adjusted basis, It's remarkable/astonishing/terrifying what happened:

1.) From 1990-1992, the assessed values of Boston office towers fell 60%. Again, I'll repeat that: 60%.

2.) They stayed in that trough, 60% below their peak 1989 assessed values, for another four years, until 1997.

3.) Although the assessed values did finally start recovering in 1997, on an inflation-adjusted basis, 35 years later, they have still not regained their 1989 assessed values.

So, yes, what's happened so far post-March 2020 in the Boston office market has been a walk in the park compared to that spectacular prolonged bloodbath.

This government publication explains what happened quite thoroughly:

https://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/history/137_165.pdf
Click to expand...
Current Class A rents in Boston are about what NYC's were *prepandemic* (~$50/sqft and more in certain areas), mostly because Boston underbuilt office for so long downtown and NYC has relatively lax office zoning. This is a drop from $70, BUT, remember those rents were more than enough to justify new builds in NYC. People even build office in places with rents below that number. If it gets down to $25 (~St Louis etc pre pandemic), then there's a different conversation.
 
chrisbrat said:
Metrics? I don't buy that. I'd say that trend has come and gone. And, after having worked fully remote for a very long time (and loving it), I wish I DID believe it! 100% of my company's workforce has been required to return to fully in-office work, or hybrid. Anecdotal, sure, but the same holds true for my extended "friend group," with only one exception (also anecdotal, I recognize, but it'd be truly spectacular for 40-60 randomly connected people in metro Boston to be returning to in-office work and have it be completely opposite to some larger trend).
Click to expand...
Not everyone who is attempting to track this includes Boston, but among those who do, placer.ai's data seems to be among the most useful for our understanding (July '24 was the latest update that includes Boston):
www.placer.ai

Placer.ai Office Index: July 2024 Recap – Placer.ai Blog

June 2024 was one of the busiest months for office buildings across the country since the pandemic - did these trends continue into July? We take a look at the data to find out.
www.placer.ai www.placer.ai

They are claiming 69.5% office utilization in Boston (relative to same-time 2019). But toward @chrisbrat's anecdotal observation, they are claiming a 17.3% year-over-year increase (2024 vs 2023) which outpaces the national average.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top