Bulfinch Triangle Infill & Small Projects

Equilibria

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
5,935
Reaction score
5,020

Didn't know where to put this because it is still very early. 700 foot proposal at 251 Causeway/North Washington Street.
Whelp, that's going nowhere... great find/post, though.

I don't know why they don't go for the gold. According to the Logan Airspace Map (now in an interactive tool!) http://ialp.airplanonline.com/PublicBOSP.aspx you could hit 780+ there for a new tallest.

What that looks like:

1659451724403.png

1659451796196.png

1659451852205.png

1659451898939.png

1659451951062.png

1659452019602.png
 
Last edited:

DZH22

Superstar
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
22,843
Whelp, that's going nowhere... great find/post, though.

I don't know why they don't go for the gold. According to the Logan Airspace Map (now in an interactive tool!) http://ialp.airplanonline.com/PublicBOSP.aspx you could hit 780+ there for a new tallest.
The JHT is 790'. I do think it would be a very Boston move to finally eclipse the JHT after 50 years with a 791', although it would be an even more Boston move to never eclipse the JHT.
 

393b40

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
2,142
Reaction score
1,202
The developer is smoking crack right? I just don't see in what world that would end up being allowed. Not that it's a bad location for it, but the North End already deepsixed similar height at The Garden way back.
 

Life Coach Mike

Active Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Messages
273
Reaction score
390
Let's leave the North End alone, okay? It's one of the few very old and semi-intact neighborhoods in the city. Stick a few more towers in Cambridge instead.
 

Blackbird

Active Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
865
Reaction score
1,085
Let's leave the North End alone, okay? It's one of the few very old and semi-intact neighborhoods in the city. Stick a few more towers in Cambridge instead.
To be fair, this would be more in the Bulfinch Triangle area and not the North End proper. Still just across N Washington from the neighborhood though.
 

curcuas

Active Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2015
Messages
689
Reaction score
566
Yeah, building towers there and on Causeway is key to preserving the North End
 

DZH22

Superstar
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
22,843
I still think the big mistake was blowing all these prime parcels with 10-14 story landscrapers instead of including towers as parts of these developments.

1659473579602.png
 

Mike

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
1,085
Reaction score
240
I still think the big mistake was blowing all these prime parcels with 10-14 story landscrapers instead of including towers as parts of these developments.

View attachment 26899
I remember reading that they couldn't build tall because of the tunnel, not that it would have happened anyway. North End residents would have shot down anything tall there.
 

DZH22

Superstar
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
22,843
I remember reading that they couldn't build tall because of the tunnel, not that it would have happened anyway. North End residents would have shot down anything tall there.
I saw something similar, but do tunnels really go under the entire footprints of all 3 of those?
 

bigpicture7

Senior Member
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
2,765
Reaction score
4,178
What that looks like:
I just want to give a massive shout out for how all-out @Equilibria went with this amazing post. Somehow the multiple views of massing renders from 10+ miles out on the highway are an appropriately ridiculous (and by that, I mean awesome) amount of analysis overkill that is beautifully juxtaposed with the flimsiness of this (pre- pre- pre-) proposal itself. Thank you for this.
 
Last edited:

DZH22

Superstar
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
22,843
According to the Logan Airspace Map (now in an interactive tool!) http://ialp.airplanonline.com/PublicBOSP.aspx you could hit 780+ there for a new tallest.
Keep in mind also that the FAA map heights calculate to above sea level. You need to also remove the site's elevation to see the actual max height that can be built there. I'm not exactly sure where this is being proposed but I think it's between a 40'-50' elevation, meaning at best we'd be able to get around 730'-740' in that location. Of course, if anything DOES ever get built there it probably won't be higher than like 150'.

I wonder if there are any renders for this?
 

DZH22

Superstar
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
22,843
The central artery goes under the left and center buildings and north station for green and orange is under the center and right buildings.
So there's no place in the entire footprint of those 3 buildings that could have supported something taller?
 

stick n move

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
8,615
Reaction score
5,263
So there's no place in the entire footprint of those 3 buildings that could have supported something taller?
The victor (center building) doesnt have the documents up on the bpda website anymore for some reason, but I found information on the civil engineering companies website:


“As part of the Boston Big Dig project, the central artery was relocated into a tunnel under the subject parcel and runs parallel with the existing tunnel of the MBTA green line. The building straddles both tunnels.”

“From preparing Existing Conditions plans of the site pre-design to creation of easement plans to allow the proposed building to bear on the newly constructed Central Artery Tunnel.”

“Once the Existing Conditions were complete the top of the newly constructed Central Artery Tunnel was exposed, A&M’s survey division was pressed into action to locate bearing piles on top of the existing tunnel that were designed in anticipation of possible future building design. The plans produced as a result of this survey were the basis for the design of the now existing building.”
https://www.allenmajor.com/portfolio-view/the-victor-boston-ma/


As far as the beverly (left building) nee merano, boston plans has the documents and images up still.




http://www.bostonplans.org/getattachment/c2bee946-f7c4-431b-9cab-50d36905aaa6


Avenir (right building) is much older than both above and theres hardly any info out there I can find other than mentioning that the building is above north station tunnels.
 
Last edited:

stellarfun

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
5,404
Reaction score
922
Two of the three parcels in the assessors map for this proposed tall. are owned by a GPT Properties Trust, This trust could either be

(1) a REIT, with its main office at 90 Park Avenue in NYC. (GPT Properties Trust was also formerly known as Gramercy Property Trust. Name changed recently to Link Logistics Real Estate. As the new name suggests, mega-talls are not in their portfolio, but logistics-related terminals, etc. are. Gramercy was apparently a spin-off of the Blackstone Group, = deep pockets.)

Or, (2) a similarly-named trust with offices in Newton MA. This trust is associated with the RMR Group.
https://www.rmrgroup.com/about-us/default.aspx
 

themissinglink

Active Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
357
Reaction score
919
Regardless of how unrealistic this proposal is, I'm glad to see a new proposal in this area. The Bulfinch Triangle is ripe for dense development, especially at the numerous parking lot parcels.
 
Last edited:

Top