bigpicture7
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2016
- Messages
- 3,746
- Reaction score
- 8,606
B&T article on the above new proposal (somehow this is public access for me, a non-subscriber):
B&T article on the above new proposal (somehow this is public access for me, a non-subscriber):
Isn't every announcement a "surprise" to someone though? This doesn't appear to have been formally proposed to the City yet and it seems like they're in the preliminary outreach phase to see what can work. Honestly, they're doing it right, even if their proposal is dead on arrival for being unrealistic. No LOI, no official abutters meetings. All we have is rumors (maybe leaked?) by someone to the neighborhood association itself. The immediate abutters are actually the first members of the public to find out about this. This is like the definition of ensuring that there are no surprises to local residents.Mayor Wu explicitly campaigned against these sorts of back room surprises.
Isn't every announcement a "surprise" to someone though?
Isn't every announcement a "surprise" to someone though? This doesn't appear to have been formally proposed to the City yet and it seems like they're in the preliminary outreach phase to see what can work. Honestly, they're doing it right, even if their proposal is dead on arrival for being unrealistic. No LOI, no official abutters meetings. All we have is rumors (maybe leaked?) by someone to the neighborhood association itself. The immediate abutters are actually the first members of the public to find out about this. This is like the definition of ensuring that there are no surprises to local residents.
It reminds me about those times when people show up to meetings saying they didn't know about a project, when by being there it means they know about it.
This proposed project is outside the legislative district of Rep. Livingstone, whose name was mentioned in B&T.It was leaked to - and then by - a local State legislator. That means it's been discussed among powerful people somehow.
It sounds more like he's meddling in the preliminary outreach phase. Imagine I say to a colleague "what's the max height we can build here, 700ft?" and then someone immediately tells the neighbors as a heads up? Everything we've heard so far is so painfully alarmist when there's literally no plan yet.
.....unless the developers contemplate doing an end-run around the city?
The mega-talls in Manhattan were built as a matter of right. There was limited review and approval authority, and apparently little or no planning. That can't be replicated in Boston. My thought was if a developer anticipated not getting approval from the city for this project, why not go to the Massachusetts State Legislature, and limit/end 'home rule' with respect to city review of this proposed project? See for example, the Boston Shadow Law from 1990, which constrained building heights.This last part doesn't make any sense. The approval process takes like 3-5 years for a building such as this. There's no way to successfully do what you are insinuating here.
Yep, my great grandfather spun tall tales of when he grossly exceeded F.A.R. then got away without a shadow study when he built his occupancy exceeding tenement. He planned on having 25 people living on a 1000sq. ft parcel. Planned it! From the beginning! He would brag about not going for neighborhood approval or even hiring a lawyer. Didn't hire an engineer or an architect. In fact he never filed plans with the City, he just up and did it! Hired some cheap labor and started throwing bricks down... environmental impact study be damned!The mega-talls in Manhattan were built as a matter of right. There was limited review and approval authority, and apparently little or no planning. That can't be replicated in Boston. My thought was if a developer anticipated not getting approval from the city for this project, why not go to the Massachusetts State Legislature, and limit/end 'home rule' with respect to city review of this proposed project? See for example, the Boston Shadow Law from 1990, which constrained building heights.
https://apnews.com/article/b91b5907820bf00b0e77e2ff8915500c
Our business has a stable revenue base from recurring management fees, anchored by 20 year agreements with the managed REITs.