Canvas - Mixed Use Tower (old Felt location) | 533 Washington St | Downtown Crossing

I'm interested to see if and how much no off-street parking plays a factor in this project coming to fruition - will it reduce the financial barrier to afford whatever political process that might hold up development from neighbours crying bloody murder about parking and congestion concerns? Will pointing at Lovejoy Wharf as a precedent for recent developments without off-street parking be effective in countering any push-back? Will there even be a significant amount of push-back?
 
DigitalSciGuy said:
I'm interested to see if and how much no off-street parking plays a factor in this project coming to fruition - will it reduce the financial barrier to afford whatever political process that might hold up development from neighbours crying bloody murder about parking and congestion concerns? Will pointing at Lovejoy Wharf as a precedent for recent developments without off-street parking be effective in countering any push-back? Will there even be a significant amount of push-back?
Click to expand...

There are plenty of people who would be willing to live in this extremely central location without a car.
 
JumboBuc said:
His largest (and really, only) project so far is "The Chrysanthemum" at 126 Salem St, a 9-unit wood framed building in the North End. I remember seeing renders (they look good!) of this when it was proposed, but I haven't been by lately and don't know what it looks like now. I might take a walk over there this afternoon...
Click to expand...

I walked by there the other night but couldn't see much with the dark and scaffolding. I think there was maybe one story of steel frame but this might still be part of demolition, since there was a sign up for that going in. Near the doorway to the Italian restaurant there are some big posters with renderings and information. Looks like a really nice piece of infill for the North End.
 
JeffDowntown said:
There are plenty of people who would be willing to live in this extremely central location without a car.
Click to expand...

We know that, but it is often used as a leveraging tool by NIMBYs to hold up/halt projects.
 
How could this building cast shadows on the Common when it will be blocked by Tremont on the Common which is also around the same height?
 
BosDevelop said:
How could this building cast shadows on the Common when it will be blocked by Tremont on the Common which is also around the same height?
Click to expand...

Agreed. I assumed it would cast shadows until I looked on Google Earth and noticed that it isn't even as tall (305 ft) as Tremont on the Common (322 ft). Wohoo! That makes it much easier to sell to the public.
 
This is the Midtown Cultural District zoning overlay, same zoning as the 172 Tremont St. proposal. Height is limited to 155' feet--which I'm pretty sure is exactly what Millennium Place stopped at, given it's 15 stories.

So both 533 Washington St. and 172 Tremont St. will require a hefty variance--but, by definition, not as high a variance as the one required for Millennium Tower, also in the same zoning overlay. Unless I'm missing something.

Anyway, whatever happens here--whoever develops it--however long it takes to develop--by definition it will be a radical improvement over the prior usage, FELT nightclub.

Which, if folks may recall, specialized in gross mismanagement, incensed abutters, irate Yelp reviews, assorted late night chaos & mayhem, and general pathetic ineptitude.
 
I think people (especially NIMBYs) often forget that people don't have to have parking on the site where they live. There are certainly people who live in old buildings in Boston that were built without parking who rent or own spaces on nearby sites. Heck I did that in Allston. I rented a space from a private lot behind the buildings across the street from my building.

I think we really need to start repeating over and over again at public meetings: "Just because a new building doesn't have parking on site doesn't mean there isn't parking available for rent nearby." People who live in the city are not so lazy as to be unwilling to walk a little bit to get to their parking space.

It would also be useful for the city to collect occupancy data for private garages near a new development. (Are there spaces currently available for rent/purchase nearby?)
 
cden4 said:
It would also be useful for the city to collect occupancy data for private garages near a new development. (Are there spaces currently available for rent/purchase nearby?)
Click to expand...

I believe the city is conducting a new census of parking.

It's also worth pointing out the irony in some of parking politics; there's the oft-repeated (yeah I know I'm veering into strawman generalizations) claim that reducing on-site parking will incur spillover into permitted on-street spots and will cause congestion - but forcing developers to assume such a high bar for parking spaces more or less guarantees that congestion will be present. If I had the money for downtown condo and had spot provided free of charge (or tied into the condo fee) of course I'm bringing a car even if it sits in the garage 95% of the time. There were some interesting numbers in the PNF for the old International Bike Club project concerning parking utilization for metered spots (heavy usage, almost always fully utilized) and for permitted street spots (far less utilization per day) - there's more wiggle-room than a lot of people think, not everywhere, not for every project, but it's not quite parkocalypse
 
Ah yes I read that PNF as well. Brighton Ave isn't even metered. It's just 2 hour only 8 am to 6 pm M-F I believe. And a total free for all at all other times. So not only are people who are trying to visit restaurants using it but anyone who doesn't have a car registered in Boston and wants to park overnight is using it too. (This includes Allston and Brighton residents.) I'd love to see exactly who is parking there and for how long. Brighton Ave is probably one of the most poorly managed streets when it comes to parking use. I really wonder if Boston should start making some of the main streets resident only from 2-5 am to discourage people from dumping their cars there for the whole evening and night. (Especially since Brookline has no overnight on-street parking and is only a few blocks away.)
 
Has anyone noticed these new garages being full of zipcar spaces? It seems that the mandatory parking minima are so far above demand that zipcar can easily purchase floors of garages...
 
curcuas said:
Has anyone noticed these new garages being full of zipcar spaces? It seems that the mandatory parking minima are so far above demand that zipcar can easily purchase floors of garages...
Click to expand...

Many of the development plans actually call for these car sharing spaces (and bicycle spaces) as part of traffic mitigation.

But, to your point, the building across the street from me in Chinatown, the Metropolitan, still has easement spaces available for sale by the original developer. The garage is technically not full 10 years after opening (showing how overbuilt it is).
 
Mike said:
There is an article today in the boston business journal about this project ... also a new rendering:


http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/r...n-yip-the-25-year-old-who-wants-to-build.html
Click to expand...

auii44.jpg


Gotta say, Colin, I might have paid a little extra to render the other buildings, too. Google Earth 3D is a little unbecoming.
 
No way this will happen, just like the other building on tremont the ritz will put up a fight which sucks they shouldnt be able to lay claim to views
 
I'm feeling pretty pessimistic about this one as well. Would be a nice one to be wrong about though. I kinda like it. (Shitty rendering aside.)
 
Suffolk 83 said:
No way this will happen, just like the other building on tremont the ritz will put up a fight which sucks they shouldnt be able to lay claim to views
Click to expand...

What view is this blocking from the ritz exactly?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top