Copley Place Expansion and Tower | Back Bay

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

datadyne007 said:
He went to the meeting.
Click to expand...

I know, but I was hoping that dshoost may know if they uploaded the presentation that contained the info. As much as I want to write a letter by quoting another person's participation (or even mine had I went to the meeting), it would probably stronger if I can quote it directly from the presentation itself. I'll see if I can find it on their website.
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

A reminder ...

3459151.jpg
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

KentXie said:
How about you give us proof that 99 percent of the people who live in Back Bay are opposing this project and maybe we can take your rant seriously?

Also, I believe they would include stairs that will allow access into the winter garden from the sidewalk. It's almost ludicrous that some of you will believe that the developer wouldn't allow some sort of access for pedestrian to use the winter garden.
Click to expand...

At the recent newly-formed "Copley Neighbors" group meetings of residents of Back Bay and adjacent neighborhoods and representatives of Back Bay groups and adjacent neighborhood groups, 100 percent of the people attending voted in oppositiion to this project. And at both the most recent BRA public meeting at the library in Copley Square and the BRA's "community advisory committee" meeting, 99 percent of the people in the audience who commented or asked a question after the architect's presentation expressed opposition to this project.

Since the Back Bay and South End neighborhoods are frequented by large numbers of disabled residents who need to utilize wheelchairs to get around and disabled commuters who have to go to the Back Bay station by way of Dartmouth Street to add money to their pass for The Ride van, including stairs to an elevated, enclosed wintergarden would still fail to "allow access
into the winter garden from the sidewalk' for people with disabilities who rely on wheelchairs and can't walk up stairs. And if enclosing the open space of the public plaza/park at Stuart and Dartmouth streets with a "winter garden" decreases the access of people who rely on wheelchairs and can't walk upstairs to this public space, then this project would also seem to violate the terms of disablity rights acts and ordinances.

Regarding the issue of providing union-wage construction jobs to unemployed construction workers in Massachusetts, an alternative approach would be for state and city officials to set up some kind of public works hiring hall (in consultation with construction union officials) as soon as possible; and after registering at the "public works department" hiring hall, each individual unemployed construction worker would be immediately assigned to work on some kind of infrastructure repair, school repair, or affordable housing building project within Massachusetts (to be financed by a "surplus wealth" tax on the people in Massachusetts who are part of the top 1 percent -in terms of their annuel incomes and total assets--and are not part of the 99 percent, etc.)
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

Neimanmarcuswatch said:
Since the Back Bay and South End neighborhoods are frequented by large numbers of disabled residents who need to utilize wheelchairs to get around and disabled commuters who have to go to the Back Bay station by way of Dartmouth Street to add money to their pass for The Ride van, including stairs to an elevated, enclosed wintergarden would still fail to "allow access into the winter garden from the sidewalk' for people with disabilities who rely on wheelchairs and can't walk up stairs. And if enclosing the open space of the public plaza/park at Stuart and Dartmouth streets with a "winter garden" decreases the access of people who rely on wheelchairs and can't walk upstairs to this public space, then this project would also seem to violate the terms of disablity rights acts and ordinances.
Click to expand...
Huh?

A.) There is something called a "ramp" that is required by the ADA.

B.) The tunnel to Back Bay from Copley Place has never been handicap accessible. En route to Back Bay, they have no reason to even be in Copley Place in the first place.

C.) This has nothing to do with Back Bay. It's on the opposite side of the street. Disabled people can use Back Bay's front door like they have for decades.

D.) "Winter garden" does not mean the building is going to extend right to the edge of the street, cutting off the sidewalk. You and many others talk about this as if the sidewalk is being removed.
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

"99 percent of the people in the audience who commented or asked a question after the architect's presentation expressed opposition to this project."

Lol, that's complete bullshit and I know it.



Also, I'm shocked that 100% of the members in a group against this building are.... against this building! You really don't make sense.
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

Now calling to order the 122nd meeting of the "We Fucking Hate Cats Alliance."

First on the agenda, a vote concerning the hating of cats. All those in favor of hating cats...
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

I can't imagine that the city would approve construction of a winter garden without an accessible entrance. Obviously this should be fixed if that's really the plan, but it's no reason to oppose the whole project.
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

Well, if nothing else, NMW is useful for comic relief.

  • A group formed to oppose the project is 100% opposed? Shocking!
  • There is absolutely no way that this project will violate ADA, that would be illegal.
  • The last thing we want is a building built by the first person who shows up. This dumbed down version of Ned proposes no accommodation for skill requirements.
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

Justin7 said:
Now calling to order the 122nd meeting of the "We Fucking Hate Cats Alliance."

First on the agenda, a vote concerning the hating of cats. All those in favor of hating cats...
Click to expand...

I somewhat resent the association of hating cats with opposition to this building. Hating cats is perfectly rational and morally irreproachable (and where can I join the WFHCA, btw? And to think they've had 122 meetings with out me... :().
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

Neimanmarcuswatch said:
At the recent newly-formed "Copley Neighbors" group meetings of residents of Back Bay and adjacent neighborhoods and representatives of Back Bay groups and adjacent neighborhood groups, 100 percent of the people attending voted in oppositiion to this project. And at both the most recent BRA public meeting at the library in Copley Square and the BRA's "community advisory committee" meeting, 99 percent of the people in the audience who commented or asked a question after the architect's presentation expressed opposition to this project.
Click to expand...

This is what statisticians called skewed numbers. First off, the "Copley Neighbors" a group created to oppose a development, is inaccurate data because of the demographic of the participants. In fact using them as an example weakens your entire argument. Second, in the public meeting, "expressing opposition" is one's opinion. What really happened is that people asked questions about the projects on certain issues such as what is the towers impact. However, unless they flat out said, I do not want this tower built, then that's not an opposition. Questions and comment are not black and white, oppose or against, some people wish to be more informed about it and most that do approve of the project would NOT have any questions. So all in all, unless 99% of the attendees voiced disapproval, your numbers are completely false and inaccurate.

Neimanmarcuswatch said:
Since the Back Bay and South End neighborhoods are frequented by large numbers of disabled residents who need to utilize wheelchairs to get around and disabled commuters who have to go to the Back Bay station by way of Dartmouth Street to add money to their pass for The Ride van, including stairs to an elevated, enclosed wintergarden would still fail to "allow access into the winter garden from the sidewalk' for people with disabilities who rely on wheelchairs and can't walk up stairs. And if enclosing the open space of the public plaza/park at Stuart and Dartmouth streets with a "winter garden" decreases the access of people who rely on wheelchairs and can't walk upstairs to this public space, then this project would also seem to violate the terms of disablity rights acts and ordinances.
Click to expand...

First off, the proposal does not extend into Back Bay Station. In additional, ramps can be included and automatic doors can be installed that will allow access for people with disabilities. These are minor changes and can easily be addressed. If yo'reu worry so much about the disabled, question them about it the next meeting. I'm certain that the issue has already been addressed in the plan but if not, adding them into a project will be a minor change.
Neimanmarcuswatch said:
Regarding the issue of providing union-wage construction jobs to unemployed construction workers in Massachusetts, an alternative approach would be for state and city officials to set up some kind of public works hiring hall (in consultation with construction union officials) as soon as possible; and after registering at the "public works department" hiring hall, each individual unemployed construction worker would be immediately assigned to work on some kind of infrastructure repair, school repair, or affordable housing building project within Massachusetts (to be financed by a "surplus wealth" tax on the people in Massachusetts who are part of the top 1 percent -in terms of their annuel incomes and total assets--and are not part of the 99 percent, etc.)
Click to expand...
For suggesting this plan that would require a state referendum to add a tax on the 1 percent. If you wish to undertake the task to convince the 1% of Massachusetts to pay an additional tax, monitor how that surplus wealth can be successfully use in repairs, and assigning the each unemployed individual while going through all the forms that are needed to process their new income, run for governor. Otherwise, your suggestion is wild and not well thought out.
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

So nmw if the project becomes handicap accessible, as required by law, will you then support it?
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

BostonUrbEx said:
"99 percent of the people in the audience who commented or asked a question after the architect's presentation expressed opposition to this project."

Lol, that's complete bullshit and I know it.



Also, I'm shocked that 100% of the members in a group against this building are.... against this building! You really don't make sense.
Click to expand...


+1

UrbEx and I were at that meeting. And even though I left 30 minutes early, maybe 7 or 8 questions had already been asked. One woman was concerned about shadows, a handicap gentleman expressed anger at Simon Properties for poorly maintaining the "elitist brick sidewalks" surrounding their property, and another woman was just misinformed and angry. A question was also asked about the facade, and another question was asked regarding the impact to Mass Pike right-of-way during construction.

Out of 5 questions/comments that I distinctly recall from the audience, only 2 of them could be considered an expression of opposition. So time for a little algebra...

[carry the 2; do the factorial of the whole audience; remember PEMDAS;... okay, almost there...]


I got it!
2 / 5 = 99%
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

Easier math... buzzword of the month = 99%.
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

Justin7 said:
Now calling to order the 122nd meeting of the "We Fucking Hate Cats Alliance."

First on the agenda, a vote concerning the hating of cats. All those in favor of hating cats...
Click to expand...

:) I like it. But it is true. The meeting announcements for this group were of the line of "come and help oppose the building". Those of us int he south end who support it aren't going to go to such a meeting just to get into an argument with the opposition...
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

BostonUrbEx said:
"99 percent of the people in the audience who commented or asked a question after the architect's presentation expressed opposition to this project."

Lol, that's complete bullshit and I know it.



Also, I'm shocked that 100% of the members in a group against this building are.... against this building! You really don't make sense.
Click to expand...

+1

I was also at the meeting. Most people asked questions they were concerned about, but asking a question doesn't mean you're opposed.

Example: A resident from Tent City was concerned about shadows and asked about them. The architect explained since Tent City is South of this project it will not be impacted by shadows. I certainly wouldn't count that as opposition, and its entirely possible that person may now be supportive of this project.
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

Neimanmarcuswatch said:
At the recent newly-formed "Copley Neighbors" group meetings of residents of Back Bay and adjacent neighborhoods and representatives of Back Bay groups and adjacent neighborhood groups, 100 percent of the people attending voted in oppositiion to this project....

...disabled commuters who have to go to the Back Bay station by way of Dartmouth Street to add money to their pass for The Ride van,

....including stairs to an elevated, enclosed wintergarden would still fail to "allow access into the winter garden from the sidewalk' for people with disabilities who rely on wheelchairs and can't walk up stairs.

....enclosing the open space of the public plaza/park at Stuart and Dartmouth streets with a "winter garden" decreases the access of people who rely on wheelchairs and can't walk upstairs to this public space, then this project would also seem to violate the terms of disablity rights acts and ordinances....."

I'm sure that the project team has addressed ADA compliance as they have addressed quite a lot in the 662 pages which include comments for and against the project

http://www.bostonredevelopmentautho...eDocs/Copley Place/DPIR/Copley Place_DPIR.pdf


As for the rest of your post:

"....Regarding the issue of providing union-wage construction jobs to unemployed construction workers in Massachusetts, an alternative approach would be for state and city officials to set up some kind of public works hiring hall (in consultation with construction union officials) as soon as possible; and after registering at the "public works department" hiring hall, each individual unemployed construction worker would be immediately assigned to work on some kind of infrastructure repair, school repair, or affordable housing building project within Massachusetts (to be financed by a "surplus wealth" tax on the people in Massachusetts who are part of the top 1 percent -in terms of their annuel incomes and total assets--and are not part of the 99 percent, etc.)
Click to expand...

Nemo --- 25 years ago I would have suggested you take your comments to Red Sq., 20 years ago it might be Tianamin Sq. (now perhaps too late) -- the fall-back alternatives might have been Pyonyang or Havana (might be too late there)

However these days while Pyonyang is still possible -- I suugest that you take your rant about taxing and spending down to the Dewey Sq. encampment of Obamaville --- The folks down there are probably more receptive when they are there
 
Re: Copley Place plan calls for condo tower

PS afterr thumbing (Ok mousing) my way through all 662 pages of the pdf -- i'm most impressed
http://www.bostonredevelopmentautho...eDocs/Copley Place/DPIR/Copley Place_DPIR.pdf


The Simon / Copley Place team has addressed all of the key issues in quite amount of detail:
winds, shadows, daylight, water run-off, water supply, sewer, electricity, fiber-optic communnnications, parking, traffic, T, Amtrak, SW Corridor park, views (many different perspectives and coridors), floor plans, construction methods (e.g. deep drilled shafts rather than pile driving), noise, construction noise, Mas Pike effects, etc., etc.)

--- and produced something -- which if built as designed -- will definitely improve the existing Copley/Westin/MarriotPru/Hynes complex for nearly everyone

If you are in the 1% who are left out -- e.g. unalterably opposed because:
a) there is no provision for a fenced compound on the green roof for cats to roam freely without being blown-off and falling on tourists entering the windtergarden -- well sorry -- try a leash
b) the green roof will increase local humidity in the immediate vicinity and hence cause excessive mold, mildew and fugal growths on the books stored in the BPL -- perhaps a dehumidifier?
c) reflections from the glass curtain wall of the residential tower will light up some locations south of the tower where satanic rites are performed in the late afternoon shadows cast by local brownstones -- try moving to Salem


For the rest of us --- the complex should be expanded to the southeast by using a Gerbil Tube accross Dartmouth St to additional construction built on air rights over / along the Turnpike on top of the Hancock Parking Garage

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&r...AQ&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=image&ved=0CBAQ_BI
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top