Dick’s House of Sports | Prudential Center | Back Bay

C

cjbski

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
1,003
Reaction score
291
Lord & Taylor will be liquidating all of its stores upon reopening from COVID. What will take the place of its spot on Boylston Street? Ideally a tower with some ground floor retail. Could go tall here, right?

If not, I'd love to see a Nordstrom full-line store, but with them closing 16 of their 115 or so stores, I'd say that not as likely. Maybe a Target? Also unlikely but would be neat.
 
cjbski said:
Lord & Taylor will be liquidating all of its stores upon reopening from COVID. What will take the place of its spot on Boylston Street? Ideally a tower with some ground floor retail. Could go tall here, right?

If not, I'd love to see a Nordstrom full-line store, but with them closing 16 of their 115 or so stores, I'd say that not as likely. Maybe a Target? Also unlikely but would be neat.
Click to expand...

Were they a tenant or do they own the property?
 
My understanding was that they leased, but they almost gave it up a couple of years ago. Jordan’s was eyeing the location for one of their play pens.
 
I'm copying the "site-related" posts from the "New Retail" thread discussion of L&T into this discussion and renaming this to a more standard thread name.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't Copley Square cause shadow problems here? That "home rule" thing for Winthrop Square is really going to tie the hands of a lot of future projects. The worst part is I'm pretty sure with the height reduction that Winthrop Square didn't need this ruling in the first place!

They'll probably have to cap this around the same height as those 3 ghastly, red 1960's residentials in the immediate area.
 
Yea there is no way they can go tall here for political reasons. Maybe 888 Boylston height.
 
Maybe they could take copley towers unused exemption and grandfather in something here.
 
RandomWalk said:
My understanding was that they leased, but they almost gave it up a couple of years ago. Jordan’s was eyeing the location for one of their play pens.
Click to expand...

I wonder what an urban Jordan's would be like..
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
No IMAX, but if it's in a multi-story you might get an indoor paintball range upstairs*.
Click to expand...

Use store merchandise to build the arenas, then sell the paintball'd tables, chairs, and sofas as up-charged, "urban chic" furniture.
 
Blackbird said:
Use store merchandise to build the arenas, then sell the paintball'd tables, chairs, and sofas as up-charged, "urban chic" furniture.
Click to expand...

SPECIAL BONUS: You get to take it all home no-money-down if the Sox hit for the cycle during the clinching game for next year's Grapefruit League pennant.


I have several friends on the West Coast. Explaining the very *concept* of Jordan's to them has resulted in endless lulz at their confused expense.
 
DZH22 said:
Wouldn't Copley Square cause shadow problems here? That "home rule" thing for Winthrop Square is really going to tie the hands of a lot of future projects. The worst part is I'm pretty sure with the height reduction that Winthrop Square didn't need this ruling in the first place!

They'll probably have to cap this around the same height as those 3 ghastly, red 1960's residentials in the immediate area.
Click to expand...
stick n move said:
Maybe they could take copley towers unused exemption and grandfather in something here.
Click to expand...
I (obviously) haven't run a full shadow study, but the L&T site has a lot of qualities that will minimize the shadow impact on Copley Square of any project there.
  1. Copley Square is pretty solidly east of the L&T site (as opposed to north or northeast). This minimizes shadows to only being possible when the sun is very far west, so late in the day towards sunset. (This differentiates the site from the Simon Copley tower would have sat right on Copley's SW corner, making shadows from that project much more pronounced.)
  2. The Lenox hotel, (new-ish) Avalon Exeter, and BPL all sit between the site and Copley Square. And plenty of older mid-rises are clumped around the L&T site to the WSW. Pretty much any time one of those buildings is casting a shadow on Copley Square (which is relatively often late in the day), a new building at the L&T site won't be.
  3. This also site sits entirely north of the line between the Pru and Copley, so that's another plus. Assuming that whatever is built here isn't taller than the Pru, any shadow from an L&T building will generally only hit Copley once the Pru's shadow has already passed south of Copley. And the Pru's shadow doesn't pass south of Copley until very late in the day for most of the year, and not even until past sunset for a decent chunk of the year.
So basically, the only time a building here would cast a shadow on Copley Square is when the sun is north of the Pru and Copley Square is not already in shadow because of the BPL, Lenox, Avalon Exeter, or anything else in the Pru complex. There aren't very many hours of the year in which this is the case. And my understanding is that the shadow law doesn't apply within an hour of sunrise or sunset, making those hours even fewer.

The current Google StreetView for Copley, which was taken late-afternoon/early-evening in November, is demonstrative of this: the BPL is already starting to cast shadows on Copley but the sun is still solidly south of the Pru. By the time the sun moves all the way around the Pru to shine down towards Copley from the west (putting the L&T site in its line), Copley will likely already be in the dark.

If I were designing for this site, I'd propose something up to the height of the Lenox along Boylston, then step up to a height somewhere between that of 101 Huntington and the Pru on the southern portion of the site, S of the Pru-complex gerbil tube.
 
Last edited:
I always thought that this block, that houses Lord & Taylor, would be the perfect location for a tower to fill in the skyline gap between the JHT and the Pru center, a very noticeable void. I'm not a big advocate for really big towers in Boston but this location would fit the bill, something exceeding 800' would be amazing. Yeah, a fantasy but so be it.
 
Last edited:
Guys, I believe this site is governed by the Pru Master Plan (negotiated with Back Bay) and whether it is or not, it is going to need to pass muster with Back Bay neighborhood. It may not cast huge shadows on Copley, but it's south of residential Back Bay. Something along the lines of Mandarin Oriental version 2.0? Sure. Tall tower? Nope.
 
If Wayfair maintains profitability moving forward, I could see them proposing Boston's first supertall office tower at this site and consolidating all office space there. I don't think there's an employer that's expanded its office footprint in Back Bay more this generation and would salivate at the opportunity to consolidate HQ into a million+ sq. ft. office tower.

I could even see them using the ground levels as a showroom for their merchandise, including public outdoor spaces.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top