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

[citydweller]

1. I think this would be best for a demo and a rebuild as residential or mixed residential/commercial. However, I have no idea what is underneath this site and whatever other zoning BS or shadow laws would prevent from putting something vertical here.

2. With the above said, I was at the Minnetonka, MN House of Sport a couple of weeks ago and it was bumping - very busy, people shopping and buying things, lots of inventory, and like the description, they have rock walls, and experiential stuff with staff providing advice, etc.. Of course, it is MN and I think ours has an ice skating rink outside. A store in this location could get quite busy.

A counterpoint to #2 is that the MN store is attached to a mall, with a parking lot, so you can put your haul of things in a car. I am not sure why people would schlep all the way into Boston to buy stuff. I think this would be better suited to Burlington or Natick.

Agreed with both points. The cost of parking in the city is a huge deterrent for me. Having said that, the Copley T station is one block away and the orange line is a short walk as well so convenient for the city dwellers at least.

 

[Lrfox]

Agreed with both points. The cost of parking in the city is a huge deterrent for me. Having said that, the Copley T station is one block away and the orange line is a short walk as well so convenient for the city dwellers at least.

Rideshares are an easy solution to this problem. A city dweller buying more than they can comfortably carry on the T from Dick's House of Sport will probably just snag an Uber (or even Uber XL) for the one-way trip home with their purchases. I don't know that it'll be a huge draw for suburban shoppers, but those that are comfortable enough to drive in and park at the Pru garage for shopping/dining probably won't have an issue also driving in for this.

 

[Arlington]

There's no reason why there can't be a 10 to 20 story residential tower atop 3 floors of retail here. This is another reason why we need a land tax, not a property tax, to encourage owners to spread the cost of their square feet of site across as many cubic feet of building, rather than say that undersized buildings are fully depreciated and "paid for"

 

[king_vibe]

There's no reason why there can't be a 10 to 20 story residential tower atop 3 floors of retail here. This is another reason why we need a land tax, not a property tax, to encourage owners to spread the cost of their square feet of site across as many cubic feet of building, rather than say that undersized buildings are fully depreciated and "paid for"

The thing is that this building is enormous, something like 180'x300'. You could comfortably build TWO residential towers on a common retail podium here. Take the 200-unit Avalon Exeter building right next door. You could build TWO of them on this site and still have the sporting goods store at the base! I feel like I'm going crazy.

 

[king_vibe]

There's five hundred million square feet of lab space coming online and the primary plan for housing all the new employees is to make them live in inaccessible moonscape warehouses next to oil tanks in Everett while the city allows a Dave and Busters to be built in one of the most transit-dense neighborhood in the country. Insane.

 

[DwnTwnr]

While I agree that this is a perfect site for housing, no one is proposing that. Someone is proposing a Dick's Sporting Goods. What is the city supposed to do beyond seizing the site and building housing here? I supposed they could rezone to encourage high rise residential, but no one is financing that right now so we just aren't seeing it.

 

[king_vibe]

While I agree that this is a perfect site for housing, no one is proposing that. Someone is proposing a Dick's Sporting Goods. What is the city supposed to do beyond seizing the site and building housing here? I supposed they could rezone to encourage high rise residential, but no one is financing that right now so we just aren't seeing it.

Ideally, the city would indeed seize this property (and many others) through eminent domain and build housing. Perfectly legal. Since contemporary American governments (local, state, and federal) have no will for that kind of common sense approach, they could seize the property and offer to it another developer who does have higher ambitions (the Kelo v. New London approach).

At the very least, we could use a more hands-on style intervention in development. Proclamations from the bully pulpit as to what the city wants to see, incentives for building, slow-walking or denying alternatives. There’s lots that can be done given a little vision.

 

[fatnoah]

As a formerly local parent that laments the loss of City Sports further down the road, Dick's would have been a welcome addition, but I'd like to see it as the lower floors of a residential tower.

 

[tobyjug]

Ideally, the city would indeed seize this property (and many others) through eminent domain and build housing. Perfectly legal. Since contemporary American governments (local, state, and federal) have no will for that kind of common sense approach, they could seize the property and offer to it another developer who does have higher ambitions (the Kelo v. New London approach).

No thanks!

 

[Charlie_mta]

No thanks!

Eminent domain got a bad reputation in the 1960s with the BRA using it to wipe out huge sections of the city. With that kind of legacy I don't see it bring used again as a development tool, thankfully.

 

[Blackbird]

Eminent domain got a bad reputation in the 1960s with the BRA using it to wipe out huge sections of the city. With that kind of legacy I don't see it bring used again as a development tool, thankfully.

Last I checked, the Lord&Taylor building isn’t a neighborhood. And Somerville has since used eminent domain with much better results, no?

 

[king_vibe]

Nobody with any authority is going to even whisper the words “eminent domain” for this site. I’m just imagining a better world.

 

[Blackbird]

It stinks that housing is such a sore subject in this city/region that we can’t just all be excited about what sounds to me like a fantastic retail addition to Boylston Street.

I still want to see an arcade, like a Dave and Busters or a Rec Room, or maybe a roller rink built somewhere in the central city that’s accessible by transit. As great as the Museum of Science is, Boston could really use more outlets for affordable, family-friendly fun. While this isn’t that exactly, the rock wall, batting cages, golf simulator, etc. will make this much more interactive and “fun” than if a regular old store were going here.

 

[mdd]

It stinks that housing is such a sore subject in this city/region that we can’t just all be excited about what sounds to me like a fantastic retail addition to Boylston Street.

I still want to see an arcade, like a Dave and Busters or a Rec Room, or maybe a roller rink built somewhere in the central city that’s accessible by transit. As great as the Museum of Science is, Boston could really use more outlets for affordable, family-friendly fun. While this isn’t that exactly, the rock wall, batting cages, golf simulator, etc. will make this much more interactive and “fun” than if a regular old store were going here.

I know it's not directly off of mass transit, but the Seaport has a number of bar/restaurant/activity concepts now. How affordable and family friendly they are is debatable, but there is a bowling alley, dart club, ping bong bar and now mini golf. It's pretty fun.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Last I checked, the Lord&Taylor building isn’t a neighborhood. And Somerville has since used eminent domain with much better results, no?

But the use of eminent domain solely for site redevelopment purposes would set a precedent which would make the public nervous. You know, the slippery slope thing.

 

[king_vibe]

It stinks that housing is such a sore subject in this city/region that we can’t just all be excited about what sounds to me like a fantastic retail addition to Boylston Street.

I still want to see an arcade, like a Dave and Busters or a Rec Room, or maybe a roller rink built somewhere in the central city that’s accessible by transit. As great as the Museum of Science is, Boston could really use more outlets for affordable, family-friendly fun. While this isn’t that exactly, the rock wall, batting cages, golf simulator, etc. will make this much more interactive and “fun” than if a regular old store were going here.

It’s still just a store! You can climb the rock wall if you’re looking to buy new climbing shoes. You can use the batting cage if you’re looking to get a new bat.

The worst part of this is that they’re somehow sinking $50,000,000 into the store renovation, so we’re bound to be stuck with it for a generation or so.

 

[bbfen]

It’s still just a store! You can climb the rock wall if you’re looking to buy new climbing shoes. You can use the batting cage if you’re looking to get a new bat.

The worst part of this is that they’re somehow sinking $50,000,000 into the store renovation, so we’re bound to be stuck with it for a generation or so.

Word around the neighborhood in the summer of 2020 was that there was a ton of abatement, elevators were shot, escalators were shot, electric service was shot. Price seems a tad high, but it’s essentially a gut rehab so maybe not.

 

[king_vibe]

Word around the neighborhood in the summer of 2020 was that there was a ton of abatement, elevators were shot, escalators were shot, electric service was shot. Price seems a tad high, but it’s essentially a gut rehab so maybe not.

Seems like a case for a full tear down to me!

 

[MjolnirMan]

1. I think this would be best for a demo and a rebuild as residential or mixed residential/commercial. However, I have no idea what is underneath this site and whatever other zoning BS or shadow laws would prevent from putting something vertical here.

Looking at OpenStreetMap and OpenRailwayMap, not much looks to be under it - unlike some of the Prudential Center complex, it's a comfortable distance from the Green Line tunnels on Boylston and Exeter, as well as the Pike and train tunnels a block south. This makes perfect sense, since MapJunction shows the L&T building to be at the far eastern extremity of the former rail yard, meaning that it went from that right to the Pru.

FAA limits put the site in the 950' zone, but for things like relevant shadow laws and realistic approval chances, I'm sure a similar height to the adjacent 28-floor/320' 77 Exeter (ca 2014) or 18-floor/325' 88 Boylston (ca 2017) would be an easy pitch. Something between that and a more ambitious massing, like the 544' 1000 Boylston proposal just down the street, could work as well.

Huge opportunity loss to not redevelop this one, whether you're advocating for more housing, better retail, or both.

 

[Life Coach Mike]

Let's say someone bought the site and built a tower or two for housing. Who do you think is going to afford this housing? I'd rather see a Dicks there than another block of unaffordable apartments or condos. Given the proximity to the entire Pru complex, which to my knowledge is solely luxury housing, the pressure would be too great to make the new one affordable. And what's affordable today? IMO it ought to be anything under $2200/month for a one bed.