DOT Parcels | 25-28 Kneeland Street | Chinatown

HalcyonEra said:
Looks like we will get a wall of 325's. Let's hope they at least make it interesting given the vantage point. Not sure where open space would be with the 2M Sq Ft goal at that height.
Click to expand...

Although...I think the 4 Seasons tower is technically in 500' zone here...so
 
whighlander said:
Atlantaden -- if you are proposing to rotate the the Ted then please lets deepen its trench so that we can do some further dredging on the harbor to let big ships in at low tide :p
Click to expand...

Don't forget to add a tube for the Silver line. :p
 
Yeah According to the FAA map I believe Four Seasons was in a 500' zone and they allowed the extra 255' so you never know.
 
tangent said:
NIMBY's didn't get the height reduced at the Garden, they got approved for much higher. The developer just didn't think they could make it work financially to go higher.
Click to expand...

...and what's really strange is the fact that the office tower contains only 21 floors. (excluding the podium) Underwhelming, to say the least. A huge wasted opportunity for a prime location.... I know, it's settled, so I'm trying to get over it!
 
One of the things I learned from reading the Longfellow Place / Garden Garage opposition letters was that the opposition asked the FAA to jump into the situation and declare the building couldn't be built that tall. They cited this article: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...faa-airports-building-height-limits/13271583/

Interesting quote from the article:

FAA doesn't directly restrict the height of buildings, but issues a "determination of hazard" when buildings are too tall near airports. At that point, local zoning boards are reluctant to approve construction and buildings can become unaffordable because of higher insurance costs and smaller size.
Click to expand...

Assuming that is correct then the FAA stuff is basically a guideline. If you want to build tall it's all fine and good but be prepared for the repercussions of doing so.
 
meddlepal said:
One of the things I learned from reading the Longfellow Place / Garden Garage opposition letters was that the opposition asked the FAA to jump into the situation and declare the building couldn't be built that tall. They cited this article: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...faa-airports-building-height-limits/13271583/

Interesting quote from the article:



Assuming that is correct then the FAA stuff is basically a guideline. If you want to build tall it's all fine and good but be prepared for the repercussions of doing so.
Click to expand...

Technically true, but not really. I was told by an FAA obstructions engineer once that once they make a hazard determination, no insurer will touch the project. One can find a fair number of examples of the FAA killing projects, mostly in Miami.
 
Equilibria said:
Technically true, but not really. I was told by an FAA obstructions engineer once that once they make a hazard determination, no insurer will touch the project. One can find a fair number of examples of the FAA killing projects, mostly in Miami.
Click to expand...

I agree. While one might try to self-insure the loss of a self-financed building, one couldn't / wouldn't self-insure if the building was to ever lead to the crash of an airplane with 250 souls on board.
 
So I have a question especially for veteran posters who are familiar with all the green line expansion plans that were determined last year - to extend thru south station and down thru the silver line tunnel:

Both the kneeland parcels as well as the Edison plant on summer both are sites of potential right of protection and/or construction - the kneeland site more important, obviously, since it needs a tunnel... But is there a way to actually pitch the green line plans to the govt in a way that will reach important people? I know action would be years away but I couldn't stand it if we squandered an opportunity to at least start thinking about the next big transit project(s).
 
^ I'd advocate that those of us who have put our amateur plans to paper should put together a presentation and at least forward it to the media. Curbed and UHub regularly cover other, less transformational or more pie-in-the-sky amateur transit plans. No reason they wouldn't cover ours. Beyond that it would take getting some real, professional planners on board (which some of us may well be) to put out feelers to city and state govt. The initial goal of any sort of engagement shouldn't even necessarily be to spark a planning process for it, but to get project managers thinking about it, and manage construction projects to prevent different paths from being structurally blocked by development. Our options are very limited by engineering realities, so it's best to try to keep the remaining paths as open as possible.
 
FK4 said:
So I have a question especially for veteran posters who are familiar with all the green line expansion plans that were determined last year - to extend thru south station and down thru the silver line tunnel:

Both the kneeland parcels as well as the Edison plant on summer both are sites of potential right of protection and/or construction - the kneeland site more important, obviously, since it needs a tunnel... But is there a way to actually pitch the green line plans to the govt in a way that will reach important people? I know action would be years away but I couldn't stand it if we squandered an opportunity to at least start thinking about the next big transit project(s).
Click to expand...

No, they aren't. The injection point into the Transitway under 93 and all the ramp tunnels is Essex St. between Chinatown Park and Summer. There is no way in coming south on Summer. The bus loop ceiling abuts the floor of a 93 ramp split; it was never designed for extension further south. All of the wiggle room for a choose-your-adventure trajectory comes west of Surface Rd. and lands on the corner of Essex @ Surface for the slip into the Transitway. Search back on old threads; this has been deconstructed to death.

So Parcels 25-28 are irrelevant for transit expansion. You couldn't cross any of those blocks on any of those south-of-Essex streets with a transit tunnel even if you wanted to.
 
Blackdog said:
How much would it cost to infill north of runway 9/27 and then rotate it counter clockwise a little.
Click to expand...

whighlander said:
Blackdog -- This never would happen -- No one is going to consider filling or move any runways -- the last small runway project took nearly 30 years to overcome the opposition and then only because Massport promised to only use it one way and only when the winds were above a certain speed in a certain direction
Click to expand...

Money does talk though. Just found this related to the construction of the Seoul Lotte Tower.

It took 15 years for Lotte to secure a building permit due to conflicts with a military airfield south of the city. In order to avoid blocking the flight path, Lotte agreed to fund a project that shifted the angle of the runway.
Click to expand...
http://skyrisecities.com/news/2016/02/seouls-first-supertall-dominates-skyline

That ain't gonna be state money.
 
Re: Congress Street Garage Development | West End

^Talks about building on the steam plant parcels by china town/93.
 
Re: Congress Street Garage Development | West End

50 new workers. Amazing.
 
Re: Congress Street Garage Development | West End

Geebus. they just posted that much horse manure over 50 workers.
 
Re: Congress Street Garage Development | West End

odurandina said:
Geebus. they just posted that much horse manure over 50 workers.
Click to expand...

And then you posted it with what relation to Congress St? :(
 
Re: Congress Street Garage Development | West End

odurandina said:
HOLY SHIT...............

https://www.bostonglobe.com/busines...rom-chicago/8fXkuz3ROVH3jN1U1gxR4J/story.html
Click to expand...

Since it was left on previous page...


Also, it's 50 'new' workers in addition to the 250 executives they'd move from their Veolia North America HQ at Chicago's Aon Center. So 300 high-paid corporate executives in the energy sector are moving shop and the face of their North American branch to downtown Boston... And allegedly without any tax breaks or incentives. THAT is amazing news!
 
Re: Congress Street Garage Development | West End

dshoost88 said:
Since it was left on previous page...


Also, it's 50 'new' workers in addition to the 250 executives they'd move from their Veolia North America HQ at Chicago's Aon Center. So 300 high-paid corporate executives in the energy sector are moving shop and the face of their North American branch to downtown Boston... And allegedly without any tax breaks or incentives. THAT is amazing news!
Click to expand...

Nope, it's 50 in addition to 250 "in and around Boston" (i.e., already here). This is the classic "move the HQ to be closer to the CEO's house" approach.

Now if we could only get Bank of America to do that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top