Fenway Infill and Small Developments

Fenway said:
Those two crossings across the driveway aren't accessible routes as they lead directly to site stairs. So they aren't required to be ADA compliant. The sidewalks themselves along the accessible routes to Landmark Center (from the site ramp to the crossing of the driveway near Bed Bath Beyond & Staples) and the public right of way along Park Drive do have the tactile strips and compliant ramps.

Fenway has a resident paraplegic ADA activist whom would sue if this work wasn't up to par.
Click to expand...

Problem is, the accessible route is a lengthy detour which is not justified by hardship or historical barriers.

ADA law requires equal access to the disabled. What they have here is by no means equal access.

This is a winnable lawsuit.


Note, this shows a slightly older configuration, but the point is the same.

Mr ADA is trying to get to the front entrance (green circle).

Paths are clearly marked. But nope, its a dead end.

My walk can follow the blue dots and arrive. Mr ADA has to take a VERY circuitous route to arrive at the same destination (the front door).


fenway_zps69d91df8.jpg


Same problem in reverse if Mr ADA wants to park and enjoy the new river.

This is an ADA violation.
 
My best friend's family owns the building across the street from Canestaro. There isn't much retail along Peterborough, I would personally rather Canestaro stay I loved that place.
 
Last edited:
Fenway said:
"Problem is, the accessible route is a lengthy detour which is not justified by hardship or historical barriers."

The grade wasn't significantly changed from the original 1928 configuration when Landmark center was developed. At some point in the future it is very likely the parking in the front of Landmark Center will be removed and the entire site regraded to make this issue a moot point.

"ADA law requires equal access to the disabled. What they have here is by no means equal access."

It is equal access given the vast differences in grade around the building and the routes provided meet the requirements of the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board, which is stricter than ADA with the except of a few obscure requirements.

"This is a winnable lawsuit."

No it isn't and that's why none has been filed in the decade of the operation of the complex.
Click to expand...


Vast difference in grade? It's three steps.

It is absolutely winnable. Saying its not because a suit hasnt been filed makes no sense. Look at the enormous number of inaccessible sidewalks in Boston, and then look at the massive lawsuit Chicago (or was it SF?) lost because they hadnt made any move to fix them.

Take the fact that one cannot cross the BU bridge at commonwealth ave, because there are no ramps. There have been no ramps for, what, 60 years?

No one has sued, but thats a winnable lawsuit as well because the area has undergone heavy construction (BU bridge project).

You also ignored the reverse trip, from parking lot to park. Even without access to the building front door, there is no convenient accessible path to the new river park.
 
From a recent filing with the BRA concerning the expansion of the Hotel Commonwealth:

"Proposal calls for a 134,000 SF expansion of the existing Hotel Commonwealth, to allow for an additional 96 hotel rooms."
 
Thanks for sharing that. I agree, looks quite promising.
 
Some more info on the Hotel Commonwealth expansion plans from the BBJ:

http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/real_estate/2013/08/hotel-commonwealth-looks-to-expand.html

The owner of Hotel Commonwealth wants to put up a second building between the 140-room hotel and Fenway Park, according to a letter of intent submitted to the Boston Redevelopment Authority.

In the Aug. 21 letter, published today by the BRA, lawyers for Kenmore Hotel LLC lay out plans for a 134,000 square foot structure containing 96 additional hotel rooms.

In December, Boston University sold the Hotel Commonwealth to Kenmore Hotel LLC, a partnership between Fundamental Advisors LP and Sage Hospitality. The sale price was $79 million.

If approved, the building would rise on a 23,000 square foot parking lot to the rear of the hotel, which is located at 500 Commonwealth Avenue in Kenmore Square. It would stand no higher than the existing, five-story hotel, according to the letter.

The lot faces a two-block extension of Newbury Street, which runs between the back of the hotel and the Massachusetts Turnpike. Across the turnpike lies the home of the Boston Red Sox.

Hotel Commonwealth operator Kenmore Hotel plans to file an expanded project notification form in September, attorneys Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo write in the letter.
Click to expand...
 
No need for them to submit renderings since they won't follow them anyway.
 
Does anyone have a link to a good article or chart that summarizes the SF currently being constructed or permitted in the back bay/longwood area? There was Bisnow article recently that I am trying to find but figured I'd ask here anyway
 
Hotel Commonwealth is not one of my favorite buildings, but I'm fine with letting them fill in an adjoining parking lot.
 
It would be great if Hotel Commonwealth could negotiate some sort of arrangement to eventually deck over the Mass Pike and have an "F" shaped building that included the current tower, the new addition over their vacant lot, and then a long stem running north-to-south that decks over Newbury Ext., Mass Pike, the commuter rail, and meets at the House of Blues for a Landsdowne Street entrance for hotel-guests only. THAT would be AWESOME!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top