How Tall Are Boston's Buildings and Should They Be Taller?

KentXie said:
Yeah, and you know how they can do that? Acquire another building or another plot and develop it which would be significantly cheaper than demolishing an existing building they own that is generating revenue. See Four Seasons? Notice how they didn't demolish their own building along Boylston St but instead is developing a new 700 ft tower in Back Bay. How about the Marriot Hotel? Notice how they didn't demolish their building on Long Wharf and instead bought the Custom House? That's what actual corporations are like.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that corporations never demolish buildings?
 
JumboBuc said:
Seriously? That's clearly not what he said. This really isn't very difficult to understand...
Click to expand...

Thanks Jumbo.

To clarify Hubman, corporations don't demolish buildings if there's no need to and I'm pretty sure whoever owns the Hilton building (whether it's the Hilton hotel or a property owner) has no incentive to demolish something that is generating revenue. Now, if the building had no tenant or if the tenant is planning to leave soon and they can't sign another tenant or they feel like they can hold off signing a tenant for 2 years to build a new tower, then the property owner may very well decide to demolish the building to build a larger building because it won't be losing revenue by doing so (ex. Traveler Insurance Building).

However, it is less likely that a high-rise will be demolished compared to a small building simply for the following reasons:

1) High-rises generate a lot more revenue than smaller buildings meaning there is a lot more revenue to lose when a structure is demolished.

2) Going off the point above, high-rises are subjected to greater loss the longer it takes to get the building constructed meaning the corporation redeveloping the building has to consider the risk a recession can doom their new tower (i.e. unable to secure financial loans for construction, losing tenants that signed the lease, construction materials goes up). They have to weigh this risk against acquiring another building or redeveloping an empty plot.

3) Replacing a high-rise with a taller building would undergo a more rigorous review in the city. You already see this with the Aquarium Tower.

In summation, corporations do not just demolish building whenever they want to. It's not a click and plop so to even suggest this idea is not reflective of reality.
 
KentXie said:
Thanks Jumbo.

Now, if the building had no tenant or if the tenant is planning to leave soon and they can't sign another tenant or they feel like they can hold off signing a tenant for 2 years to build a new tower, then the property owner may very well decide to demolish the building to build a larger building because it won't be losing revenue by doing so (ex. Traveler Insurance Building).
Click to expand...

I thought the hotel owned the building.
 
Great so now you understand why it hasn't come down.
 
Could they build an extension? What if they added on next to or on the tower? Is there any space around the hotel?
 
Hubman said:
Could they build an extension? What if they added on next to or on the tower? Is there any space around the hotel?
Click to expand...

An extension? It's a 30 floor hotel, not a backyard patio. If Marriott/Starwood saw the need for more rooms they'd just build new or possibly buy something and rebrand it.
 
kmp1284 said:
An extension? It's a 30 floor hotel, not a backyard patio. If Marriott/Starwood saw the need for more rooms they'd just build new or possibly buy something and rebrand it.
Click to expand...

They could always want more space. Or they could do a condo tower like 4 Seasons did.
 
Hubman said:
They could always want more space. Or they could do a condo tower like 4 Seasons did.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and they can do it by, again, buying a building or building a new tower. I don't understand why you are asking the same question over and over again. The point is, these two options are more likely than demolishing an existing building. Whether they do so is dictated by the market.
 
It's not the same question. Demolishing and adding are not the same.
 
Hubman said:
It's not the same question. Demolishing and adding are not the same.
Click to expand...

Ok, so the simple answer is yes they can but it's unlikely they are going to extend it on an existing tower due to 1) the plot it sits on is incredibly small meaning there is no room for a horizontal extension and 2) I doubt the tower was design to support additional floors.
 
^^^ Of course. This is why the combined Marriott/Starwood entity now has at least one of almost every brand they operate except Edition, JW Marriott and St Regis in Boston.
 
Regarding the Sheraton, are both towers part of the same hotel? It's basically 2 visually identical towers, except the one closer to Boylston is wider and tends to obscure the view of the 2nd one.
 
KentXie said:
Ok, so the simple answer is yes they can but it's unlikely they are going to extend it on an existing tower due to 1) the plot it sits on is incredibly small meaning there is no room for a horizontal extension and 2) I doubt the tower was design to support additional floors.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I was wondering whether it sat on a plaza and if this was feasible.
 
Hubman said:
Thanks. I was wondering whether it sat on a plaza and if this was feasible.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm incorrect in my statement. They can demolish the adjacent parking garage that they own (most likely it also isn't built to support additional floors). It's whether they want to inconvenient their guests for multiple years by not having parking space unless they cut a deal with the parking garage next to Kings.
 
DZH22 said:
Regarding the Sheraton, are both towers part of the same hotel? It's basically 2 visually identical towers, except the one closer to Boylston is wider and tends to obscure the view of the 2nd one.
Click to expand...

Yes they both belong to Sheraton. I think a good opportunity to continue developing at Prudential Center is over near the arcade that connects to P.F. Chang. It would align against the side of the Sheraton tower so only a few views are affected.
 
Wow. I had no idea such a thing existed-were not really seeing any affects here yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top