Iron Works | 323-365 Dorchester Ave | South Boston

We're going to want a new thread for this one but I'd rather somebody with more information be the one to create it.

www.universalhub.com

Unwrapped: Proposed 21-story tower on Dorchester Avenue in South Boston

National Development yesterday filed detailed plans and renderings of its proposed 21-story, $210-million residential, office and retail building at 323-345 Dorchester Ave., the first of several buildings it hopes to build on the roughly 5.4 acres it owns on that side of Dorchester Avenue, near...
www.universalhub.com www.universalhub.com
 
iamdjmichael said:
I can't remember if there is a thread already but there is a small early rendering for 333 Dorchester Ave https://boston.curbed.com/boston-development/2020/2/21/21147426/333-dorchester-avenue-boston
Click to expand...

EPNF_Dot_Resi_Entry__1_.0.jpg

dorchesterstreettower.jpg

nd-streetview.jpg
nd-map.jpg
 
This is all the info we need to start a new thread! Thanks for posting.
 
Downburst said:
Some context: this is (more or less) in line with the PLAN: South Boston/Dorchester Avenue plan/zoning passed a couple of years ago. We can expect many more developments of this scale in this area.
Click to expand...
I've been mentioning my excitement about this new neighborhood every chance I can. This is another early example (along with Washington Square) of what is to become. Once these things get built and everybody sees how fast they fill up it will be off to the races. They can't built them fast enough along Harrison Ave, and these have a real subway.
 
I didn’t see the number of parking spaces in that article, does anyone know?
 
fattony said:
I didn’t see the number of parking spaces in that article, does anyone know?
Click to expand...
www.universalhub.com

Unwrapped: Proposed 21-story tower on Dorchester Avenue in South Boston

National Development yesterday filed detailed plans and renderings of its proposed 21-story, $210-million residential, office and retail building at 323-345 Dorchester Ave., the first of several buildings it hopes to build on the roughly 5.4 acres it owns on that side of Dorchester Avenue, near...
www.universalhub.com www.universalhub.com

National Development says it will ultimately file a "planned development area" blueprint for the land, which would let it and the BPDA throw out the current zoning and negotiate just what can be built there - although the company says it "intends to meet the Boston Zoning Code dimensional requirements and project parameters as an integrated whole" - but for now is concentrating on just the one building, which would have 265 residential units, 47,000 square feet of office space and ground-floor space for a 10,000-square-foot grocery store and a restaurant, as well as 198 parking spaces in an underground garage.
 
PNF:

Box

bpda.app.box.com bpda.app.box.com

two below-grade parking levels with 198 vehicle spaces and 285 secured bicycle spaces serve the Project’s residential and commercial uses.
Click to expand...
 
"At 254 feet, the building would be several stories shorter than the 300 feet allowed under the Dorchester Avenue overlay zoning."

In terms of density, I don't get the logic here. I don't doubt that there is a reason for leaving that much potential $ off the table, but I'm sincerely hoping someone here can help me out.
 
The rezoning of dot ave
V5RSdZJ.png

Boston Plans

You can see where it will fit in here. Theyre also going to create 2 entirely new streets parallel to dot ave. Also gives a good idea of how Washington village ties into the broader neighborhood.

nd-map.jpg
 
Last edited:
Downburst said:
Some context: this is (more or less) in line with the PLAN: South Boston/Dorchester Avenue plan/zoning passed a couple of years ago. We can expect many more developments of this scale in this area.
Click to expand...

I've been looking forward to this finally getting started. This building should get 15-20 neighbors of similar size. Every single street that runs between two HRT stations needs this level of density.
 
rjacobs said:
In terms of density, I don't get the logic here. I don't doubt that there is a reason for leaving that much potential $ off the table, but I'm sincerely hoping someone here can help me out.
Click to expand...

It's the first big one in the neighborhood so they're probably testing the waters a bit. It's still a pretty good scale for that purpose.
 
If the first mid-rise encounters anything beyond tepid resistance I wager about 1/10 of total build-out will be achieved. The rezoning and plans would be considered overly ambitious even in a city with wheels greased for development. I'm for the rezoning, I just don't see it actually bearing much fruit.
 
DZH22 said:
It's the first big one in the neighborhood so they're probably testing the waters a bit. It's still a pretty good scale for that purpose.
Click to expand...
That and I suspect that they are hitting constraints in terms of providing what they feel the market will require for parking and construction cost. The higher you go the most costly construction becomes. Without proven rents and parking utilization in this sub-market they are probably being relatively conservative all the way round.
 
DZH22 said:
It's the first big one in the neighborhood so they're probably testing the waters a bit. It's still a pretty good scale for that purpose.
Click to expand...
National Development seems to have a very conservative payback model for urban developments. They never seem to use the available zoning height or FAR. (Witness the Ink Block, and now here.)
 
rjacobs said:
"At 254 feet, the building would be several stories shorter than the 300 feet allowed under the Dorchester Avenue overlay zoning."
In terms of density, I don't get the logic here. I don't doubt that there is a reason for leaving that much potential $ off the table, but I'm sincerely hoping someone here can help me out.
Click to expand...

goody said:
That and I suspect that they are hitting constraints in terms of providing what they feel the market will require for parking and construction cost. The higher you go the most costly construction becomes. Without proven rents and parking utilization in this sub-market they are probably being relatively conservative all the way round.
Click to expand...

JeffDowntown said:
National Development seems to have a very conservative payback model for urban developments. They never seem to use the available zoning height or FAR. (Witness the Ink Block, and now here.)
Click to expand...
its important to remember that the BPDA Board approved the Plan Dot Ave, but it never even went to a zoning hearing to become the actual zoning for the area.
the electeds probably were not on board with the height/density.
 
HenryAlan said:
I've been looking forward to this finally getting started. This building should get 15-20 neighbors of similar size. Every single street that runs between two HRT stations needs this level of density.
Click to expand...
Henry -- the problem with that kind of blanket statement is that there are existing neighborhoods which become victims of a "one size fits all" mentality

For example -- Build all you want between Broadway and Andrew on the [W] side of Dorchester Ave. East of Dorchester Ave there are existing residential developments which need to be treated with care. The same goes for the "Polish Triangle" between Boston St. and Dorchester Ave.

The planners are letting massive buildings encroach on a stable residential neighborhood.
The best approach is to go somewhat slow starting at the Broadway end redeveloping the old industrial / warehouse district parcel by parcel over the next decade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top