Liberty Mutual Tower | 157 Berkeley Street | Back Bay

[Sicilian]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

^Briv

Emphatic +1

 

[Mayor Menino's Crohn's]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Actually you might want to dump Arbella. They make Liberty Mutual look like the golden light.

Arbella will leave you high and dry if something serious happen. They try to beat me for 7 grand because they found a loophole.
I had to hire a lawyer and eventually they paid the full amount.

Be Careful. I guess when it all comes down to paying out big money the insurance companies will try to find anything to screw you.

Actually, Amica is the cat's meow IMHO...


I was in a no-fault fender bender about two years ago. The driver ahead was merging from an off ramp onto the main road. She stopped all of a sudden in the middle of the road. No traffic. No rhyme of reason. I tap into her. I then quickly get out and look at the damage. There's none to my car or her's. The woman gets out. She's from Laos, and she barely speaks english. I told her to go pull under the overpass. We then exchange papers. There was a language barrier. But to make a long story short, she tried to milk me for whiplash when I was served papers a few months back. Needless to say, Arbella has been very good to me.

Insurance has gotten out of control. This is what happens when the Commonwealth adopt Jersey's insurance laws.

 

[JohnAKeith]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

My column in Back Bay Patch

Back Bay Building Blocks: Is New Liberty Mutual Tower Breaking the Law?
Berkeley St & Columbus Ave, Boston, MA

Earlier this year, the Liberty Mutual Insurance Company received city approval to build a 22-story tall office tower to be located at the border of the Back Bay.

The $300 million project, which will replace the old Salvation Army site on the corner of Berkeley Street and Columbus Avenue, is expected to create about 500 construction jobs and 600 permanent jobs.

The Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay has written several letters in which it expresses its concern that the height of the new building will shade the sun on Boston Common, in violation of state law.

The project has the support of Mayor Menino and most of the Boston City Council, so perhaps the company feels it doesn't need to obey the letter of the law. In its Project Notification Form, Liberty Mutual admits there will be a new shadow but contends that's okay:

... that shadow is entirely within the boundaries of a larger area that would be cast in shadow by structures conforming to the as-of-right height limit in effect on May 1, 1990.

That's a pretty gutsy line of defense. Basically, Liberty Mutual is saying that, yeah, there'll be a new shadow, but when it comes to shading the Common there's currently zoning in place that would allow a taller building to be built in front of their's. And if it's built, their building's shadow would be blocked by the taller building's shadow.

Unfortunately for Liberty Mutual, last year, State Rep. Marty Walz, D-Back Bay, and Rep. Byron Rushing, D-South End/Roxbury, filed a bill (now pending a vote) that would expand the existing law and prohibit construction of any building that would cast new shadow on many downtown Boston parks, including nearby Copley Square.

Liberty Mutual admits there will be new shadow on the historic square but implies it's such a small amount ? for a few weeks in September from 7:35 a.m. ? 7:50 a.m. ? that it really shouldn't matter:

The maximum extent of this new shadow is approximately the size of two MBTA buses and this amount of new shadow lasts no longer than a few minutes before fading to a de minimis sliver for a few minutes more.

The Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay was not amused:

[A] statement of "de minimis" shadow is not an adequate analysis of the impacts to our historic buildings and public parks.

Who's right? Is a law 'absolute'? Should the neighborhood association accept this project as proposed or should it demand full compliance?

If it decides this is worthy of a fight, it will need to move fast. Demolition of the Salvation Army building has already begun.

http://backbay.patch.com/articles/b...-is-new-liberty-mutual-tower-breaking-the-law

 

[mass88]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

So are you against the building?

 

[ledjes]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

John - I'm a huge fan of your posts, but this one - wow, seriously?

Firstly - How do shadows have a detrimental impact on historic buildings?

Secondly - seriously? You're seriously considering picking a fight over small shadow that lasts for half an hour in September?

I'm not an advocate of bending laws but this is totally lacking in reasonability. My advice: know when to pick your battles. You'll expend significant political capital for something that at best will be prove to be pyrrhic victory for you.

 

[briv]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

I think there are many reasons to be against this building, but shadow concerns is not one of them. I don't think the anti-shadow hysteria stands up to scrutiny. It strikes me more as a tool used as a lateral attack against any new development.

 

[DZH22]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

One man's shadow is another man's shade. On a hot summer day, good luck finding a bench on the common that isn't being blasted by the sun. All the "shadowed" ones are taken.

Let's get some more shade on these parks!

 

[TheRifleman]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

I think there are many reasons to be against this building, but shadow concerns is not one of them. I don't think the anti-shadow hysteria stands up to scrutiny. It strikes me more as a tool used as a lateral attack against any new development.

So it's okay for shadows on the Boston common but not on the Rose Kennedy GREENWAY? Can somebody ask the BRA how this is consistent with development process.

I have to admit, I am deeply concerned about casting shadows over BOSTON COMMON. The only reason i prefer the common over the Greenway, I actually hang out in the Common.

 

[GW2500]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Personally I'm w/ Briv on shade. But here is simple question that makes the whole shade issue seem silly. What is the difference between shade casted by a big tree in the park as a opposed to a building. It's shade either way you slice it and yet one is ok and one is some how bad. And what about cloudy days... do faces melt or some shit. And the shade is constantly moving. Bullshit is what it really is.

 

[JohnAKeith]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Where did you get the idea I was for or against anything? Doesn't the article simply review the concerns of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay??

 

[BostonUrbEx]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Where did you get the idea I was for or against anything? Doesn't the article simply review the concerns of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay??

That's how I saw it. Just presenting what's going on and then leaving the reader with some questions to think for themselves. And from it, I was 100% against the NABB on the shadow issue. I wouldn't want large shadows on the Common just as much as the next guy, but this seems silly.

 

[Tombstoner]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Where did you get the idea I was for or against anything? Doesn't the article simply review the concerns of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay??

I certainly had the impression that the article was not in favor of the building. Several phrases suggested that to me, for instance:

"The project has the support of Mayor Menino and most of the Boston City Council, so perhaps the company feels it doesn't need to obey the letter of the law." A little snarky, no?

"...That's a pretty gutsy line of defense." Seeming to imply that the defense is somehow suspect and requires balls to assert.

"...The Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay was not amused" Seeming to again suggest that the company's defense is questionable/disingenious

It would genuinely surprise me if you did not mean to editorialize a bit--I thought it was obvious that you were critical of Liberty Mutual. I'm agnostic about the Great Shadow Debate itself, but that's how I read it.

 

[Shepard]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

I must agree with Tombstoner. Even the title - "Is New Liberty Mutual Tower Breaking the Law?" - leads in a certain direction.

 

[Tombstoner]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

I must agree with Tombstoner.

You don't have to; it just makes it easier on all of us.

 

[JohnAKeith]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

I think it's good that I came across that way rather than the way I feel that they're nuts to complain. It led to its desired result - to get a rise out of people for NABB's irrational response.

This was my first column for Back Bay Patch (my posts go up every Tuesday). Since the readership is (hopefully) Back Bay residents, I want to encourage conversation and debate. Since it's a paid gig, I also need to be more professional and even-handed, don't you think?

Next week's column is about Copley Square.

(I have to say, it's very hard to write about these things and fit them into 400 words.)

 

[bbfen]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Disagree, John. If you have an opinion? Own it. If you want to be neutral, then do that. A winked bias toward NABBsters only encourages their unhealthy practices.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

So it's okay for shadows on the Boston common but not on the Rose Kennedy GREENWAY? Can somebody ask the BRA how this is consistent with development process.

I have to admit, I am deeply concerned about casting shadows over BOSTON COMMON. The only reason i prefer the common over the Greenway, I actually hang out in the Common.

As stated in Mr. Keith's column, for TWO WEEKS IN SEPTEMBER between the times 7:35am to 7:50am???????

Are you kidding me?

The only people on the Common trying to catch rays in an area the size of two buses (according to Mr. Keith) on early September mornings would be the .....ahem..... 'overnight residents' of the Common.

As much as I want them to have as much sunlight as possible, no one's way of life will be irreversibly damaged by moving outside of the "two bus circumference" for 15 pre-8am minutes for during half of September.

Honestly, folks.

 

[TheRifleman]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

As stated in Mr. Keith's column, for two weeks in September between the times 7:35am to 7:50am???????

Give me a break.

The only people on the Common trying to catch rays in an area the size of two buses (according to Mr. Keith) on early September mornings would be the .....ahem..... 'overnight residents' of the Common.

As much as I want them to have as much sunlight as possible, no one's way of life will be irreversibly damaged by moving outside of the "two bus circumference" for 15 pre-8am minutes for during half of September.

Honestly, folks.

Then it's official if Shadows are okay on the common they are okay on the Greenway.

I can live with that.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Then it's official if Shadows are okay on the common they are okay on the Greenway.

I can live with that.

I agree that shadows on the Greenway is a ridiculous protest, but even the most ardent Greenway Solar Worshipper wouldn't give half a rat's you-know-what over 15 minutes per day between 7:35-7:50am for two weeks in September.

With all due respect, facts and perspective, people.

 

[KentXie]

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

I agree that shadows on the Greenway is a ridiculous protest, but even the most ardent Greenway Solar Worshipper wouldn't give half a rat's you-know-what over 15 minutes per day between 7:35-7:50am for two weeks in September.

With all due respect, facts and perspective, people.

Oh you'd think that wouldn't you. Remember that Copley Place tower? NIMBYs are unhappy that the project will cast a 30 minute shadow on a small part of Copley Plaza during the ungodly hours of 6 am during Winter.