Lyrik Back Bay | 1001 Boylston Street (Parcel 12) | Back Bay

ritchiew said:
Could that part of highway be capped with a park?
Click to expand...
That would be nice, but the thing with that parcel, is that it's pretty well hidden from view once the other parcels are developed. To me, it wouldn't be a high priority for capping until the rest are done anyway, in terms of stitching the city back together. Ultimately, though, a park would certainly be a thing people might advocate.
 
cubbe8 said:
What would you do with the roads? Both Ipswich and Newbury are at the level of the pike.
Click to expand...

You'd have to have stairs, an elevator, and or a series of ramps to go from the roads to the park, which would indeed probably need to be raised to fit over the highway.
 
ritchiew said:
Could that part of highway be capped with a park?
Click to expand...

Some interesting discussion on this happened around page 32:

Stlin said:
Rethought and expanded the area I modeled to include Parcel 12. *IF* you can get away with the 7ft of Newbury parking lane as a fire escape, and deal with having the on ramp, something like this is basically the only rectilinear shape I could make that wouldn't block the light. Though a quick flip through the parcel 12 PIR suggests that shadows cast by buildings to the north aren't as much of a concern compared to easterly. If it works out, I don't see why it couldn't extend to the full width of the westbound side. If I were to build it, I would probably incorporate a garage redev, and foot bridge over. and that blob on the parcel 12 end would be the main entrance and floor area, accessed via parcel 12's concourse. Hopefully, that's enough floorplan area to be able to justify the deck. That depends on how much though they're depending on the gap between towers for light in the first place
View attachment 21594
Click to expand...
 
I walked by the area few days ago and kept thinking how such project got approved in the first place from the aesthetic & urbanistic POV.... 🤷‍♂️ those towers are completely disconnected from the existing blocks in similar height, character & proportions.. they're literally two white masts anchored in a no mans land trying to fill a void that got more hollow by their presence. Truly unwalkable & unapproachable from the pedestrian POV
 
Last edited:
Hufer said:
I walked by area few days ago and kept thinking how such project got approved in the first place from the aesthetic & urbanistic POV.... 🤷‍♂️ those towers are completely disconnected from the existing blocks in similar height, character & proportions.. they're literally two white masts anchored in a no mans land trying to fill a void that got more hollow by their presence. Truly unwalkable & unapproachable from the pedestrian POV
Click to expand...

I agree with one of your points -- these towers are trying to fill a *literal* void. And they did. You can argue the design merits of the development (I think it's unremarkable from a strictly "architecture" standpoint), but you'd really prefer what was (more accurately WASN'T) there before? This is a net win, no question. Anyone who's lived and walked in this part of the city knows that.
 
chrisbrat said:
I agree with one of your points -- these towers are trying to fill a *literal* void. And they did. You can argue the design merits of the development (I think it's unremarkable from a strictly "architecture" standpoint), but you'd really prefer what was (more accurately WASN'T) there before? This is a net win, no question. Anyone who's lived and walked in this part of the city knows that.
Click to expand...
but before it was a bridge with a bus stop - IOW it was an infrastructure element with a horrible bus stop location- granted it was awful- but because the void is now filled with two insipid towers and a pseudo plaza does it make it "better"? I'm not against the development at all, since I was for it when first announced, but the final product leaves so much to desire when the potential for something worthy was there to be achieved.
bottom line is - it's done, built and now part of the urban fabric. So be it.
 
Hufer said:
I walked by area few days ago and kept thinking how such project got approved in the first place from the aesthetic & urbanistic POV.... 🤷‍♂️ those towers are completely disconnected from the existing blocks in similar height, character & proportions.. they're literally two white masts anchored in a no mans land trying to fill a void that got more hollow by their presence. Truly unwalkable & unapproachable from the pedestrian POV
Click to expand...
I think once the project, including its pocket park, is complete and open to public pedestrian access, it will look a lot more approachable and integrated with the neighborhood.
 
Hufer said:
I walked by area few days ago and kept thinking how such project got approved in the first place from the aesthetic & urbanistic POV.... 🤷‍♂️ those towers are completely disconnected from the existing blocks in similar height, character & proportions.. they're literally two white masts anchored in a no mans land trying to fill a void that got more hollow by their presence. Truly unwalkable & unapproachable from the pedestrian POV
Click to expand...
People, for the hundredth time, it was a highway before. If not for this project, it likely would have remained a highway for the foreseeable future. How do we know this? Because this is the first air rights highway project in Boston in almost 40 years. These types of projects are incredibly complicated and expensive. If this was an Arby’s drive-through, I’d consider it a win.

We can quibble a bit on design, but I promise this will be 100x better from a pedestrian perspective than its predecessor. If we want to continue to see air rights projects, we’re going to have to compromise a bit on design, height, etc. From my perspective, I don’t think it’s especially obtrusive and definitely beats having a highway as a neighbor.

20230615_192521_Original.jpeg
 
Hufer said:
I walked by area few days ago and kept thinking how such project got approved in the first place from the aesthetic & urbanistic POV.... 🤷‍♂️ those towers are completely disconnected from the existing blocks in similar height, character & proportions.. they're literally two white masts anchored in a no mans land trying to fill a void that got more hollow by their presence. Truly unwalkable & unapproachable from the pedestrian POV
Click to expand...
I walk by this location often; I think it's too early to judge the pedestrian experience since the front sidewalks and plaza are surrounded by fencing. From what I can see through the fences it looks to be promising and a huge improvement over what was there.
 
I made a point to walk past today. Looks like the glass Green Line headhouse is up. At least I think that's what that is. Whoever can grab aerial shots, I'd love to see
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top