Not really It overall suggests the Midtown Hotel is a fantastic (mainly meaning "cheap") place, beloved of its guests and its owner. But nobody explicitly says, "For the love of George Jetson, let's never redevelop this wonderful motel - even though it'd be fit to be redeveloped in far less valuable patches of real estate, never mind the middle of Boston."At least 750 words from the Globe here, from just a year ago, that should pretty much answer all your questions?
Actually, as long as he also owns the Colonnade, which is essentially next-door (actually just 100 yards away, and split by only one other property), why on earth would he ever want to redevelop it?Very curious why he's waited so long - what's he holding out for?
Good read, thanks.At least 750 words from the Globe here, from just a year ago, that should pretty much answer all your questions?
Because it means leaving money (in the form of price you don't take) on the table. If it's such a robust hotel market, you're not worried about getting rooms filled.In such a robust hotel market, why would anyone to give up the enviable niche of anchoring the cheapest, no-frills end of the spectrum?
Too soon to be posting the thread. But it is prime land in Back Bay. Church of Christ Scientist will almost surely require the buyer/City to follow strict shadow protocol limiting scale. And we'll see more high priced condo's/ apts placed here.Sorry for the bump but I'm not sure where else to put this. The Midtown Hotel just went to market with HFF being billed as a "large-scale, generational development opportunity". It is 73,331 total land area across 3 parcels. Being sold as a ground lease development though so I'm not sure how much true interest there will be.
I don't know. That tower was pretty specifically negotiated by John Barros (and maybe the Mayor was involved too) as a way to keep the Huntington Theater--the tower is supposed to be the same volume as the as-of-right building for the parcel, which would have required demoing the theater.It will be interesting to see if developers will use the precedence of the Huntington Theatre project (just two blocks away) as leverage to gain approval for additional height at the Midtown site.
And I'm probably the only person who likes this little hotel, a legit example of Midcentury design à la Edward Durrell Stone on the fringe of a 19th Century neighborhood.
What is the shadow in Copley Square? At 9 pm during the summer solstice? As this site is a bit further west wouldn't the shadow occur in early evening, where IIRC there's already lots of shadows anyway?Wow, i didn't realize Trinity Church and South Church are in the clear. Though Shadow Law restrictions still apply to Copley Sq..... it looks like you can get very high before putting down shadow.
Christian Science have made it quite clear they don't want shadows on their park. But maybe $200M can change their minds!
The neighbors behind St Botolph St will scream about anything tall. Other than that, who wants a banal row of residential & possibly even setback buildings?
I like it, too, but mostly because it reminds me of some of the hotels surrounding Disneyland in the 70s and 80s (where I spent much of my youth).