Parcel P-12 | 286-290 Tremont St | Chinatown

JeffDowntown said:
The parking was not for the building, it was for Tufts Medical Center. Tufts is a major stakeholder at this location. You don't give Tufts the expanded parking for the medical canter, they will find a way to torpedo the development.

The parking component was for a direct abutter. The hotel room component was for a direct abutter. The housing was for the neighborhood. The original proposal was a very carefully crafted balancing act by the BPDA of the competing interests.
Click to expand...
I agree, which is why i'm so confused there wasn't a clear attempt to save that plan.
 
curcuas said:
I agree, which is why i'm so confused there wasn't a clear attempt to save that plan.
Click to expand...
Maybe the city has wised up and decided it doesn't need to pander to busybody neighbors to get housing built in the middle of downtown.
 
king_vibe said:
Maybe the city has wised up and decided it doesn't need to pander to busybody neighbors to get housing built in the middle of downtown.
Click to expand...
You clearly do not understand the Massachusetts Zoning Act of 1975. Abutters, particularly directly connected abutters, have automatic standing to challenge any development that is not as-of-right (which this project clearly is not). And abutters usually win the challenge. This is why you have to play nice with abutters in Massachusetts. (Which is what the BPDA tried to do in the original plan. Everyone was on board.)
 
Blackbird said:
Why isn't this project as-of-right?
Click to expand...
Midtown Cultural District Zoning -- 125' max in general, 156' with setback. Welcome to Boston Proper where every zoning decision goes to the ZBA.

The BPDA has (theoretically) applied a "minor modification" amendment to the zoning to 360' max, 20 FAR (from 8-10), but that modification likely won't hold if an abutter objects. (Doubling the height and FAR are not exactly minor modifications.)
 
Last edited:
JeffDowntown said:
You clearly do not understand the Massachusetts Zoning Act of 1975. Abutters, particularly directly connected abutters, have automatic standing to challenge any development that is not as-of-right (which this project clearly is not). And abutters usually win the challenge. This is why you have to play nice with abutters in Massachusetts. (Which is what the BPDA tried to do in the original plan. Everyone was on board.)
Click to expand...
Someone will propose a building with above the as-of-right FAR with hundreds of affordable units, the 6th best medical center in the city will complain, and they’ll get told to kick rocks.
 

I'm very disappointed to see how short this proposal is (118'), especially compared to the prior proposal, although I recognize that it was likely an inevitable outcome.

Current proposal:
render.PNG


Earlier proposal:
69-F862-F6-739-A-4-FEF-BA9-C-4-CDFF9989-F24.jpg
 
themissinglink said:

I'm very disappointed to see how short this proposal is (118'), especially compared to the prior proposal, although I recognize that it was likely an inevitable outcome.

Current proposal:
View attachment 42135

Earlier proposal:
View attachment 42136
Click to expand...

I'm not usually part of the "make everything 800'" crowd, but this is right in the downtown core it should be higher.

I'm assuming they are staying under 120' so they can build it out of light gauge steel and save money.

I don't know why there is no financing for housing when we have such a shortage. It's baffling.
 
Last edited:
The Best part of the current proposal is the Pedestrian Passage with those circle art-pieces strung between the buildings. That could be really nice if it doesn't get value engineered. However, I'm not optimistic.
 
Bos77 said:
Checks notes: We still have a housing shortage, right?
Click to expand...
We also still have a funding shortage for affordable housing.

This project lost most of the big transfer payment that was to come from Winthrop Center. Hence a huge haircut.

There does not seem to be any political will to find a new, robust source of funding for affordable housing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top