Pinnacle at Central Wharf (Harbor Garage) | 70 East India Row | Waterfront | Downtown

Status
Not open for further replies.
nm88 said:
This reminds me Phillip Johnson's dilemma with International Place. He was quoted: "How do I fit too big a building into too small a space without destroying the neighborhood?" His answer - create a village of buildings and hopefully diminish/disguise the size. Here we are again. To my mind, a building too big for its lot. Okay, money issues are tricky. Yes, the architect (TMM) is attempting to resolve the challenge with set-backs and artful skin design. Thankfully, it's not another generic glass box. However, wouldn't a slimmer version be profitable? It would make it more neighborly and less overwhelming. This is Boston. Our neighborly blocks are who we are.
Click to expand...

Given the recent history, that particular "neighborhood" deserves no further goodwill gestures.
 
nm88 said:
However, wouldn't a slimmer version be profitable? It would make it more neighborly and less overwhelming. This is Boston. Our neighborly blocks are who we are.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it's a going concern whether or not the current version could even be profitable. Due to FAA and shadow rules for the harbor this can't possibly get any taller, which would be the mandatory offset to slimming. There's a reason the first couple of proposals included 2 towers and not just 1.
 
Apologies for the bump, but there is a time-sensitive 'action item' that is highly relevant. I just received the following email (see below); I hope some of you will be able to attend/contribute.

"We wanted to share a few new project and neighborhood updates with you.

  • This Wednesday, March 10 @ 6:30, the BPDA will kick off the first Design & Use Guidelines community workshop for the Downtown Waterfront. This effort aims to advance the open space & public realm objectives of the Municipal Harbor Plan, and the outcomes of these conversations will provide guidelines for future design efforts for this project and others in the neighborhood. We hope that you will join virtually and share your input. You can find a link to the interactive feedback map at https://www.pinnaclecentralwharf.com and can register to participate in the workshop here: http://www.bostonplans.org/news-cal...gn-and-use-guidelines-for-downtown-waterfront.

  • As many of you know, the Scoping Determination for The Pinnacle at Central Wharf was released by the BPDA in January. This city document, which you can view on the BPDA project page (http://www.bostonplans.org/projects/development-projects/harbor-garage-redevelopment), outlines the issues that require further investigation, and dictates what detailed studies our team will need to undertake for the next phase. Our team is conducting a thorough review of the Scoping Determination provided by the BPDA, as well as all of the comments received. We thank all those who participated in the public comment period. We continue to be in a listening mode, and we anticipate the project will evolve in conjunction with robust outreach and collaboration efforts.
We hope that you will continue be involved in this important waterfront development, and that you will share your ideas and input on how to make it a destination for all. Please don’t hesitate to contact us if you have any questions on the project - info@chiofaro.com

Check out our website, and follow our social:
PinnacleCentralWharf.com
Twitter: @pinnacleCW
FB: PinnacleCentralWharf
 
1617379974026.png
 
Watching people lose their shit over something that was never actually going to get built will be thoroughly amusing.
 
Can we also ask the judge to mandate that the CLF offices be moved to where they have to stare at that garage, all day, forever?
 
Today's ruling is a huge win for Giant horrendous concrete blocks that block the waterfront and are just in general massive eye sores and total wastes of space. Yay Concrete Blocks!!!! May you Always be a sacred and eternal part of our noble city!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
This is why we have a housing crisis. I know this one particular project would have been more for the rich, but this anti-development attitude, times a million, trickling down to every decision, has contributed greatly to the housing crisis. This is the perfect spot for a large development. Just perfect. Ridiculous.............
 
“Big victory for [people who fight against] waterfront planning”
 
Suffolk 83 said:
Why was this never going to happen before this ruling?
Click to expand...

A lack of demand for straight office space primarily. Wasn’t that kind of obvious?

MOD EDIT: Tangent replies moved here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Vivanna said:
Haven't read the ruling but it appears to be a temporary hold up for the MHP. DEP just needs to approve the plan as opposed to having the Secretary do it, probably adds another 6 months to the process, nothing more.
Click to expand...
Can anyone confirm this? What is the situation looking like going forward?
 
eddy2698 said:
Can anyone confirm this? What is the situation looking like going forward?
Click to expand...
From the Globe
Davis’ ruling hinges on a rather technical matter: Essentially whether the EEA secretary was right to approve the plan, rather than the state Department of Environmental Protection, as is spelled out in state law. But its effect, said Jeff Pyle, an attorney with Prince Lobel who represented Harbor Towers, could be far-reaching indeed.
Click to expand...

That is my understanding of the lawsuit. That the state official who approved the plan (covers Hook as well as Harbor Garage) had no authority under the law to so approve. Assuming this decision by the judge is upheld, very sloppy on part of the state.
 
stellarfun said:
From the Globe


That is my understanding of the lawsuit. That the state official who approved the plan (covers Hook as well as Harbor Garage) had no authority under the law to so approve. Assuming this decision by the judge is upheld, very sloppy on part of the state.
Click to expand...
Yes but is there any indication that the DEP would reject this plan? If not, it’s just a procedural setback.
 
Patrick Winn said:
Yes but is there any indication that the DEP would reject this plan? If not, it’s just a procedural setback.
Click to expand...
I looked quickly for a copy of the decision but did not find it. (And I am a novice when it comes to finding records of Suffolk superior Court.) It would surprise me if the Secretary exceeded the authorities given to the DEP under the law; if the judge found that he did, then that would have a substantive impact on development.
 
stellarfun said:
I looked quickly for a copy of the decision but did not find it. (And I am a novice when it comes to finding records of Suffolk superior Court.) It would surprise me if the Secretary exceeded the authorities given to the DEP under the law; if the judge found that he did, then that would have a substantive impact on development.
Click to expand...
I can look it up on masscourts if you know the names of the parties.
 
I'm pretty sure this ruling will affect the James Hook development, as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top