The Economics of Building in Boston, Part 2

Is there anything that can be done to promote smaller apartment buildings spread over many different lots than large condo towers? I know demand and land prices play a big part but I wonder if cities and towns would be more welcoming to development if they increased the scale and densities gradually rather than having a 20 story tower spring up in a neighborhood of brownstones.
 
Cost of Regs, etc.

Given that the study was done at Harvard... where its well known that they can't count......8)

A whole lot of things don't seem right as its rare that the "same house" is built on 1/4 acre and 1/2 acre in the same immediate area

The two houses might looks the same from the outside -- but inside one will be have a kitchen from Sears while the other will be all Sub Zero, etc.

Even in fairly homogeneous upper-burb like Lexington there are the houses that could have slipped across the line from Arlington or Waltham and the then there are the houses that are quintessentially Lexington.

There are even a few neighborhoods that could just as easily be in Wellesley or Weston

Between the bottom and the top on roughly the same acreage the price ranges over a factor of two to three.

Westy
 
Banker & Tradesman said:
Mayor: Incoming BRA Head Has Plenty of Work to Tackle
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter

John F. Palmieri won?t take over as Boston Redevelopment Authority director until next month, but his duties already are piling up.

?His plate is full,? said Mayor Thomas M. Menino following last week?s ribbon-cutting for the Penny Savings Bank Residences in the city?s South End. ?I?ve asked him to make the Longwood Medical Area, South Boston?s Waterfront and the Newmarket section of the city at 1010 Massachusetts Ave., top priorities.?

Palmieri, 56, will earn $168,000 annually and manage 300 employees at the city?s planning and development agency. He succeeds Mark Maloney, who left the job in January at a salary of $164,088.

Paul L. McCann, the BRA?s acting director, said Palmieri will be the BRA?s most senior director in the agency?s 50-year history in terms of age and experience. ?John will be a wonderful addition to the BRA,? he said.

While Menino declined to provide details, the four-term mayor said he would ask Palmieri to ?reorganize? the BRA.

?I want him to examine how the BRA integrates with the Department of Neighborhood Development on small business. That?s key,? said the mayor. ?And I?ve asked him to look at how we continue to grow the city to meet the challenges we face and how we can move the process along further.?

In addition, Palmieri will be faced with the planning and approval process for the 1,000-foot tower that Menino wants built in Downtown Crossing at Winthrop Square, a new City Hall for the waterfront, the future of City Hall at Government Center and the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway, which is comprised of 27 acres made available by the removal of the elevated Central Artery.

Palmieri brings more than 25 years of experience in planning and economic development from three cities to his new post as BRA chief. Since 2004, he has served as Hartford, Conn.?s, Department of Development Services director, overseeing planning, economic and real estate development. While in Hartford, he partnered with the Chamber of Commerce to create a marketing program for the city and established a tax increment financing district for a mixed-use development at the historic Colt Firearms factory.

From 2002 to 2004, John Palmieri worked as director of economic development for Charlotte, N.C. While there, he developed an economic development strategy for the city, lured a Time Warner headquarters and a Johnson & Wales University campus, implemented a program to provide small businesses with financial assistance and instituted policy guidelines for transit-oriented development.

?Very Pliable?

Laura Knott-Twine, executive director of the Hartford Preservation Alliance, whose mission is to preserve and revitalize the city?s architectural heritage, said she will miss Palmieri.

?John could always be counted on to be available for information, support and ideas and has always been open to comments on projects,? she said. ?As director of a preservation organization, I appreciated his knowledge about preservation. He has been very resourceful in getting developers and builders to understand the importance of preserving our past.?

While Hartford lacks the controversies that often pit developers against neighborhoods, she said, Palmieri is a team builder who has a knack for getting disparate groups to work together, she added.

In 1993, Palmieri was hired by former Providence, R.I., Mayor Vincent ?Buddy? Cianci as the city?s development and planning director. The pair worked together to create an arts and cultural district, and managed development of the 1.2 million-square-foot Providence Place Mall and the $1 billion Capital Center corporate district.

?John will do well in Boston,? Cianci said in between breaks from his radio talk show on WPRO in Providence. ?He?s a good guy, very pliable and open to suggestions. There are always obstacles to development, but he is very active and very low-key. He should do well working with Tom Menino.

?I give John accolades because he?s competent, skilled and follows through. John had a good support staff and came in with me at at a time when the infrastructure for Capital Center and moving the rivers was completed. John is not reclusive, but don?t expect Demosthenes, the Greek orator of ancient Athens.?

Formed 50 years ago by the City Council and the Legislature, the BRA is Boston?s planning and economic development agency. Its role is to plan the city?s future and realize economic development through programs, planning and job training initiatives. The BRA oversees planning, zoning and design review; implements economic and workforce development initiatives to attract, retain, and grow small businesses and major industries; and partners with a variety of other city departments to spark development of housing in all price ranges.

Since its inception, the BRA has been in the middle of controversies, as developers routinely seek approvals for the tallest buildings they can build while neighbors insist that City Hall enforce zoning limits.

Palmieri?s first task could be to settle the dispute over the $192 million twin towers proposed for the Prudential Center. Avalon Properties is seeking permits for a 30-story residential high-rise on Exeter Street while Boston Properties want to build a 19-story glass office tower in front of the Prudential Building. The neighborhood and their elected representatives on Beacon Hill have made it clear that the buildings do not fit in the historic Back Bay..

Hartford, huh?
Wouldn't it have been nice to get someone from Europe? Oh well.
 
Bankers & Tradesman said:
Rhode Island Capital Touted As Smart Alternative to Hub
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter

Providenceskyline.jpg

Photo courtesy Providence Warwick Convention & Visitors Bureau
At least one landlord in Providence, R.I. (above), is trying to lure tenants priced out of Boston?s hot office market.


Priced out of Boston?s skyrocketing office space? Consider Providence.

At least one commercial property owner insists that the alternative to $50-$90 per-square-foot rents in the Hub is only an hour away in the Rhode Island capital. D.L. Saunders Real Estate Corp. placed an advertisement in a Boston weekly newspaper boasting the ?best deal in Boston is in downtown Providence.? The ad offers space for $16 per square foot within walking distance of the Rhode Island State House and the commuter rail.

But is there any evidence that price-weary tenants are going south?

?I wish it were the case but I don?t see it yet,? said Karl F. Sherry, a partner at Hayes & Sherry, a Rhode Island-based commercial real estate brokerage. ?I haven?t seen a major company move from Boston to Providence because rents are cheaper here.?

Privately, brokers say the property that Saunders owns at One State St. is a hard sell. They say the building?s management team is located off-site and tenants have complained that the facility lacks essential services.

Neither Donald nor Lisa Saunders of D.L. Saunders Real Estate returned repeated calls and e-mails seeking comment.

Some Boston-based companies, including the law offices of Nixon Peabody LLP, have opened satellite bureaus in Providence. But those offices have more to do with having a regional presence in Rhode Island, according to Sherry.

The idea to lure office space seekers to Providence comes as Boston?s rents are rising. From July through September, landlords increased their asking rents 46 percent in Boston, according to Jones Lang LaSalle, the global real estate firm that tracks such prices. As rents soar, office vacancy rates are at their lowest level since 2001.

Boston?s Back Bay neighborhood saw the biggest rent hike in the third quarter as the average asking price for Class A office space reached $60.36 per square foot, up from $39.90 per square foot last year, a 51 percent boost, JLL reported.

Despite some of the biggest rents in years, landlords are still giving some concessions and companies are not fleeing Boston, according to brokers.

Jay Fluck, a broker at CB Richard Ellis/New England, said despite the dramatically lower cost of space in Providence, he is not seeing a flight of Massachusetts companies. Providence?s per-square-foot rents range from $15 to the mid-$30s.

When New England-based Dexter Shoe Co. did a regional search for new quarters, they considered Providence but chose a location north of Boston. ?We have not won a big tenant yet,? Fluck said. ?I haven?t made a deal.?

That said, the bigger the spread between rents in Boston and Providence, the more opportunities for Providence landlords to attract Boston firms, Sherry noted. ?I don?t see major companies moving into Providence from Boston because rents are cheaper,? he said. ?But if Boston rents keeps rising and reach $100 per square foot, Providence has lots of good space for $25 [per square foot].?

?Institutional Investors?

Providence has 6.2 million square feet of office space. Of the 117 buildings tracked by Hayes & Sherry, 83 are Class B properties. The overall vacancy rate is 10.5 percent or 654,758 square feet, about the same as last year. But the Class A properties are seeing vacancy rates closer to 7.5 percent.

Unlike Boston, only a pair of buildings in Providence has per-square-foot rents in the $40s. They include GTECH, the 10-story glass and metal building at the corner of Francis Street and Memorial Drive and Center Place at 50 Park Row West, adjacent to Providence?s Financial District and the Amtrak/MBTA train station. The rest of the Class A properties are priced from $25 per square foot to $32 per square foot, Sherry noted.

Still, vacancy rates have fallen slightly because institutions including Brown University, the Rhode Island School of Design and some of the hospitals are running out of space on their campuses. In response, the nonprofits are moving into downtown Providence and taking office space off the market.

?The good news for us is that local companies are growing and there are more and more people who are interested in investing in Providence,? Sherry said. ?Today, we have institutional investors who are parking their money in downtown building. They are interested in investing in the city because it?s turned around.?

Still, Providence does not have a single office building in the construction pipeline. In addition, the downtown still has a number of parking lots, something that is disappearing on Boston?s landscape to make way for new construction.

?No one would build an office building on spec in Providence because the demand is just not there,? said Sherry. ?And we need the parking lots.?

Not since the dramatic transformation in the 1980s of Lowell?s mills into condominiums, performance centers and a national park has a New England city enjoyed such a rebirth.

Under the administration of former Mayor Vincent ?Buddy? Cianci, Providence underwent a renaissance in the 1990s. Public and private dollars reshaped the downtown, giving the city beautified riverbanks, an arts district, additional housing, a shopping mall, and an ice skating rink. One of the city?s biggest attractions is WaterFire, an artist installation of bonfires just above the surface of the downtown waterways.

Cianci was convicted of racketeering and served five years in federal prison after federal prosecutors alleged a conspiracy by city leaders to accept bribes in connection with redevelopment projects.
NLA
 
Banker & Tradsman said:
Survey: Boston Misses Top 10 For Office Space Construction
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter

TwoFinancialCenter.jpg

B&T staff photo by Thomas Grillo
Two Financial Center, a 12-story office building with 212,000 square feet of office space, is under construction in Boston?s Leather District.


Where?s Boston? The Hub was nowhere to be found on a recently released Top 10 list of U.S. cities with office space under construction. The annual survey of cities, which focuses on new workplace development in the nation, was conducted by Colliers International, a global commercial real estate firm.

Downtown Manhattan in New York topped the survey with 4.6 million square feet. Other office markets to make the Top 10 were Chicago at 4.3 million; Charlotte, N.C., at 3.7 million; New York?s Midtown Manhattan at 3.5 million; San Francisco at 1.8 million; Philadelphia at 1.3 million; Denver at 1.2 million; and Washington, D.C., at 1.2 million. Sacramento, Calif., and Nashville, Tenn., rounded out the list at just under 1 million each.

The Boston Redevelopment Authority said the city has a handful of office projects under way that total more than 700,000 square feet. But if the Crosstown Center at the corner of Massachusetts Avenue and Melnea Cass Boulevard in Boston?s Roxbury neighborhood were added, it would bring the total to 910,000, placing the city at No. 9 on the list, according to the BRA. Crosstown started leasing space over the summer.

?Boston is on the cusp in terms of pure Class A office buildings,? said Kairos Shen, the BRA?s planning director. ?But if Colliers added research-and-development space, that?s where our big numbers and investments have been. We have 1.26 million square feet of medical research space under construction. There are a series of office projects that are gearing up, and next year?s numbers will be much bigger.?

It is unclear what data was included in the survey?s totals. Kristin Sadlon, a Colliers spokeswoman, could not be reached by press time.

Lincoln Property Co. has commenced construction on its Two Financial Center project, a 12-story office building in the city?s Leather District that will consist of 212,000 square feet of office space. In September, The Fallon Co. broke ground on Fan Pier?s first office building, a 500,000-square-foot tower.

Other projects that may not have been included in the Colliers totals include One Franklin, the redevelopment of Filene?s that will offer 475,000 square feet of office space. Also under way is Boston Properties? Russia Wharf project, which will contain 517,500 square feet of space on the city?s waterfront.

If the office pipeline were added to Boston?s totals, the city?s numbers would rival New York?s. Earlier this year, the BRA approved a proposal by Hines ? an international firm whose headquarters are in Houston ? that includes a 40-story office tower at South Station. Still in the planning stages is the city?s tallest tower to be built at Winthrop Square, which would replace a parking garage with a 75-story glass office building.

Modest Gains

In addition to its list of projects in development, the Colliers study reported that the nation?s office market showed modest gains in this year?s third quarter. The period from July through September saw the average vacancy rate drop to 12.24 percent, down from 12.38 percent from the previous quarter.

While vacancies dropped slightly, absorption, the amount of change in occupied space, totaled 18.9 million square feet. That figure is off slightly from the second quarter?s 20.7 million square feet, bringing the year-to-date change in occupied space to 51.8 million square feet. Compared to a year ago, absorption has fallen. At the close of the third quarter in 2006, absorption reached 70.1 million square feet.

Downtown district vacancy rates dropped slightly nationwide to 10.62 in the third quarter, down from 10.86 percent in the previous quarter. Nearly three dozen downtowns surveyed by Colliers recorded a decrease in vacancy over the past quarter, while 27 markets recorded an increase in downtown office vacancies.

For suburban markets, quarter-over-quarter vacancy rates were flat at 13.06 percent from 13.14 percent one last year. Twenty-eight suburban markets surveyed by Colliers reported an increase in vacancy, while 27 reported a decline.

During the same period, the vacancy rates for Class A office space fell to 10.97 percent from 11.1 percent. Meanwhile, vacancies for more economic office space fell 0.13 percentage points to 13.41 percent.

?Bearing in mind the plethora of bad news during the third quarter, the office market continued to act much like the Energizer Bunny, with demand humming along and rents ratcheting up yet again,? said Ross Moore, director of market and economic research at Colliers. ?We?re clearly worried about the slowdown in housing and the fallout from this summer?s credit crisis, but to date, the office market hasn?t given up any of the gains made over the past several years.?

In terms of new supply, 17.6 million square feet was added to the U.S. office market during the third quarter and 102.6 million square feet is under construction.

Rents in downtown and suburban Class A buildings increased compared to the previous quarter, with a 3.2 percent rise in the nation?s downtowns rents and a 3.5 percent increase in the suburbs. Downtown rents have increased year-to-date by 15.4 percent, while suburban market rents have increased 9.3 percent.

Class A downtown rents in the United States averaged $47.41 per square foot during the third quarter, ranging from a low of $14.95 in Little Rock, Ark., to a high of $95.23 in Midtown Manhattan. The national average per-square-foot rent for suburban office space was $28.24.

Last month, Banker & Tradesman reported that the biggest increase in rents for the third quarter was in the city?s Back Bay neighborhood where one tenant was paying $72.50 per square foot at 111 Huntington Ave.
NLA
 
^ Is this article about office space in Boston, or how poorly Collier conducted its research?
 
I really want to bitch and moan about the lack of development in Boston. However, if you look at the population, around 550,000, there really is a good amount of development going on. Russia Wharf, Filenes, SST are good examples of some commercial development. 45 Province, Clarendon for residential and some mixed use, Columbus Center and the Mandarin. It could be worse. Some comparable size cities, although smaller as a metro region, like Oklahoma City, Memphis, Denver, Jacksonville, and larger cities like Indianapolis, Detroit and Phoenix, have almost nothing on the same scale as what is being built/proposed in Boston.
What sucks is that everytime, and that is not an exageration, everytime something is proposed, it is criticized, scrutanized, deconstructed and scaled down to the point that it doesn't make much financial sense to build in Boston.
And once it does get approved, Clarendon, SST, 1 Franklin, it takes forever to get out of the ground. Boston doesn't need to be like Dubai, approving everything no matter how hideous. It does need to stop pandering to what a small few complain about, their views from their condo, shadows on the commons, the "manhattanization" of Boston, traffic, lack of parking......
Growth is good and needed. It shows a healthy city, one that welcomes business and a strong future. If you don't want growth or development, move to northern Maine, population 5, and you will have unobstructed views, plenty of parking and no traffic.
 
Comparable Sizes....

In this era of sprawling metropolitan areas it really isn't instructive to compare Boston to cities of a 'similar size'. It is impossible to separate Boston from the communities that surround it.

It's one of the reasons why I find it so irritating when transient residents of Boston complain that suburban outsiders have no right to a say about development in the city proper. I live now, only a block away from the proposed site of Columbus Center, but during the seven or so years that the project has been in the pipeline I have lived in the suburbs, Cambridge and downtown as well. I felt equally invested in the future well being of the city and the development that would shape it, when I lived in all of these places.

Which brings me to my question...should the structure and scope of our municipal government system be scrapped? Would the plans and systems of our region be more effectively administered by a governing body that was not chopped into the mishmash of fiefdoms that make up eastern massachusetts today? Home rule seems to be an ineffecient, counterproductive way to manage land planning and development. Are there redundancies that could be eliminated? Is unhealthy competition for tax dollars creating negative outcomes for the region as a whole. Perhaps our interests would be more effectively served by a regional government?
 
All cities/towns linked to downtown Boston through frequent, all-day fixed route transit service (Chelsea, Revere, Everett, Malden, Medford, Somerville, Cambridge, Arlington, Belmont, Waltham, Newton, Watertown, Brookline and Quincy at a minimum) function as neighborhoods of Boston in all but government structure, in my opinion. A regional government structure involving these communities would make sense and the resulting 1.2 million population would at least serve to silence the complaints by people that we are falling behind cities like Columbus, Austin and Jacksonville in population.

As for suburban outsiders, once you get beyond the communities listed above, I'm just not sure their opinions are much more relevant than those of a business traveler from Detroit who flies in once or twice a month. They may be valid opinions, but I'm not sure why Boston developers, politicians or residents should be expected to care.
 
Suburban developers thinking bigger
Plans mean new revenue, amenities, and concerns

By James Vaznis, Globe Staff | November 23, 2007

The suburbs of Boston are experiencing a burst of development not seen in years, driven by towns desperate for new tax sources, retailers looking to draw the area's well-off consumers, and builders tapping into unusually huge swaths of land for new housing or corporate offices.

In Westwood alone, a proposed 4.5 million-square-foot office, retail, and condominium development called Westwood Station would be nearly four times the size of Boston's landmark Prudential Tower and promises to dramatically transform the once sleepy dairy community of 12,600 residents, which doesn't even have a downtown.

And that may not be the biggest proposal. In Weymouth and two neighboring towns, a former naval air station is slated to become a veritable city unto itself, with roughly 5 million square feet of residential, retail, and commercial space.

Around the region, at least four dozen medium- and large-size developments are on the drawing boards, under construction, or have recently opened, according to regional planning groups and state environmental review filings. Burlington, Waltham, and other suburbs with reputations as development-friendly are courting projects, as are struggling cities such as Lawrence and Lowell and even towns such as Sharon that often have been averse to major developments.

The new wave of development differs from previous growth periods because of the sheer size of many projects, some billed as "villages" or "lifestyle centers" that combine housing, retail, and offices, and may include a unique draw, such as a luxury movie theater. In the past, development typically came in single steps - a housing project, an office park, or a retail establishment - but developers say today's suburbanites, tired of stop-and-go traffic and office park isolation, want all those features within walking distance.

These new developments come with a delicate trade-off. Some communities are making permitting far easier, occasionally cutting years off the process. In return, developers are providing roads, athletic fields, and other amenities to help offset the strain on local budgets, in addition to the new property tax dollars.

Some homeowners, environmentalists, and a few regional planners warn that the new developments will alter the suburban towns' quality of life, bringing more traffic, higher school costs, and environmental damage. In several cases, projects are being pitched near highway interchanges, next to or on top of crucial aquifers that supply drinking water, or close to a similar project in another town.

"People move to a Westwood because they don't want to be near a downtown Boston, and Westwood will have an urban feel to it. I don't think it will be the same town at all," said John Harding, president of the town's Everett Forbes Neighborhood Association

Pointing to other developments under consideration south of Boston, he said, "How many Talbots do you need?"

In Westwood, the Planning Board approved a special zoning permit Tuesday night to allow for Westwood Station, one of the state's largest suburban developments ever, over the objections of critics who say it would forever alter the character of the town by attracting about 55,000 vehicles a day and some 1,700 new residents. To be built next to the Route 128 commuter rail stop, it would have shops, restaurants, offices, and 1,000 condominiums, as well as hotels and parking garages.

The development would produce an estimated $12.6 million annually in net property tax revenue for Westwood, more than 20 percent of the town's operating budget.

"Communities are desperate for cash these days, and commercial development, in particular, generates strong revenues," said Marc Draisen, executive director of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council. "You find some communities eager - some may say too eager - to encourage large-scale commercial developments."

Westwood Station developers Cabot, Cabot & Forbes, Commonfund Realty Inc., and New England Development will spend $60 million on off-site improvements, including new athletic fields at Westwood High School, a second public safety building, and a new MBTA platform. Developers of other Greater Boston projects have promised fire engines, conservation land, and, in at least one case on the South Shore, a school.

In Wayland, a developer has proposed a $140 million shopping, residential, and office project - including a municipal building - on former Raytheon Co. property. In Burlington, meanwhile, Nordblom Co. is planning to recast Northwest Park, a 1950s-era office center, into a bustling, tree-lined center of shops, offices, and housing, while a New York firm intends a similar but smaller redevelopment of the 119-acre Polaroid Corp. site in Waltham.

"Given how tight municipal budgets are, many more communities in 2007 are actively looking to expand their commercial tax bases, more than any time in the last 20 years," said Greg Bialecki, the state's undersecretary of business development.

But business leaders say the uptick is not enough to prop up the state's economy, especially as analysts predict slower-than-anticipated growth through 2011. Completion of the projects could take a decade or longer.

"Compared to other regions of the country, I wouldn't call it a land rush," said David Begelfer, chief executive officer of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Association of Industrial & Office Properties. He later added, "We are a long way from seeing anything from a growth cycle or a building boom."

Developers and towns have targeted aging office and manufacturing complexes along congested Route 128, as well as on pristine land in far-flung suburbs. But some residents are objecting to the changes.

In Waltham, where sleek glass office buildings along Route 128 serve as an icon to suburban commercial success, some residents have been campaigning against overdevelopment, blocking construction of an approximately eight-story building across from the common.

And along the rolling landscape of Sharon, a former lakeside summer resort town where 5,000 acres are in conservation, many residents are outraged that cranberry bogs and a habitat of the endangered Eastern box turtle could be replaced by a 500,000-square-foot shopping and office complex that could draw 19,300 vehicles a day.

Critics also fought six eight-story senior housing buildings, containing 624 units, going up on Rattlesnake Hill, a spot where the endangered black rat snake slithers.

Earlier this month, Neighbors Against Destructive Development lobbied a Special Town Meeting to curtail the growth, but failed to convince voters in Sharon, a bedroom community of 18,000.

"I feel like that guy in Tiananmen Square standing in front of the army tank. I can't fight this," said Paul Lauenstein, a Sharon Planning Board member and self-described environmentalist.

But Walter "Joe" Roach, Board of Selectmen chairman, said homeowners need relief from taxes.

"It won't lower taxes, but it will stabilize taxes so we don't go for overrides as often as we have. If development is done with balance, it's not that bad," said Roach, a retired high school custodian.

Near the proposed Westwood Station, selectmen in neighboring Canton created a website last summer critical of the project, hired a public relations firm, and turned down $1.3 million from the developers for road improvements. Canton officials say a proposed exit for Westwood Station on Interstate 95 at Dedham Street in their town will flood residential streets with traffic, while other vehicles will add to major traffic backups at the decades-old junction of Interstates 95 and 93, also located in Canton.

This month, the selectmen notified Governor Deval Patrick about plans to sue the state, on grounds that Massachusetts officials' recent approval of Westwood Station lacked adequate highway traffic remedies. On Tuesday, the town took the first formal step, filing a notice with state environmental regulators that it intends to appeal.

Adding to the anxiety for Canton and other Westwood Station critics, including some Westwood residents, is a spate of other retail-based projects clustered nearby. New developments have been proposed or recently opened in Dedham, Sharon, Foxborough, and Mansfield, while the traditional enclosed malls, Walpole Mall and South Shore Plaza, are both planning major expansions to compete.

Farther south, an Indian casino could go up in Middleborough.

Many critics question whether small towns like Westwood, where development is overseen by a volunteer planning board and one town planner, has the expertise to review a project equivalent to nearly four Prudential Towers. The boards, the critics say, typically approve a Starbucks, Dunkin' Donuts, or a small subdivision.

Towns, though, insist projects are being thoroughly reviewed.

"I understand the concern that Westwood Station might be a mini-city and could distract from the character of the town, but we have worked hard to make it a place where Westwood residents will want to come to and be proud to say it's part of Westwood," said Steve Rafsky, chairman of the town's economic development advisory board.

Roughly half the project - including all the retail - would open in two years. The remaining construction would hinge on market demand, an approach developers of some larger projects are taking.

The developers remain bullish.

"Part of the problem in Massachusetts is we are not keeping enough young people here," said Jay Doherty, Cabot, Cabot & Forbes president. "They want more public transportation options and more amenities in their lifestyles. They want more shopping and restaurants than prior generations, and if they can't find it here they will go somewhere else."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/23/suburban_developers_thinking_bigger?mode=PF
 
Suburban developers thinking bigger
Plans mean new revenue, amenities, and concerns


... but developers say today's suburbanites, tired of stop-and-go traffic and office park isolation, want all those features within walking distance.

...Some homeowners, environmentalists, and a few regional planners warn that the new developments will alter the suburban towns' quality of life, bringing more traffic

Developments like this will not ease traffic.

I believe traffic would be a problem, if the majority of these towns accepted their major development projects. A real example of place where their suburb is very commercially developed is, Washington D.C. The traffic down there is unreal. I believe most of it is due to the development of other cities around D.C. (Arlington (VA), Alexandria (VA), Roslyn (VA), Bethesda (MD), Lanham (MD), etc.).
 
"Many critics question whether small towns like Westwood, where development is overseen by a volunteer planning board and one town planner, has the expertise to review a project equivalent to nearly four Prudential Towers"

this quote almost seems laughable considering some of what's approved for Boston (See: Fan Pier Developments). I don't see how these small planning boards could do much worse than anyone else. These suburbs have the same NIMBYs that plague Boston, therefore many of these projects will sit as idle as the ones in town.

That being said, I'm not a fan of this type of development. This "New Urbanism" may work in Florida, but it's not good for a metropolitan area like Boston. As has been mentioned, this type of development will increase traffic and that's not what these towns need. If people want all of these things, move INTO the city. spend the money on a nice townhouse because they'll come relatively inexpensively in the down market, and move where the amenities are already in front of you.

This type of development may be good for the people who live right next door, but the infrastructure in these little towns is nowhere near ready for this type of development. It works in Florida because they do it in areas that are totally undeveloped. they put massive boulevards that head towards the center of town that can handle the volumes. Westwood, Weymouth, and even Middleborough can't handle that. the last thing 128, route 3, or 495 needs is higher traffic volumes of people heading into these little towns.

On top of that, Boston is losing population to the 'burbs at a pretty high rate and it's crap like this that is the cause. It's a shame that this type of massive development is shunned where it should be welcomed (Boston). and the towns that are going to be thrown for a loop because of this crap are getting it.
 
I think it's a bit more complicated.
Boston is not losing population to the suburbs. The entire region is growing, very very slowly compared to other economically healthy regions. It has a higher domestic out-migration rate than domestic immigration rate. Only international immigration makes up for this loss, and barely.
The entire region suffers from chronic affordability problems that will outlast any housing crisis. Whereas positive productivity in places with an elastic housing market translates into population growth (Dallas, Houston, DC, Charlotte), in Boston, NY, SF, LA, Miami, etc. it translates into higher costs of living and (hopefully) higher wages. Which situation is more economically sustainable is arguable; I have my opinion that it is not the latter.
So this suburban growth has benefits for the region, and this has benefits for the city of Boston in sustaining economic growth.
As for what shape it takes, zoning law determines that. Until you can overturn 80 years of jurisprudence, these awkwardly situated clumps of new urbanist stuff are the best you can hope for.
As for transportation planning, it's never a pro-active process, the accommodation for growth will come down the road at a very high cost.
Don't worry, it's not California yet.
 
I hope this is the right thread...

Menino says BRA will adopt new approach to development
Boston Business Journal - by Eric Convey Journal staff

The Boston Redevelopment Authority -- the agency that oversees city planning -- needs to be revamped so it can take a more proactive roll in guiding what's built and where with an eye toward stimulating key industries, Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino said Tuesday morning.

"Our new BRA director, John Palmieri...and I share the conviction that today's global competition demands that we reorient our planning and economic development," Menino told a breakfast hosted by the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce at the Westin Boston Waterfront hotel.

"Boston must become more proactive in envisioning and creating economic growth. City government must reach out to business and support you," he added.

The work needs to expand beyond the development to also include more assistance for existing companies, he said.

Specifically, he said, the city needs to do more to help the state's financial services industry, which he said employees 80,000 people, occupies 20 million square feet and generates half a billion dollars of annual state income tax.


"It's critical to our economy," he said.

In January, Menino said, he will convene business school deans and top executives to find ways "to provide added value for financial services firms and to solidy Boston as a global center for years to come." Part of that will include finding ways to better-train Bostonians for jobs in the industry, he said.

Menino also turned to a topic he first raised a year ago -- his controversial proposal to move City Hall from its current location at Government Center to a new site on the South Boston waterfront.

Noting that some critics had panned the proposal, he said Tuesday morning that some "facts" are beyond debate: "We have a costly, inefficient building that needs millions of dollars in maintenance, and we have a geographically small city with a large, underutilized site right in its center."

In an interview following the speech, Menino told the Boston Business Journal that he continues to pursue the possibility of splitting City Hall operations between a new waterfront location and a neighborhood-oriented facility in a building the city purchased in Dudley Square.

"We've got to move some of our operations there," said Menino. "We have to have a center in the city close to the public."

But with the Internet, he said, many City Hall operations would work fine from the Seaport District.

In a question-and-answer session -- the questions were filtered by the Chamber of Commerce -- Menino said the city will "address concerns" so the Boston University biolab can be built in the South End.

"I have no fears about the biolab opening in the next year or so," he said.

Asked about the presidential candidates' focus -- or lack thereof -- on urban America, Menino said all the candidates "except for one" are ignoring cities. He accused candidates who talk about immigration of doing so to "cover up" an unwillingness to tackle issues such as health care and housing.

He said it was among "phony issues" on which candidates are focusing.

But Menino said suburbanites and city dwellers now face the same issues, the only difference being that in the suburbs "they have yards."

Asked about pilot schools, Menino said, "We have some issues with the union but the union has agreed to have a meeting in the first part of January to discuss the possibility of (opening more schools)."

To a question about keeping graduates of Boston colleges and universities in the city, he said, "we have enormous opportunities" but getting people between 20 and 34 "engaged in our city is a real challenge." The expansion of "creative" industries is helping, he said.

Responding to another question, Menino said the city is "doing a very good job balancing the requirements of (expanding) universities with neighborhoods." The existing BRA process for overseeing expansion of academic facilities is working, he said.

"We always work...to make sure the neighborhood has their say in redevelopment," he said, but "we need expansion for universities and health care institutions in our city. Those two industries aren't going anywhere."

Finding "the expansion space they need" is a "challenge," he said.

Menino praised three companies that he said produced an extraordinary number of summer jobs for teens: State Street Corp., John Hancock Financial Services and Bank of America.

Eric Convey can be reached at econvey@bizjournals.com

Link
 
The Boston Globe finally had enough of the extreme anti-NIMBYism when they opposed small, low impact cottages:

GLOBE EDITORIAL
Cozy, sensible, unwelcome

December 14, 2007

AN IMAGINATIVE local developer wants to build sensible, 1,000-square-foot cottages for single people and couples whose housing choices might otherwise be limited to condos or unnecessarily large and expensive single-family homes. But residents in Easton and West Bridgewater have slammed the door in his face. It's another disappointing setback in the effort to bring rationality to state and local housing policies.

Developer Nick Mirrione of Easton envisions clusters of one- and two-bedroom cottages mostly priced between $245,000 and $345,000. He proposes seven cottages per acre, offering enough space for detached garages and small yards. Town planners like the concept. And buyer interest is strong, says Mirrione, especially among single women and empty nesters. But the project failed to win the two-thirds vote of Town Meeting required to amend zoning ordinances in Easton and West Bridgewater. NIMBYism again trumped a modest effort to ease the state's housing crunch.

The concept of small, dense cottage communities is catching on nationwide, including in states that compete with Massachusetts for biotech jobs. For some, small is just a matter of taste. But the greatest draw of cottages is as starter homes, one of the rarest commodities in the state. So long as towns cling to inflexible requirements that single-family homes be built on an acre or more of land, however, the entrance to homeownership will remain barred.

Mirrione simply wants to build homes that are attainable. But now he is left with no choice but to pursue his cottage proposal through Chapter 40B, the anti-snob-zoning law that allows the state to override local zoning bylaws as long as developers set aside one-quarter of their units for low- and moderate-income buyers. That is likely to set off another battle with residents. But there is little room to negotiate with overwrought opponents who greet even a simple cottage development as if it were a teeming slum.

Maybe the state could step in with local-aid incentives for towns that create zoning relief for cottage communities. But similar carrots haven't worked especially well in other efforts to build moderately priced housing. A better approach would be to alter state law so that zoning amendments require only a simple majority of town meeting votes instead of an unrealistic two-thirds. Tina Brooks, the undersecretary of the Department of Housing and Community Development, supports such a change, calling it "fair and achievable." A still braver strategy would be for the Legislature to allow planning boards and selectmen to establish "by right" permits for smaller homes and cottages without the approval of town meeting.

The housing problem is out of control when even modest cottages fall under attack.
 
It's come full circle in suburban housing -- except for NIMBYs

The first place that I lived in Greater Boston after I returned from graduate school was in Lexington. It was built in the early 1950's to accommodate the flood of people moving to the inner suburbs immediately post WWII.

My first Boston Area house had 40 feet of frontage and a yard that went back almost 85 feet from the corner -- I think with streets that would translate to near 10 houses per acre. My current house, also in Lexington has about 1/5 of an acre of land with 80 feet of frontage {it was built even closer to WW II in 1947}. I've never understood why we couldn't do the same once again in suburbs such as Lexington, Burlington, Woburn that have water and sewers and good access to Boston. Finally, along major thoroughfares throughout the inner metro area where they can be served by frequent buses, etc., we should be allowing 4, 6, even 8 story apartments and mixed use developments.

However, we've got to stop paving over rail beds for bicycle trails that only serve the elite. Instead -- self-propelled electrically driven frequent commuter rail could solve a lot of the traffic problems for in-bound commuting. Unfortunately, ultimately only people being able to live near where they work in the suburbs will really make a difference and that means major zoning overhaul.

The real challenge for Greater Boston and New England is still how to ?long-term accommodate? the tremendous immigration from throughout the US and indeed the rest of the world attracted by The Great Research Universities.

The Universities are currently undertaking an unprecedented massive construction boom as they are feed off the global knowledge driven economy. We have all that is necessary to dominate the world?s knowledge economy. However, due to the region?s inability to affordably accommodate the graduates? transition from living in dorms or rooms for rent, to urban apartments, or suburban single family and everything in-between ? we tend to lose a lot of potential good residents to cheaper places to live. Eventually, when they?ve made a name for themselves in research or business, we can get some of them back {or equivalents from other university centered communities} because they get offers that allow them to afford the half million dollar starter homes. These people should be putting down roots here, just as they are leaving graduate school and becoming the builders of the future opportunities for the rest of the population.

Westy
 
Westy, I was with you until this:

"However, we've got to stop paving over rail beds for bicycle trails that only serve the elite."

I'm not sure which elite you're talking about here. You can buy a bicycle for less than the price of a monthly commuter rail pass. Other of walking, I can't think of a mode of transportation that is less elite than bicycling. People of all ages, levels of education, and income do it.

You do have a point that if we pave over rail beds, it makes it harder to restore rail service. On the other hand, it preserves the railbed from private developers encroaching. It's easier to restore a publicly owned bike path into a rail line than it is to buy the land back from private owners, who hopefully have not built on it. I believe there are actually clauses in many cases that say rail may be restored at any time.

Keep in mind that towns such as Arlington and Lexington had their chance for rail but passed it up due to fears of crime and traffic. All we can say to them is take a look at Davis Square if you want to see what could have happened to them. They passed up the opportunity to REDUCE traffic and create vibrant districts with many people walking and bicycling and not needing their cars to get around. Traffic can be managed (residential parking + public meters). The crime just doesn't happen. Perhaps the tides are turning now; I sure hope so.

On your other point, I totally agree that the densities of the 1950s made a lot of sense in many places. I live in Somerville, where the houses are very close together, and I really enjoy it. It makes the streets walkable and the distances to travel short, and it allows many people to live comfortably in a relatively small space. Living in a suburb with 1+ acre zoning would be absolute hell as far as I'm concerned.
 
Keep in mind that towns such as Arlington and Lexington had their chance for rail but passed it up due to fears of crime and traffic. All we can say to them is take a look at Davis Square if you want to see what could have happened to them.

You need to understand that many people form Arlington and Lexington look at Davis Sq and think that they dodged a bullet by blocking the Red Line. I love Davis Sq but that is me, but I know there are many who only see it as congested, dirty, and full of homeless people. There are people in Arlington and Lexington who would have a shit fit if you seriously proposed turning Arlington Center and Lexington Center into new Davis Squares. Most of us like the low scale, urban feel of the place but there are many who live in the suburbs because they prefer it.
 
Lexington plus train does not equal Davis Square; it would be more like Newton Center. Arlington Center plus train would be awesome. Too bad, so sad.
 

Back
Top