Viola | Mass DOT Parcel 13 | Boylston & Mass Ave | Back Bay

Are you freakin kidding me? Peebles will now deck over the Pike (after what, six years of sitting on this parcel) by building a lab and 125 affordable housing? And on top of that, they'll build another lab/housing project on Parcel 25 along Kneeland St. to begin construction in 2024, finished by 2026? Uhm, no way this is all happening in four years.

www.bostonglobe.com

Labs and apartments could be coming to the southern edge of downtown Boston - The Boston Globe

A pair of Black-owned firms will build lab space and apartments on the long-planned site in Chinatown.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
 
The current design as we know it does not scream lab building to me, which is concerning as to what we may get instead.

Edit: Reviewing old docs, they already had penned in 125-150 units. Over time, that increased from 182,000 gsf in shared rental and condo units to 275,00 gsf in condos. I'd assume the residential component will be closer to/lower than 180,000 in a new version with affordable units. The remainder of the most recent proposal was 150,000 gsf for the hotel, with TBD retail and community space, which were a combined 26,800 gsf in the original RFP submission, and 150+ parking spaces.

I'm being optimistic in hoping for a nice looking building, but these are all pointing to a building designed by an excel sheet, factoring in increased construction costs, which they had listed as a reason for changing the project in February 2020, when construction costs were rising at laughable rates compared to now, increased square footage, and increased demands from the MBTA following the original RFP..
 
Last edited:
stefal said:
The current design as we know it does not scream lab building to me, which is concerning as to what we may get instead.

Edit: Reviewing old docs, they already had penned in 125-150 units. Over time, that increased from 182,000 gsf in shared rental and condo units to 275,00 gsf in condos. I'd assume the residential component will be closer to/lower than 180,000 in a new version with affordable units. The remainder of the most recent proposal was 150,000 gsf for the hotel, with TBD retail and community space, which were a combined 26,800 gsf in the original RFP submission, and 150+ parking spaces.

I'm being optimistic in hoping for a nice looking building, but these are all pointing to a building designed by an excel sheet, factoring in increased construction costs, which they had listed as a reason for changing the project in February 2020, when construction costs were rising at laughable rates compared to now, increased square footage, and increased demands from the MBTA following the original RFP..
Click to expand...

Moody Nolan, the architect, has done some decent things. I assume that selecting a new architect means the whole previous design is in the bin.

www.bostonglobe.com

Coming soon to the corner of Mass. Ave. and Boylston: Lab space and affordable housing - The Boston Globe

Developer re-works long-stalled project on a key corner of Back Bay.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

For the housing, Peebles intends to pursue both city and state subsidies, along with federal low-income housing tax credits. What’s more, it’s asking elected officials to allocate some federal infrastructure money for the project — which would include building a $64 million deck over the Turnpike on which to build the lab and apartment buildings.
Click to expand...

Ah, so this is conditional on the Legislature. That's always a good sign.
 
Last edited:
Equilibria said:
Moody Nolan, the architect, has done some decent things. I assume that selecting a new architect means the whole previous design is in the bin.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware they had switched from Handel. I will gladly welcome any Moody Nolan project to the city.
 
Last edited:
stick n move said:
Good news!

“Peebles is aiming to start construction in about 18 months and to have the project completed in about four years.
Click to expand...
Maybe not so good news, looking for a massive handout for 125 units of affordable housing ($500K per unit paid by the state?), this math doesn't make sense:

"For the housing, Peebles intends to pursue both city and state subsidies, along with federal low-income housing tax credits. What’s more, it’s asking elected officials to allocate some federal infrastructure money for the project — which would include building a $64 million deck over the Turnpike on which to build the lab and apartment buildings."
 
Vivanna said:
Maybe not so good news, looking for a massive handout for 125 units of affordable housing ($500K per unit paid by the state?), this math doesn't make sense:

"For the housing, Peebles intends to pursue both city and state subsidies, along with federal low-income housing tax credits. What’s more, it’s asking elected officials to allocate some federal infrastructure money for the project — which would include building a $64 million deck over the Turnpike on which to build the lab and apartment buildings."
Click to expand...

IMO the right solution would be for them to make the residential portion much taller, and add a couple hundred more market rate units to make their numbers pan out. The metro needs all the housing it can get, especially that TOD that is always touted in abstract but disregarded in actual practice. Instead of a handout, work with developers so their numbers work and it can mutually benefit all parties. In this case, the developer would get to build a larger building with more income potential, the city would save in the short term and ongoingly collect more taxes in the medium-to-long term, and the residents/prospective residents get more housing to choose from. It's really a no brainer. I doubt the decision makers will see it that way, but they're doing the city a disservice if they either agree to the handout in lieu of (way) more potential tax revenue, or make it unfeasible to build altogether.

My prediction is we'll still be talking about this undeveloped parcel well into the 2030's.
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to wrap my head around this infrastructure funding plea...

They expect the state to be okay with giving them federal money set aside for statewide infrastructure projects to (what I assume) cover a private developer's promised (through a public bid) contribution for infrastructure improvements... chances that actually happens?
 
125 affordable units will make the DSA folks drip in their panties. Literally could be a steaming dump and they would be happy because of that.
 
Smartiro said:
Time to put this parcel back to bid.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more... this developer is a joke, I have no idea how he wins all these RFP's from public agencies. Hi massive 'Affirmation Tower' in NYC is typical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W-4
How does the RFP process work. Doesn't a major change in use automatically invalidate their winning bid?
 
stefal said:
I'm trying to wrap my head around this infrastructure funding plea...

They expect the state to be okay with giving them federal money set aside for statewide infrastructure projects to (what I assume) cover a private developer's promised (through a public bid) contribution for infrastructure improvements... chances that actually happens?
Click to expand...

Haven’t people on this board argued in favor before of having the state or city build the actual decking over the pike to make it easier for the parcels to be filled?
 
Blackbird said:
Haven’t people on this board argued in favor before of having the state or city build the actual decking over the pike to make it easier for the parcels to be filled?
Click to expand...

People on this board have also argued for moving the freaking Hynes MBTA station upgrade forward asap, this development be damned. That's one facet I'd be fully comfortable using federal or state money for (in a manner compatible with plunking a development on top of it, but also in a manner that would stand alone if this thing never got built). If there'd be some way to deck over the pike in an economies-of-scale way with the MBTA station work, then great (I'd even be OK with a bit of extra gov spending to round that out). But spending gov money on solely a deck with no MBTA benefit is not something that's hugely appealing IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top