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

Equilibria said:
1663087184193.png
Click to expand...

Are they looking at the same facade as in the render?

1663096226114.png

1663096374088.png
 
I hate it... the street level looks dead and totally unactivated.

I expect this will sail through approval because affordable housing and lab space checks a lot of boxes for everyone involved from Mayor to developer. Ugh.
 
393b40 said:
I hate it... the street level looks dead and totally unactivated.

I expect this will sail through approval because affordable housing and lab space checks a lot of boxes for everyone involved from Mayor to developer. Ugh.
Click to expand...
It's in the Back Bay Architectural District (barely) so it has to go before the Back Bay Architectural Commission, I don't think they'll let it pass through looking like this
 
393b40 said:
I hate it... the street level looks dead and totally unactivated.

I expect this will sail through approval because affordable housing and lab space checks a lot of boxes for everyone involved from Mayor to developer. Ugh.
Click to expand...

It won't sail through looking like this, because this is not a finished design.
 
king_vibe said:
PEEBLES: I want to keep this development parcel but I don’t actually want to develop it. How I keep this hackey sack in the air?
ARCHITECT: What if I come up with the most fucking stupid looking shit anyone has ever seen... without spending any actual time or money on it
Click to expand...
Exactly, Peebles is a complete joke.
 
WHOOPS....literally. This would take a lot of getting used to, if it's possible.
 
I have said many, many times that I don't care what goes on air rights parcels as long as they get built, but, well, at a loss for words on this one. I give it a zero chance of every being built, but, if it does it might make me go back on my thoughts. Can we get a petition to just give all air rights to Samuels & Associates?
 
This comes from the same design firm that has designed this:
1663129282711.png


And this:
1663129303770.png


What's the end goal for Peebles? They were already really stretching it with their plea for infrastructure bill funding for the affordable housing units, and now they've presented a pretty unloveable design. They get to hold onto a failed (public) proposal that will only get more expensive to build on with every day that passes?

That elevation posted upthread is really, really disorienting - high school intern level rendering - what the hell is going on with the ground plane?

Everything about it suggests this was rushed from beginning to end.
 
Last edited:
stefal said:
This comes from the same design firm that has designed this:
View attachment 28404

And this:
View attachment 28405

What's the end goal for Peebles? They were already really stretching it with their plea for infrastructure bill funding for the affordable housing units, and now they've presented a pretty unlovable design. They get to hold onto a failed (public) proposal that will only get more expensive to build on with every day that passes?

That elevation posted upthread is really, really disorienting - high school intern level rendering - what the hell is going on with the ground plane?

Everything about it suggests this was rushed from beginning to end.
Click to expand...

My impression is that they don't really have a design, and this was rushed. We'll get a different version later.
 
resisttheist said:
What was the Utile design? Wasn't the previously-approved by Handel? Did Utile have something before or more recently?
Click to expand...

It was both. From Nov. 2015:

The Peebles team is committed to providing maximum air rights coverage to link the Back Bay and Fenway neighborhoods with its planned lifestyle hotel, 170 residences, retail and parking with two public plazas. Peebles is working with Handel Architects of New York and Boston-based urban design think-tank, Utile Inc., to design the building.
Click to expand...
 
Either commit to some wacky geometry all over, or go for some repeating rectangles. This is a horrible compromise between the two.

Peebles continues to be a running joke.
 
W-4 said:
Either commit to some wacky geometry all over, or go for some repeating rectangles. This is a horrible compromise between the two.

Peebles continues to be a running joke.
Click to expand...

I have to respectfully disagree. That Boston.blah article was a mugging, and it seems they’re just butt-hurt about the lack of parking. Super petty, but it’s the Boston Glob’s ignorant little sibling, so, lol.

Peebles had the rug pulled out from under them, twice, (due to no fault of their own), in a long effort to win this bid (with significant financial investment, no less!). I’m on my phone and can’t find the thread, but it’s well-documented on here the drama of Parcels 12—15, the Commonwealth’s shenanigans, the challenges of decking 3 parcels and converting a “covered way” under the Pru into a “tunnel” (to meet contemporary adequate life safety code along the Pike/CR underpass—yeah, I’m using the wrong terms, but F-Line would prolly know specifics). In any case.

Peebles was supremely dignified through all this shit. I posit they have been both thoughtful and transparent at what they intend as their inaugural project in New England, in the heart of a gateway neighborhood—healing the wounds of Boston’s civic “design” in the 50s/60s/70s era of regrettable auto-centric prioritization.

Peebles had to negotiate with the MBTA, MassDOT, MCCA, MBCR, DCR, Fenway CDC, BBAC, BBA, the BRA (d/b/a BPDA, lol); all the local loonies, abutters, and the general neighborhood cranks; never mind Parcel 12 developers and the Berklee School (who are approved to redevelop the SE corner of the intersection, including the terra firma Parcel 14): through all this evolution, it’s admirable the Peebles final proposal sought to increase affordable housing in a neighborhood with an embarrassingly barren inventory of affordable housing. I think it’s something stupid like only 4% of the rentable housing stock is available in the Back Bay. (Never mind, the $34M or so they’d pay to fix the damn MBTA’s accessibility issues at Hynes/ICA/Auditorium that should’ve been addressed 40 years ago; this alone is a delicate design and funding partnership with Parcel 12, those lunatic condo nutters at 360 Newbury, and the MBTA—itself an incoherent icon of incompetence.

I can certainly quibble with the exterior materials of the Peebles renderings, as shown *at this point in design*, but that’s what the public comment and IAG/CAC processes are designed to address.

And, to their credit, Peebles essentially started from this project from scratch during Covid lockdown after due diligence found some rather unusual unforeseen/undocumented site conditions implemented during the Turnpike Extension and rebuilding of the Boylston overpass between Mass Ave to Hereford. I think I read it’s a 2’-ish grade change.

I found the Peebles response pretty clever from an engineering standpoint (hence some of the strange angles hiding interior issues, due to the grade change), their lead guy quite engaging, and the design team is very open to dialogue with neighbors. The exterior may need some further tweaking, but the overall project is the opposite of a running joke.

Full disclosure: I have no stake in Parcel 13, other than that I live 2 blocks away and typically travel this stretch of Boylston at least four times a day. More, when the Red Sox are playing at home. ;-)

EDIT: I grammar bad … sorry! Fixed?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top