W Hotel | 100 Stuart St | Theater District

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: W Hotel

Well it's really crushed in by Chinatown to one side, a giant hospital, and a massive highway (which even if they built over the highway, it's medium-density residential on the other side).

It would take a lot of finagling to get this area to be vibrant, but I think it can be done. The way I figure it -- going along with the "if you build it, they will come" mentality -- as long as the W Hotel fills up, there will be at least a few hundred more people wandering the streets in this area on any given night.

Every person you see has a reason to be where they are. Whether they're going to Macy's, CVS, the Watch Hospital, a bar, the T station, a play at the theater, H&M or just passing through -- people have a reason to be in DTX. If you put more hotels and actual *destinations* in this area of the theater district, more people will fill the streets and it will actually be a vibrant city destination.

Of course, this all assumes the businesses don't fail. . .
 
Re: W Hotel

czsz said:
I'm not condemning the area forever, I'm just trying to give it a proper diagnosis. What would help it most of all would be an incentive to revive of Boston's nightlife and entertainment scene in the area - a revival that would preferably not solely be funded by Emerson College. A
Click to expand...

One easy solution would be to allow venues selling liquor to get the same licenses as those for Chinatown.
 
Re: W Hotel

as long as the W Hotel fills up, there will be at least a few hundred more people wandering the streets in this area on any given night.
Click to expand...

This theory doesn't exactly pan out when it comes to the Seaport Hotel, just to name one example. Park Square, despite its large hotels, is pretty dead almost all the time. Hotel guests (who don't necessarily know the city well, and in some cases don't know how to be in a city) can be surprisingly cloistered, cabbing to and from the front door. I hope the W debuts some ridiculously chic destination restaurants or lounges - that would make it a local draw.
 
Re: W Hotel

czsz said:
Even if the Pike were covered, the South End is a mess of housing projects and assorted architectural detritus for blocks until you reach the more cohesively urban, vibrant parts of the nabe.
Click to expand...

Everyone thinks the South End's next growht area will be south. There are 13 individual housing projects between Mass Ave and Melina Cass Blvd., all of which are badly designed for a city. The movement south will be slow. There are a few large parcels east of Albany St that may soon be offered for development.

I think once the economy recovers you will see the South End move north. It's closer to the financial district and the Back Bay. You also have very large blocks of land owned by few people. Harold Brown, Patrick Purcell the owner of the Herald.

And someday that section of the turnpike will be covered.
 
Re: W Hotel

Well one thing that area could use, as well greater metro area is 24 hr diners.
 
Re: W Hotel

The Tremont/Kneeland/Stuart Street intersection is hardly a "crossroads." I bet a traffic study would show that most traffic through there is people going down Stuart St and continuing on Kneeland (and vice versa). It's more of a pass through with some stuff in it. That being said, to say there's nothing going on there is pretty off target. I go down there quite a bit for shows at the Wang, Shubert, Majestic, for food at Montien, Avilla, drinks at the Tam, Jacob Worth's. Hell, burritos at Herrera's in the Transpo are pretty good too.

I think the wierd thing is, and this ties in with what Paul said, there is a real dead zone between the theatre district and the South End. If I'm going from the North End to the South End, I'll sometimes pass through this way, or get off at NEMC and walk, but usually I'll take the train down to Back Bay Station and walk from there, and I have the feeling the majority of other people are doing that as well. It's not even 100% the Pike's fault; stuff in that area (the boarder of the theatre district and the South End) is just dead, dead, dead. If there was more going on there, Stuart/Kneeland/Tremont might be a crossroads, but right now, there's just not a huge reason for anyone to walk down Tremont must past the Wang.
 
Re: W Hotel

BTW, the median strip on the stretch of Stuart Street in front of the W hotel has been removed.
 
Re: W Hotel

JimboJones said:
BTW, the median strip on the stretch of Stuart Street in front of the W hotel has been removed.
Click to expand...

Good. They need to git rid of it for the rest of Stuart St (or is that party Kneeland St?) and extend the sidewalks.
 
Re: W Hotel

From last week (with Quiddich on the Common in the foreground):

 
Re: W Hotel

today from Dot ave
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-1.jpg
 
Re: W Hotel

Are those two "go right of barrier" signs really necessary?
 
Re: W Hotel

Which leads to the question:

Are those barriers really necessary?
 
Re: W Hotel

The only reason to have such a median island is for pedestrians to wait there after crossing part of the street.
 
Re: W Hotel

Don't forget the invaluable open space they provide, for picnicking and frolicking and the like.
 
Re: W Hotel

The way people drive in the area, and the confusion the streets sometimes create here, 80% of them are needed. at least.
 
Re: W Hotel

Newman, those barriers also increase safety for the drivers in terms of more separation for oncoming traffic. As a result, they decrease the accident rate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top