Whats left to build on?

TallIsGood

Active Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
370
Reaction score
4
The first lot is in Bulfinch Triangle and heights are limited there.
 

Justin7

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
16
I'd be shocked to see a tower in the triangle, but I'm surprised we haven't seen any movement on these.
 

bigpicture7

Senior Member
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
1,729
Reaction score
89
Here's a prime surface lot parcel just put up for sale:

The parcel covers about one-third of an acre at the corner of Newbury and Dartmouth streets, a block from Copley Square...

...The lot has been owned for generations by the same family, said Ben Sayles, a director at the real estate firm HFF, which is handling the sale. He expects the listing to draw wide interest from developers and investors.
Per the Globe:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2019/01/15/this-newbury-street-parking-lot-may-sell-for-tens-millions/XJdArSQNhSsC0aih2bIg9H/story.html

Map location:
https://goo.gl/maps/vKkATdUVV6p
 

statler

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
7,718
Reaction score
59
Prediction:

Whatever gets built there will be better than a parking lot and worse than everything else around it.
 

TheRifleman

Banned
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
4,431
Reaction score
0
Prediction:

Whatever gets built there will be better than a parking lot and worse than everything else around it.
I'm actually starting to miss open space. Every possible open space is getting developed. Even the suburbs are starting to feel like everything is closing in on it between condo developments, traffic congestion.

Space has become a very expensive perc now in and around the city.
 
Last edited:

bigpicture7

Senior Member
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
1,729
Reaction score
89
Open space (parks, natural woodlands, waterfront, etc)...and asphalt surface lots perennially filled with cars are two very different things.
 

stefal

Active Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
622
Reaction score
39
I'm actually starting to miss open space. Every possible open space is getting developed. Even the suburbs are starting to feel like everything is closing in on it between condo developments, traffic congestion.

Space has become a very expensive perc now in and around the city.
This lot is literally 50 steps from the Commonwealth Avenue parkway, which leads to one of the largest urban park areas in the US on one end, and Emerald Necklace, a park system envied by most US cities, on the other. There's no "closing in" feeling on Newbury St or most of the Back Bay roads because it's all human scaled.
 

dwash59

Active Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
581
Reaction score
0
Open space (parks, natural woodlands, waterfront, etc)...and asphalt surface lots perennially filled with cars are two very different things.
Yep, and it is unfortunate that so many zoning codes treat them identically.
 

JeffDowntown

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,849
Reaction score
29
This lot is literally 50 steps from the Commonwealth Avenue parkway, which leads to one of the largest urban park areas in the US on one end, and Emerald Necklace, a park system envied by most US cities, on the other. There's no "closing in" feeling on Newbury St or most of the Back Bay roads because it's all human scaled.
And Dartmouth Street has the super wide sidewalk on the west side, by the lot; left over from the former carriage way into Back Bay from Back Bay Station.
 

odurandina

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2015
Messages
4,919
Reaction score
59
Very soon to be, and all but ending is the era of >390' construction in Boston. Excepting for South Station Tower, the Harbor Garage site, and possibly, 1 Bromfield, we are effectively 'wrapping up.'

(>390' is a low number, but safe reference of demarcation).

re; the 547' Govt Center Garage residential tower;
Purely my subjective opinion, I've been biting my tongue on this one but some buildings just let you down out of the gate and others do not, this one is not so great... but it's rising from a parking garage so I can deal with it. If anything, I have a new found lukewarm appreciation of the neighboring JFK high rise. Even after 40 plus years, on the whole, its a comparatively more attractive high rise than this building rising today. In lay man's terms, this looks like a plastic modern version of the concrete high rises of the jfk era. That being said, on a positive note, it's a skyline filler and from city hall plaza and other areas it provides a visual sense of enclosure.
i believe the concept, design and materials are all good. It's the people being allowed to disproportionately affect the process, and not in a good way: not allowing the proper a/r's that is fatal brew. If you proposed a West End area crown at 65 Martha, the Suffolk Jail, the low section of the O'Neill Fed, or on one of the parcels adjacent to the tracks, the reaction and outrage would be as incredible and out of proportion as it would be remarkably effective--and result in the same outcome as those who came before; another splendid idea reduced to a Boston resident tower.

A type of bizarre, extreme, urban selfishness & narcissism rooted in prudish, provincialism & leftist authoritarianism (sorry) has produced a very squat city from one end to the other since about the time Flynnino took office. i believe this sentiment is most prevalent in the West End near Beacon Hill, Back Bay, and anything in or near the South End or Chinatown, such as the New York Streets & the area near the Radian, 125 Lincoln St etc--and in Mission Hill.

But, it's not just there; but every parcel in Boston is given the same talking points for why there must be no significant height (ever). Admittedly, you don't want to cast too much shadow upon Back Bay, Beacon Hill or parks. Which is precisely why possibly more height with narrow spires could and probably should have been pushed at BB Station, Church of Christ Scientist, Midtown Hotel etc--and these sites developed. But you can also make the argument that grandfathering Copley Tower, and stopping just there isn't a bad look. When the planned 300~400' towers go up on Back Bay, the unfortunate absence of Copley Tower will be, clear.

a Boston supertall skyscraper: 685~790'
a Back Bay High Spine/Downtown/ West End resident supertall tower: 325~540'
rare exceptions; MT, 1 Dalton
a neighborhood supertall: 140~290'
rare exceptions; the Pierce, Dudley Square.

Rinse & repeat;

1. the sky will disappear.
2. it's out of character for the neighborhood.
3. it's too close to Beacon Hill
4. it's too close to the North End
5. it creates too many shadows.
6. it would cast shadows on the Esplanade.
7. it's too tall for this area of Boston
8. it violates ancient zoning
9. it will contribute to the ruin of Athens
10. it will add too much traffic to the area
11. we don't want an 860' tower built, especially here, period.
12. developers are just evil greedy scum (anyway) that must be stopped.
 

Suffolk 83

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Messages
2,187
Reaction score
28
Certain people cant stop their brains from going to some left vs right argument for everything. NIMBY obstructionists cross all political spectrums and all they care about is their own selfish outcomes. It's 100% wrong and unfair to blame it on "leftists" or to bring politics into this whatsoever.
 

Massachoicetts

New member
Joined
Jun 4, 2019
Messages
73
Reaction score
33

Top