New Tower(s) Planned For Prudential Center [Archive]

quadratdackel

07-05-2006, 04:18 PM

^ By "community", I meant everyone in the area, not just those whose window looks out on a development. I guess you could think of community as being just those immediate neighbors and use some other word for the broader metro area population. Either way, this is still a classic collective action problem: individually, we're best off if every project is built except the one blocking the view out our window, but collectively, we're better off if all projects get built than if no projects get built (assuming of course that a high-density, affordable city is preferable to a lower-density, unaffordable city). The problem is that there's much more individual energy opposing view blockage than there is collective energy supporting housing creation. So, from the vantage point of, say, a city official at a public development hearing, it looks like there's widespread, heated opposition to the project because only the opposition has enough interest in this specific project to show up. The only way around this is to balance these voices with others representing the interests of the broader population. Boston struggles because it errs to far immediate neighbors' direction, possibly because it's still scarred from the West End demolition backlash.

justin

07-05-2006, 06:22 PM

To paraphrase the 20th century's greatest politician: 'There is no such thing as community'.

justin

ablarc

07-05-2006, 07:29 PM

To paraphrase the 20th century's greatest politician: 'There is no such thing as community'

Margaret Thatcher?

justin

07-06-2006, 08:28 AM

:D :D :D :D :D

briv

01-20-2007, 12:03 AM

This is from the latest Courant:

New Tower Is Planned For Prudential Center
by Shayndi Raice

Plans are being drawn up to nearly double the size of an office building at the the Prudential Center, already New England's largest mixed-use development.

The plans by the Pru's owner, Boston Properties, have not yet been officially unveiled, but they have been discussed with city officials and at least one member of a citizen group overseeing development at the Prudential Center. According to reliable sources, the plan involves nearly doubling the height of an 11-story office building that had already been approved for 888 Boylston Street, now a courtyard directly in front of the Prudential Tower.

If built, the expanded office building would be considerably taller than the Mandarin Hotel, which is under construction next door to the site and will be 155 feet high.

Boston Properties' expansion could also involve plans disclosed last summer to build another luxury housing tower along Exeter Street in partnership with Avalon Bay Communities,
which owns three existing residential towers at the Prudential Center.

Betsy Johnson, chairperson of the Prudential Project Advisory Committee (PruPAC), was briefed on plans in October and said that a meeting was supposed to be scheduled with the committee, but it was delayed with the start of the holiday season. "All I know is that things are supposed to be in the works", she said. "In fairness, [Boston Properties] is probably trying to make sure the all their ducks in a row".

Johnson said that any new office or housing expansion would come under the purview of PruPAC. She noted, however, that members of the committee reacted favorably to the possibility of additional housing of Exeter, especially in the wake of construction of the Mandarin where residences had once been contemplated.

Johnson added that after the 11-story glass office building had been approved, some PruPAC members indicated "in retrospect" that the building could have been considerably higher.

For the time being, Boston Properties is keeping any expansion plans at the Prudential Center close to its vest. "888 Boylston is the last planned development site on the master plan when we bought the building from Prudential", said Boston Properties spokesperson Amy Daniels. "While we're encouraged by office market conditions and we look forward to working with PruPAC and the BRA, there are no imminent plans for [the property] at this point."

jass

01-21-2007, 01:20 AM

Hm, I dont know....I like that Plaza...its a nice rbeak from the streetwall, and a good access to the foodcourt....

However, I doubt theyll have oposition, considering they own everything there.

Also

"Boston Properties' expansion could also involve plans disclosed last summer to build another luxury housing tower along Exeter Street in partnership with Avalon Bay Communities,
which owns three existing residential towers at the Prudential Center. "

Ew. Please let it not be as ugly as the Avalon.

Ron Newman

01-21-2007, 06:29 AM

The food court will become gloomy without the light coming in through those windows. A small price to pay, but still...

bowesst

01-21-2007, 12:05 PM

The Prudential Center Food Court is a Boston treasure.

jass

01-21-2007, 01:57 PM

The Prudential Center Food Court is a Boston treasure.

And a staple of marathon monday

kz1000ps

01-22-2007, 11:11 AM

I always thought that 11 stories for the 888 site seemed awfully small, but I had assumed BP had hashed out a deal with the BBAC or some other similar group to keep shadows on the Back Bay to a minimum. Now I wonder if they (BBAC) will start chiming in any minute to raise holy hell over this, even though they have absolutely no jurisdiction over the matter..

Edit: and to answer a question I had - "what/who is the PruPAC?" - I found this, from the Biz Journal 8/29/97
Faced with strong community opposition to the Prudential Center's ambitious development plans, former Boston Mayor Raymond Flynn in 1986 created the Prudential Project Advisory Committee, comprising 22 neighborhood and civic groups. The group initiated weekly meetings that were held throughout the entire process. One estimate put the total number of meetings at 350.

"There were a lot of discussions, and we had a lot of sandwiches," recalled Bertman.

As a result of the meetings, the Pru's original development plan was changed dramatically.

"Under the new design, we looked at the Prudential Center as a collection of streets and blocks like any other city block, instead of a monolithic whole," Bertman said.

http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/1997/09/01/story1.html

bowesst

01-22-2007, 07:19 PM

The Prudential Center Food Court is a Boston treasure.

And a staple of marathon monday

I don't know if you got my sarcasm or not but either way I wasn't aware the food court had any kind of connection to the Boston Marathon. I know the "courtyard" in front of it where the tower will be sees a lot of activity.

http://img379.imageshack.us/img379/2342/img43672hz.jpg

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/1959/img43748ci.jpg

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/3314/img43779aq.jpg

IMAngry

01-22-2007, 08:12 PM

The BBAC or whomever may have had an agreement for a limit on the height of any proposed office building, but it's 2006 and things change, even in Boston.

Your first point is the most important one - they have no jurisdiction over the building, nor does any neighborhood association.

What we're seeing, unfortunately, is each neighborhood fighting against every other neighborhood - developers are going to build where there is the least amount of controversy. Every downtown neighborhood association is against ANY development (in my opinion) so the developers just go where there is the least amount of protest, or where they can wear out the opposition.

Ron Newman

01-23-2007, 06:21 AM

Any of you remember what the Pru looked like before 1986? I'd say the PruPAC process has been a great success.

01-23-2007, 07:38 AM

I would be more inclined to give credit to Boston Properties than PruPac. What did PruPac actually do?

Waldorf

01-23-2007, 08:19 AM

^ Bitch and moan. Oh, wait, that's NABB. :lol:

Mike

06-22-2007, 02:15 AM

palindrome

06-22-2007, 09:15 PM

So realistically, we can expect a 12 story building?

or is it already approved?

briv

06-22-2007, 09:17 PM

Where exactly would this building be located? Anyone know?

atlrvr

06-22-2007, 09:19 PM

The plaza in front of the food court where the statue of the naked man is...between the new M.O. and the Hynes CC.

czsz

06-22-2007, 10:43 PM

888 Boylston will be in the food court plaza...this building must have a different location...

singbat

06-22-2007, 10:55 PM

kinda surprising ... from the Globe:

Also yesterday, Boston Properties said it has chosen Avalon Bay to build a 30-story, 200-unit residential apartment tower on Exeter Street, which also had been previously planned. That building would be 340 feet high.

Link (http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2007/06/22/back_bay_builder_seeks_ok_for_19_story_tower/)

hmm. is that the building that was said to be planned for the area behind L&T and in front of the east-most of the three apartment highrises? is there more on that one?

Mike

06-22-2007, 11:04 PM

according to quadratdackel in an earlier post:

The building's to be on the Exeter Street side of the Prudential Center, near the garage entrance and the Shaw's supermarket. It would be 40 feet from the Gloucester apartment tower

kz1000ps

06-23-2007, 02:23 AM

Only 40 feet away? Boy the people in that eastern-most tower will be pissed.

it will sit right up against the back of Lord & Taylor
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/5363/img5285vh9.jpg

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/4157/img5286xp4.jpg

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/1614/img5284it5.jpg

ablarc

06-23-2007, 07:36 AM

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/1614/img5284it5.jpg
This block is so grim!

statler

06-23-2007, 07:48 AM

^^

If only someone would do something about it!

Oh..wait...

bbfen

06-23-2007, 09:03 AM

Seems to me this was part of the original Prudential development plan, right? I think the support infrastructure even exists (when you're in the parking level, the NW corner that now holds luxury cars was to be the garage-level lobby for the residence). Then something happened, money ran out, L&T got built, I can't remember. Or, maybe I'm just dreaming!

06-23-2007, 09:44 AM

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/1614/img5284it5.jpg

I still don't see where this tower is going to fit in, unless a portion of it is going to be built over Lord and Taylor. There just doesn't seem to be enough room at the garage entrance.

Has anyone seen a rendering?

ablarc

06-23-2007, 09:57 AM

Will they redeem the street with shops?

singbat

06-23-2007, 11:57 AM

Will they redeem the street with shops?

by my count 3 of 6: the hotels are not bad, but the library, L&T and the supermarket's sides are no good. (i'd give the garage opening a pass since it had to happen somewhere). The Library isn't going to change. that's 1/2 the block.

chris

08-25-2007, 01:24 AM

The most recent Boston Courant has an article about high-rise developments in the Back Bay.

Apparently in addition to 888 Boylston and the Exeter apartments, sometime in the fall the Prudential people are going to propose a 50 story mixed-use building to be built where the Neiman Marcus is (Copley Center is the building ). The article noted there are no height limits there, but they may need a zoning variance anyways.

The article also stated that the Christian Science Center may build a high-rise hotel on their complex (but that is not this thread).

Alas there does not appear to be an online version of the Courant as far as I can tell.

JimboJones

08-25-2007, 07:45 AM

More about the 50-story building near Neiman Marcus, from Mr Grouchy:

http://bostonreb.com/blog/2006/06/25/condo-and-hotel-tower-to-rise-at-copley-nabb-loves-the-idea/

atlantaden

08-25-2007, 09:13 AM

We all have our moments...glad you're still here.

Bos77

08-25-2007, 09:31 AM

Others were quick to make clear that they hate the idea, in no uncertain terms.

Peter M. Sherin, chairman of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay, (NAGG), said his organization hadn?t heard anything about the project, but still went on record with some comments.

?We would be concerned about plans for any building of that height,? he said. ?It would cast shadows that fall on historic properties, create darkness and wind in the area , be out of scale with the surroundings, and overload already congested streets.?

I just LOVE how nobody has even seen the actual proposal, but the call to arms has been sounded. "Villagers of the Back Bay, get your pitchforks and torches ready...let us call on the mystical forces of Shirley Kressel to send these heathens back to their place in the underworld... "

atlantaden

08-25-2007, 09:40 AM

Peter M. Sherin, chairman of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay, (NAGG),

Freudian Slip or deliberate typo? Either way, very appropriate!

KentXie

08-25-2007, 10:08 AM

I also agree that this proposal will be out of scale. I mean, at 50 stories its probably going to be around 500-550ft. It doesn't fit in between the 750 ft Pru and 790ft JHT. It's too short. In order to make this more to scale, they should increase its height to at least 650ft+

KentXie

08-25-2007, 10:16 AM

Another thing about out of scale. The reason why these towers are out of scale is because NIMBYs like these people prevent anything towers reaching that height which mean all the other towers will be around the same height. If they allow towers to be build taller or at various height, then these towers won't be out of scale. If it wasn't for those towers back in the 80s luckily enough to be built or the PRu and JHT, anything above 200-300ft would have been out of scale.

chris

08-25-2007, 10:41 AM

Wow, my bad. i didn't know I was bringing up old news. (http://architecturalboston.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=202)

Still, I think the key difference is the height, the old articles mention 20-30 stories.

Ron Newman

08-25-2007, 02:36 PM

I don't see how the Prudential can build on top of Neiman Marcus when they don't own it.

tocoto

08-25-2007, 05:08 PM

I believe simon properties wants to build at the neiman marcus site, and they do own the property.

Merper

08-25-2007, 05:52 PM

"The tower would be built in front of, and on top of, the existing Neiman-Marcus department store, on what is now an empty lot."

uhm, i'm having difficulty figuring out where this 'empty lot' is....

shiz02130

08-25-2007, 06:54 PM

The lot is here (directly across Dartmouth Street from the air rights parking garage):

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Dartmouth St & Stuart St, Boston, MA 02116, USA&ie=UTF8&ll=42.348072,-71.076702&spn=0.001538,0.002486&t=h&z=19&iwloc=addr&om=1

Ron Newman

08-25-2007, 07:31 PM

Mike

08-25-2007, 07:49 PM

it might be a good idea to merge the new stuff with the old thread:

http://architecturalboston.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=202

JimboJones

08-25-2007, 07:56 PM

The location is in front of the entrance to Neiman-Marcus - there's a piece of art there (I think it's horses?) and some concrete planters / barriers, right where Dartmouth Street meets Stuart Street, across the intersection from the Healthworks building (with Starbucks on the first floor).

Tight spot.

Ron Newman

08-25-2007, 08:05 PM

Oh, there? My feeling is that is shoehorning a building where it doesn't belong. Not as bad as the location I thought you meant, but still.... couldn't it be South End-scaled, 4-5 stories?

briv

08-25-2007, 09:00 PM

Here is a view of the proposed site and immediate surroundings from Live Local.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y99/briv1/BB_Station.jpg

The area around Copley Place may be the single most pedestrian-inhospitable streetscape in Boston. There is a large swath that doesnt even have sidewalks. I would totally support any development that attempted to remedy this problem as part of a larger project.

Also, the proposal's proximity to Backbay Station(local bus, commuter rail and Amtrak), the Orange and Green Lines, and easy access to the Mass Turnpike definitely warrant a very high density. Probably much higher than is even being proposed.

Beton Brut

08-25-2007, 09:03 PM

...couldn't it be South End-scaled, 4-5 stories?

Sure -- three questions:

1.) For what purpose?

2.) Who's going to finance a project of this scale?

3.) Seeing as this site isn't in the South End, why should that neighborhood's scale influence its height?

And just so no one thinks I pop a rod every time someone post a blurb about a new tower, I think this site would be just as appropriate for a glazed pavilion for a farmer's market.

atlrvr

08-25-2007, 11:24 PM

commuter guy

08-26-2007, 12:25 PM

Looking at that aerial, it makes me wonder if the Westin was originally concieved to have a second tower as part of a future phase...running north-south along Dartmouth? The setback of that distance from Dartmouth seems odd, and there is certainly enough room for a second tower if the supporting structure is designed to accomodate one.

I'm wondering if those setbacks have anything to do with an effort to mitigate shadows being cast upon the Public Library's courtyard. I have a vague memory of an article discussing the construction of the very mediocre "Trinity Place" building situated at one huntington ave. The article stated that the building (particularly the "high rise" portion) was intentionally set back away from the corner nearest copley square so that the impact of shadows on the library would be minimized.

If my memory serves me right - this will probably be an issue for a large building on the neiman marcus site.

kz1000ps

08-26-2007, 12:26 PM

First off - there's an existing thread dedicated to this tower already, so hopefully Vanshnook can move it pretty soon. (pwitty pwease?)

Now to address atlrvr's question: the Westin is where it is because the neighborhood groups wanted the tower's mass as far away from Copley Square as possible. Although there might be space for a second tower (and I find the proposition intriguing), the structure as built wouldn't be able to support it.

Here's a couple images I've gathered from the BPL of early proposals/massing studies:

http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/846/img2502xa8.jpg

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/8564/img2505fa4.jpg

And then here's the final form:

http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/5245/img2506oh0.jpg

czsz

08-26-2007, 12:41 PM

I think the new tower should be set back in a similar fashion from Dartmouth...it would give the street a characteristic consistency, not to mention prevent the vista down Dartmouth from anywhere in Back Bay from being dominated by this tower entirely (the South End won't be so lucky...and will likely fight this with the ferocity they've pursued Columbus Center).

08-26-2007, 09:25 PM

By "empty lot" do you mean the little brick plaza across the street from Back Bay Station? To me, that's not a buildable lot, it's a public amenity, the gateway to the Southwest Corridor linear park. I'd hate to see it encroached upon.

Ron,

It's not directly across from BB Station. It's on the other side of Newman Marcus towards Copley.

ablarc

08-27-2007, 06:43 AM

[quote=Ron Newman]Ron,

It's not directly across from BB Station. It's on the other side of Newman Marcus towards Copley.
Are you talking to Ron Neiman? ;)

08-27-2007, 12:20 PM

LOL,

Just letting my friend Mr. Neiman know which entrance would be impacted by the 'soaring' new tower.

statler

09-18-2007, 10:13 AM

I think this goes here.

Proposal for Pair of Towers Causes Some Growing Pains

Project Team Eyes Spot at Hub?s Prudential Center; Advisory Panel Wary of Height, Look and Location
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter
http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/newspics/PruCtrPNFExeter888Boylston.jpg
Image courtesy Boston Redevelopment Authority
The 30-story residential tower proposed for Exeter Street at the Prudential Center in Boston is shown above in an artist?s rendering. The developers are Boston Properties and Avalon Bay Communities.

Growing pains. Boston Properties and Avalon Bay Communities have proposed a pair of towers that will bring 200 residences and a 19-story office building to Boston?s Prudential Center. But some members of a city advisory panel already have raised red flags about the height, look and location of the towers.

?Height, density and appearance are always a worry,? said Richard Kiley, a member of the Prudential Project Advisory Committee (PruPAC), a group formed in the 1980s to advise City Hall on development proposals in the neighborhood.

The $192 million proposal calls for a 30-story residential high-rise on Exeter Street across from the Boston Public Library, according to documents filed with the Boston Redevelopment Authority. The project also calls for the construction of an office building at 888 Boylston St., adjacent to the John B. Hynes Veterans Memorial Convention. The BRA had approved an 11-story building at the site, but the developer has told officials that the building needs to be taller to attract anchor tenants.

Michael A. Cantalupa of Boston Properties declined to talk about the project or provide renderings of the towers. Avalon?s Michael Roberts did not return repeated calls seeking comment.

While the developers were silent, some PruPAC members raised concerns about the buildings? height and location.

?Anything above the 11-story limit that has been the tradition in the neighborhood raises concerns,? said PruPAC member and state Rep. Martha M. Walz, whose district abuts the Prudential Center. ?All of the tall Pru buildings are set back from the street, but the one proposed for Boylston is at the sidewalk?s edge and that?s another concern.?

Walz said she is not convinced that Boston Properties needs more height in order to make the tower more marketable to tenants.

?I don?t understand enough about the commercial real estate market to know whether that?s a reasonable assertion,? she said. ?I?d want to know more before I accept that at face value.?

Steven Wolf, a PruPAC member who represents the Fenway Community Development Corp., said the initial model presented by the developers of the two-pronged project on Exeter Street and Boylston streets ?looked good? but that lots of details need to be worked out.

?Boston Properties [has] done [its] homework,? he said. ?We will see how things evolve during this process, but my initial reaction is positive.?

?Lots of Arm-Twisting?

Still, Wolf said while the proposal for two towers seems reasonable, he is still irked by the city?s approval of the nearby Mandarin Oriental being built on Boylston Street.

The 13-story Mandarin Oriental Boston hotel is scheduled to open next year next to Lord & Taylor on Boylston Street. The $230 million project will add 168 guestrooms and the property will be part of a mixed-use complex with first-floor retail and condominiums on the upper floors.

?The way the Mandarin got shoehorned into that location still rankles us, six years later,? Wolf said. ?There was lots of arm-twisting by the mayor and lobbying by the BRA. It felt like if you?re friends with the mayor, the skids are greased for you. Now that building casts a shadow on the sidewalk, even in the middle of the summer.?

A BRA spokeswoman noted that the Mandarin project only moved forward following a ?lengthy public review process and support from PruPAC.?

While PruPAC encouraged the construction of the residential tower on Exeter Street, Walz said she is not sure whether the height and design of the tower are in keeping with the neighborhood.

?Do we want a 32-story building across the street from the Boston Public Library?? Walz asked. ?That?s twice the height of the Lenox Hotel. That location makes sense for housing, but it appears the architects were being unduly timid in their approach and could design a more beautiful building. The architects are missing an opportunity to create something that fits into an architecturally diverse Pru Center.?

The project has at least one big booster: Mayor Thomas M. Menino.

?Boston Properties is an outstanding developer and has always done right by the community, and we will continue to work with them so we can have further development at the Pru,? Menino told Banker & Tradesman. ?I am inclined to support them as long as they work with the neighborhood.?

Boston Properties and Avalon Bay presented plans for the project at a PruPAC meeting earlier this month. The 41-member panel found itself in the midst of a controversy after evicting a reporter from the session.

While PruPAC voted overwhelmingly to remove a Boston Courant reporter from the meeting held on Wednesday, Sept. 5, the mayor has directed the board to keep the meetings open.

Still, it is unclear what will happen at the next PruPAC meeting, which is scheduled for Wednesday, Oct. 10. Betsy Johnson, PruPac chairwoman, said the committee would not fight an edict by Menino to keep all of the gatherings open to the public.

The BRA sent a letter to the panel instructing the board last week to keep the meetings open to the public after the mayor?s comments were published in Banker & Tradesman.

But Kiley, the PruPac member who voted to keep the press out, said he is not sure how he will vote.

?I want to talk more to the board about it because PruPAC has always conducted its working sessions without the media,? he said. ?But sometimes we have to adapt to change, and if public sentiment is that strong we will not ignore it. Perhaps it?s counterproductive to keep the meetings private because people would wonder more what?s done behind closed doors.?
No link available

statler

09-18-2007, 10:30 AM

So many stupid quotes. Let's start with this one:

?Do we want a 32-story building across the street from the Boston Public Library?? Walz asked.
Uh, um.
http://eifl.nkp.cz/fotky/usa/photos/07.jpg

The architects are missing an opportunity to create something that fits into an architecturally diverse Pru Center.
Exactly what style 'fits into' an 'architecturally diverse' area? Or more to the point what style doesn't fit in? Maybe they have a different meaning of 'diverse' than I do. :?:

ckb

09-18-2007, 10:34 AM

Some more fun.

?Height, density and appearance are always a worry,? said Richard Kiley,

I agree, but I think I worry in the opposite direction as Mr. Kiley on the first two points. More density is needed, and height is great! Look at that rendering -- it looks like a city. On the second point, I agree ... what is going on with the jumbled appearance. Crappy rendering?

?I don?t understand enough about the commercial real estate market to know whether that?s a reasonable assertion,? [Martha Walz] said [regarding the need for a taller building in order for a project to be profitable].

Well, I guess it is nice to see a politician admitting she needs more information. But, after serving on PruPAC for sometime, wouldn't you think she would have some general idea?

?The way the Mandarin got shoehorned into that location still rankles us, six years later,? Wolf said. ?There was lots of arm-twisting by the mayor and lobbying by the BRA. It felt like if you?re friends with the mayor, the skids are greased for you. Now that building casts a shadow on the sidewalk, even in the middle of the summer.?

Agreement and disagreement. Repeated again, "it felt like if you?re friends with the mayor, the skids are greased for you." The process in Boston is broken.

Disagreement: "that building casts a shadow on the sidewalk." Ok, I don't disagree that it casts a shadow. Oh, the horror, the horror! There's no grass growing on the sidewalk. Anyway, the orientation of the street determines the shadow pattern much more than building height. Newbury Street is in shadow as well (with 4-5 buildings on it!). Doesn't seem to prevent people from wanting to walk there, though.

And what did the Mandarin replace? A very pedestrian UNfriendly raised plaza and parking garage entrance ramps.

Walz again: "but it appears the architects were being unduly timid in their approach and could design a more beautiful building. The architects are missing an opportunity to create something that fits into an architecturally diverse Pru Center.?

Agreed!!!! Ok, I don't know what doesn't fit into something that is architecturally diverse, but if we're going to gun for better design than that junky rendering, I'm all for it.

Smuttynose

09-18-2007, 10:45 AM

It's hard to get a good sense of the buildings based on that rendering, but it looks pretty modern, which you really need there to balance out all those 1960's Prudential complex buildings.

JimboJones

09-18-2007, 11:53 AM

Whoa. I didn't know that's where the building was going to go.

It's perfect! Seriously. No one will know it's there except those who live there. No one goes down that road except to cut through to the other side, it's an ugly street to begin with, it has little-to-no foot traffic, it's empty space.

I like it. 30-stories sounds fine. Again, no one can see it.

Adding residential housing here is a great idea.

If there is additional parking, it will work out fine. Those who park in there can exit toward Huntington Ave, keeping additional traffic congestion stress on the Back Bay to a minimum (meaning, none at all).

Sounds good!

chris

09-18-2007, 11:54 AM

While PruPAC encouraged the construction of the residential tower on Exeter Street, Walz said she is not sure whether the height and design of the tower are in keeping with the neighborhood.

?Do we want a 32-story building across the street from the Boston Public Library?? Walz asked. ?That?s twice the height of the Lenox Hotel. That location makes sense for housing, but it appears the architects were being unduly timid in their approach and could design a more beautiful building. The architects are missing an opportunity to create something that fits into an architecturally diverse Pru Center.?

So she criticizes the proposal as being out of character for the neighborhood, and at the same time criticizes the proposal for not be enough out of character of the neighborhood. Now that's NIMBYism!

Also, it looks like from the render that the new Exeter building is really really close to an existing tower. I can't imagine those residents will be too happy.

atlrvr

09-18-2007, 01:26 PM

This is very very close to the Exter(?) Tower that Avalon also owns/operates.....the thing is, they are all rental towers, so it's not going to monetarily affect anyone by blocking their view of Beacon Hill/maybe Public Garden....the only revenue it could affect is Avalon's own income if they have to discount rents on the north side of the existing tower to compensate for having a large building obscuring the view from those units.

Based on this difficult to see rendering, it looks great to me.....it mimics the design elements of most new Boston residential towers, but that's not a bad thing, espeically as someone mentioned, the complex needs some modern infusion.

I don't see how height can be an issue on the residential tower. I predict that it will be harder to get the 19 story office tower approved, but the Marty, please read between the lines, they have a tenant lined up that needs that much space.

vanshnookenraggen

09-18-2007, 02:08 PM

I thought the condo market was cooling? Why propose two new towers?

atlrvr

09-18-2007, 02:36 PM

^ Ummm....because these are an apartment and office tower, which have little to do with the condo market.

JimboJones

09-18-2007, 04:16 PM

Regarding your question about the condo market.

In the city, there is still a very strong market. In fact, there will be more $2 million+ sales in Boston, this year, than ever before (actual closings, not under agreements). There will be more $1 million+ sales in Boston, this year, than ever before.

The middle market (say, $500,000) is down in sales volume, maybe 20%, but sales prices are not.

The situation in the outer-neighborhoods such as Dorchester or East Boston may be different, although even there things seem to be going strong - I did an analysis of sales in East Boston last week, and it showed 103 units sold this year to date, compared to 134 for the entire year, last year.

I like how they are planning a mixed-use building - office, rental and condo. Spread the risk.

type001

09-19-2007, 10:57 AM

They should have proposed more 60-70 story buildings here to keep the idea of the high spine alive.

Padre Mike

09-19-2007, 04:19 PM

I love the proposal, and yes, I think a very tall tower (30-40 stories) would be great there. It would balance off the rest of the Pru center and its relation to Copley Place. The multiple facade layout breaks up the mass of the building, but I would be just as happy with something consistently clad, sleek, and edgy. And "hogwash" to the idea that it's too close to the BPL or "intrudes" on the Back Bay. The Pru site was a tangle of derelict train yards originally, and was never considered part of the Back Bay proper until the Pru, etc. was built. And so what if the new building is next to the Johnson BPL building. It's a brutalist bunker designed to insulate the McKim building of the BPL from everything else around it. It will continue to be an insulator no matter how close, how tall, how modern the Exeter St. building becomes. After all, the apartment building on the corner of Huntington, next to the McKim building and across from the Westin hasn't detracted from the BPL, in my opinion.

kz1000ps

09-19-2007, 08:29 PM

The plaza as it currently exists:

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/6743/img0182lc8.jpg

http://img488.imageshack.us/img488/375/img0179zf5.jpg

(there's those movie production trailers)

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/7808/img0180hb6.jpg

atlrvr

09-24-2007, 03:53 PM

I think I figured out what Marty is so afraid of these soaring towers....she lives on Comm Ave between Fairfield and Gloucester......that would be two new towers just two streets over from her....that means some additional shadows may come within 200 feet of her.

kz1000ps

10-03-2007, 08:47 AM

TONIGHT:

BRA meeting regarding the Project Notification Form/Notice of Project Change filed by Boston Properties for its Exeter Residences and 888 Boylston Street proposals.

Boston Public Library, Copley Square. 6-8:30 pm.

****

I'll probably attend. For anyone else who goes and feels like searching me out (I most likely won't have access to a computer between now and then), I'll be wearing a grey t-shirt that says "Vermont Baseball" (go UVM!), jeans, boots and a blue windbreaker.

tommym96

10-03-2007, 01:31 PM

Yeah, go UVM!! I love Burlington. I wish I could attend tonight....f*cking night classes....

daimio1

10-03-2007, 09:08 PM

so i attended the BRA meeting tonight and just wanted to note a few things i noticed (not really related to the exeter/boylston topic, but about the meeting itself).

first off, an introduction. this is my first post, but i have been reading this forum for probably 6 or so years (has it been around that long?... cant keep this and skyscrapercity, skyscraperpage, cafe l'urbanite, etc... straight.) i lived in boston from 2000-04, then los angles from 2004-06, then nyc from 2006-07, and currently back in boston getting my masters is architecture and urban planning.

now on to the meeting. after living in the above cities, i must say that boston is very lucky (or not?) to have a development process that involves the community as much as it does. What i witnessed tonight is virtually non existent in los angeles and new york. and to have the architects present was awesome as well. frickin manfredi was there addressing these people and answering their questions. we are talking a name partner and a huge design firm.

now onto the Q and A... what a mess. what is the issue with height? how do you argue over the difference between 180 feet and 300 feet when the bldg in question is surrounding by blgds twice its size? it seems everyone has an agenda, and reason goes out the window. This open and input based design process should be embraced not abused.

some good questions were brought up (emergency/evac/police/fire, etc...) but were somewhat brushed over, not by the designers/builders/BRA, but by the community attending the meeting. what surprised me the most was the round of applause that is received whenever someone mentions a reduction in height. some one pretty much stated that the bldgs should be completely redesigned from the ground up, because this is an opportunity for something grand, and the current design is not to her aesthetic pleasing of her idea of what is grand. she in fact used the word ugly. when is ONE person's SUBJECTIVE OPINION the basis for redesign?

there also seemed to be a big issue that the height to be cut down, but no stated reason for it. Apparently 115 ft (or 175, not sure of the exact number) is some sort of magical number that makes a design acceptable. honestly it seemed like people were screaming about height just to hear their voice.

also many residents wanted to know where their benefits were for the project? is it not enough that these projects are encouraging economic development, creating jobs, creating house, filling in dead holes in the street wall (honestly what is better for your neighborhood, a vacant lot next to a loading dock or a vibrant apartment tower?). redeveloping these lots should be benefit enough, correct? what else are people looking for? no one in the community seemed to offer up what they think should be there to benefit the community, but instead jumped on the developers for not offering whatever these imaginary benefits are. is it not enough to finance a 300 mill bldg replacing a vacant lot, developers have to read minds now?

honestly (and ironically?), it seems that these subjective and opinion based issues seem to hijack the meeting and take away from the true issues that the meeting is intended to bring up and resolve. i picked up an undercurrent of residents somehow being offend by the idea of a new development coming in. its like the developers and their bldgs have a vendetta against the residents of the back bay.

Thanks for reading? sorry for the rant, i had to down a few beers after the meeting

nm88

10-03-2007, 09:43 PM

"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."
-- Winston Churchill.

We live in the era of the amateur. Every knucklehead with an opinion thinks he knows better.

Forgive my rant.

awood91

10-03-2007, 10:10 PM

first, welcome to the board daimio1! i enjoyed reading your post and have several comments. for example, WHY DO PEOPLE THINK THAT PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT IS SUPPOSE TO MAKE THEIR LIVES SOOOO MUCH BETTER???? do the same rules in the suburbs apply to the city? who goes by a huge effing house under construction in Weston and says to them selves, "How will this new huge ass house make my life better?" its ridiculous! second, people must not have any respect for mr. manfredi or maybe they don't really know who he is, but for people to only talk about their individual problems is totally inappropriate. last question, does anyone know just how much an architect takes these stupid comments to heart? will the designs actually be changed? are they legally bound to apply the suggestions of the retards(if you can even call them that) or do they just do it to make the people who attend the meetings feel important/influential?

vanshnookenraggen

10-04-2007, 12:06 AM

daimio1, I am going to have to talk with you some other time about urban planning schools....

Also, having lived in other cities, do you feel the sense of elitism that surrounds Boston? From your post it seems that these people think they all deserve something. I never noticed it living there but now that I am in New York (where there is a community process, btw) it is glaring. Although it is apples and oranges, it doesn't mean it isn't there.

daimio1

10-04-2007, 07:12 AM

i wouldn't go as far as calling it elitism. maybe provincialism? but every city has an certain stench in the air if you know what i mean.

i am aware that these types of meeting exist in nyc and los angeles, but my point was that they are nothing to this extreme. a next door neighbor is not telling richard meier how to design a bldg. it was almost disrespectful how manfredi was being treated. Resident A was telling him his bldg was ugly and should be completely redesigned to something grander. i am sure he would love to bldg a granite skyscraper, but the economics aren't there, and until resident A has 500 mill to throw around to develop one of these projects, her design input is null and void.

as far as the people at the meeting feeling like they deserve something, it was very obvious from the meeting that they do feel like they deserve something. since when is it a private developer's responsibility to give to the community when they are bldg a private bldg on private land? as is, they already laid out 5 mill. in community incentives (redesigned plaza and entrance to the pru, funding to upkeep a park, 20% affordable housing).. WHAT ELSE DO THEY WANT? no one in the community had a clear plan as to what these community benefits should be, all they know is what is on the table was not enough. i would of loved to see the developers say they were opening and funding the biggest homeless shelter in boston in one of these bldgs, and seen the look of the community then. hows that for community benefits.

kz1000ps

10-04-2007, 07:37 PM

OK, I went to the meeting last night too. I don't have much to add to what daimio1 said (and welcome aboard daimio!), so I'll just list the stats I gathered on the Exeter tower:

--30 stories, 340 feet, 9300 s.f. footprint.

--approx. 200 units, 140 parking spaces.

--approx. 2000 s.f. of retail on two levels (street and deck).

--there will be exterior stairs on axis with Blagden St. connecting Exeter St. to the plaza that will be open 24/7 (Mr. Manfredi spoke for some time about the permeability of the Pru).

--20% affordable housing spread amongst the new and three existing Avalon towers.

--the north and east facades will be primarily glass, while the south and west facades will be primarily precast brick.

--there will be 60 feet between the new building and the Gloucester Apartments, and likewise between it and the Lenox Hotel. Also, the west facade is on axis with the east facade of the Gloucester as to preserve views as much as possible (to state the obvious: it's a tight site).

Chris

10-06-2007, 12:34 AM

two choice quotes from the latest Courant article:

"In response to the latest design [of the office building], State Rep. Marty Walz, who is a member of PruPAC, said, 'I don't think we should be left with a choice between a grand entrance for extra height. We should insist on 155 feet, with a beautiful entrance," she said to applause.

and

"In light of the excess height, several attendees asked if the developers intended to go to extra lengths to compensate the neighborhood for the impacts the buildings would have."

----

To anyone who went to the meeting, did any person speak in support of the proposals, particularly the heights?

palindrome

10-06-2007, 09:04 AM

These mindless nimbys make my blood boil. :evil: :evil:

kz1000ps

10-06-2007, 12:36 PM

some one pretty much stated that the bldgs should be completely redesigned from the ground up, because this is an opportunity for something grand, and the current design is not to her aesthetic pleasing of her idea of what is grand. she in fact used the word ugly. when is ONE person's SUBJECTIVE OPINION the basis for redesign?

there also seemed to be a big issue that the height to be cut down, but no stated reason for it. Apparently 115 ft (or 175, not sure of the exact number) is some sort of magical number that makes a design acceptable.

That person who spoke about the Exeter tower being ugly was none other than Back Bay and Beacon Hill state representative Marty Walz. Her telling David Manfredi (great to see him show up and submit to the torture) point blank that the building was ugly was something else. My eyes rolled all the way around the globe after that little nugget of wisdom came out.. lol.

I hung around after the meeting so I could talk to Marty, to whom I said I appreciated her comments and agreed that the buildings are "ugly" (gotta do some schmoozing!) but then cut to the chase -- BEIGE PRECAST. Her eyes immediately lit up in agreement, as if she had previously come to the same conclusion about that shit. But as soon as I got a few words out she started talking about how she wanted "pretty buildings" (she used the word pretty two or three times) and how everything is ugly and depressing.. I quickly realized the conversation wasn't going anywhere I wanted it to go, so I said thanks for your time blah blah blah and got the hell outta there :roll:

On to the height issue, the number that people kept saying was 155 ft because that was the height that 888 and the Mandarin were zoned for back when the Pru was doing its master plan in the late '80s. If you recall, 888 was originally proposed at 11 stories because that was as many floors as could be fitted within the set height, a number the community agreed upon after dozens of meetings (PruPAC was formed at that time). That's why people kept questioning the 19-story 888 Boylston even though it's a good 80 feet shorter than the Exeter tower.

The 1989 Master Plan. Note that the Mandarin has been realized almost exactly as planned 18 years ago.

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/961/img2413li8.jpg

kz1000ps

10-06-2007, 12:48 PM

To anyone who went to the meeting, did any person speak in support of the proposals, particularly the heights?

There was one young man bursting over with energy who said he liked height and the proposals as is, but other than that only a couple (at most) said they liked the buildings, and the only other person to speak remotely in favor for tall buildings was the BRA representative, who spoke plainly and clearly that height is a subjective issue -- while plenty seem to hate towers, there are plenty others who love 'em.

I was praying as he spoke that this dose of common sense might cure some of the close-mindedness in the room, but you know... it probably didn't change a damn thing.

vanshnookenraggen

10-06-2007, 12:53 PM

There was one young man bursting over with energy who said he liked height and the proposals as is

TheBostonBoy?

palindrome

10-07-2007, 09:23 AM

There was one young man bursting over with energy who said he liked height and the proposals as is

TheBostonBoy?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

That was the funniest thing i have read all day. Where has he been lately?

kennedy

10-07-2007, 11:39 PM

statler

10-09-2007, 02:52 PM

Residents Have Big Problems With Plans for Two Buildings
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter

http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/newspics/AvalonExeter.jpg
Image courtesy Elkus Manfredi Architects
This artist?s rendering depicts Avalon Exeter, a 30-story residential tower proposed for Exeter Street in Boston?s Back Bay.

It?s not a good fit.

At a packed public hearing at the Boston Public Library last week, many residents of the city?s Back Bay area said the 19-story glass office tower proposed for Boylston Street is too tall. They argued that 180 parking spaces are not enough for the 1,600 employees expected to fill the skyscraper. Meanwhile, others pleaded for more time to study the consequences of another tall building that would overlook the historic neighborhood.

At stake is a $192 million plan by Boston Properties and Avalon Bay Communities that call for a 438,993-square-foot building at 888 Boylston St., between the Mandarin Oriental Boston Hotel and the John B. Hynes Veterans Memorial Convention. The second project, Avalon Exeter, would be a 30-story residential high-rise on Exeter Street, across from the library.

The Boylston Street office building originally was approved by the Boston Redevelopment Authority as a 287,493-square-foot, 11-story tower at the site. But the developer is seeking to add 8 stories to the design and needs city approval.

State Rep. Byron Rushing, a Boston Democrat whose district includes the Prudential Center, said the buildings are out of scale. He urged the BRA to limit 888 Boylston St. to 155 feet, the height the BRA approved in 2002. In addition, he said the developer should take a second look at the elevation of Avalon Exeter and its design.

?I?m ready to negotiate the height of both buildings with the developers,? Rushing said following a meeting that was attended by more than 100 neighbors. ?On the residential tower, it?s not attractive. I think the architect is trying to do too many things. He seems influenced by the surrounding buildings, but is also trying to do something too dramatic.?

Dozens of questions centered on parking for the office tower. Michael A. Cantalupa of Boston Properties said he is convinced that 180 new parking spaces to be added to the Prudential?s 3,920-car underground garage will be sufficient for employees.

Cantalupa noted that the Boston Transportation Department estimated that of the 1,600 employees who are expected to work in the building, 25 percent will walk, 38 percent will take the MBTA and 37 percent will drive.

But that caused one resident to ask: ?That?s about 600 spaces and you are only proposing 180. Where do the rest of the cars fit? You?re talking about a substantial number of cars for people who work in this building.?

Another resident noted that in the 1980s, residents agreed to the 155-foot height limit at the Prudential with the promise of community benefits from the developer. ?We fought to limit height to 11 stories. Now you?re asking to increase the height by 40 percent. How does the community benefit??

In response, Cantalupa said the city will receive $4.3 million in the form of housing, jobs and contributions to improvements along Boylston Street, as well as a plaza in front of 888 Boylston.

?Political? Decision

Without the added height, Cantalupa said, the developers cannot afford to design and build the plaza. But then another resident suggested that at $60 per square foot or more, the public space would be paid for in just a few months.

?I can?t comment on when it would be paid for, but we can deliver a better product by going a little higher and, with the added square footage, we can build a first-class park and plaza on Boylston Street,? Cantalupa responded. ?We see this as the last major opportunity to improve the Prudential Center. This plan was developed by the Prudential Project Advisory Committee [PruPAC] in the late 1980s. ?we?re trying to make Boylston the best street that it can be.?

PruPAC is a 41-member group that was established by former Mayor Raymond Flynn in the 1980s to advise City Hall on development projects at Boston?s Prudential Center.

Elliott Laffer, PruPAC?s vice chairman, said he hopes the BRA and the developers will allow enough time to study the comment letters. He expects the panel will offer an opinion about the proposal.

?We have a couple of meetings coming up and we intend to share what?ve seen and heard and then go back to our 22 neighborhood entities and write an opinion about whether the height works or doesn?t,? he said. ?I don?t know that anyone has made those determinations yet.?

Jacquelin Yessian, president of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay, declined to comment, saying she must first talk to her members before a consensus is reached.

Several residents, including state Rep. Martha M. Walz, raised questions about the public process. She urged the BRA to consider further environmental review. In response to a question about how the decision will be made at City Hall, Rodney Sinclair, the BRA?s project manager, said part of the answer is ?political.?

?If 5,000 folks complain about height, even if technically height is not an issue, the mayor could say ?the voters don?t want height,? and there won?t be height,? he said. ?I?ll just tell you that the mayor, your state representatives and city councilor push decisions ? if it comes down to Reps. Walz or Rushing saying ?my constituents don?t want it,? my director will listen carefully to them.

?We?d like to not to get to that point,? Sinclair added. ?We prefer to have a conversation and mitigate these issues.?

Michael Roberts, vice president of development at Avalon, said his company is very excited about the opportunity to develop new housing downtown. ?There is always a need for more housing in Boston and we think the Pru is a fabulous location,? he said.

David Manfredi, architect for Avalon Exeter, said the project represents an opportunity to transform Exeter Street. The design offers a chance to turn a service alley into 2,000 square feet of first-floor retail and improve pedestrian activity.

?Our goal is to make Exeter more walkable and a more pedestrian-friendly street,? he said.

vanshnookenraggen

10-09-2007, 03:21 PM

These people are so short sighted I'm surprised they don't walk into things walking down the street.

awood91

10-09-2007, 03:34 PM

oh my god, again with the fucking community benefits!! and the guy who said that the design was too 'dramatic'? just read that again and then tell me who thought it would be a good idea to let a eloquent speaker comment during the meeting?? he should probably just move on and get a job at 'architectural record' and write an article on how the hancock is NOT a masterpiece because its too dramatic. NEWS FLASH: dramatic architecture is generally good architecture!!! christ...

Ron Newman

10-09-2007, 03:58 PM

But if there was already an agreement and approval for a building of a certain height, it seems like bad faith on the developer's part to renege on it and ask to build higher.

lexicon506

10-09-2007, 04:17 PM

did those NIMBYs arguing that it doesn't fit in even look at the rendering? note the half dozen buildings surrounding it that are similar in height and the two in the background that are much taller! if anything, this tower could go higher!

Ron Newman

10-09-2007, 04:23 PM

but how is that a good argument for abrogating a carefully-negotiated agreement?

lexicon506

10-09-2007, 04:26 PM

^times change....It was agreed at the ratification of the Bill of Rights that only white men should get the vote. Does that mean that it should still be that way today??

palindrome

10-09-2007, 04:53 PM

I really just don't understand why some people live in a city......

Ron Newman

10-09-2007, 05:16 PM

What has changed that justifies breaking the agreement?

I'm not saying the agreement is good or bad, but it exists, and whoever wants to modify it should have a good argument.

tocoto

10-09-2007, 07:05 PM

What has changed that justifies breaking the agreement?

I'm not saying the agreement is good or bad, but it exists, and whoever wants to modify it should have a good argument.

I think the developers give good arguments:

enough money for a beneficial project to be economically feasible
money for public improvements
new housing
community benefits, retail instead of a windswept plaza
needed business space and jobs

to name a few.

When the agreement was made all accepted that there would be future building. Why is a slightly taller building such a big deal? Is it really going to result in a lot more wind, shadow, traffic, smog? I think the downside is minimal on these questions, far outweighed by the positives.

The unstated element to the argument is how does the development affect Back Bay property values. My view is probably very little, but if I owned a $2 million home there I would be concerned, probably irrationally.

atlrvr

10-09-2007, 07:14 PM

I own a Back Bay property that is worth close to $1M, and I'm delighted. I can't see how increasing employment by 1,600 people within a couple blocks of my condo, and possibly a Bloomingdale's (as has been rumored) could possibly hurt my property's value.

This is NOT pressed up againt the street like the M.O., and the "shadow" effects beyond the actual Pru is negligble. I personally enjoy looking at the Pru from my back Patio, though this building might not even be tall enough to enter my field of view.

Anyone in the Back Bay who is against this project, is against it to maintain the party line.

New white-collar jobs and luxury retail can only help property values by increasing demand.

As far as Avalon Exeter, my impression is that it would be rental, so I can't imagine how thay would negatively affect me, especially considering it would probably rent higher per square foot than I could rent my condo for. If anything, it would help the value in my opinion.

I'm so sick of this city's reactionary tone to all new projects. It's a great city, but allowing some new high-rises adjacent to existinging highER rises does nothing to destroy the fabric of the city, especially considering it is being built where a major train yard was less than a century ago.

JimboJones

10-09-2007, 07:23 PM

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

During the PruPAC meeting last week, local residents said, "You promised us in the mid-80's that you'd keep any new buildings under 155 feet tall."

The city's response, according to the Boston Courant?

Rodney Sinclair, BRA project manager for the Pru expansion said that the proposed height of the buildings would be evaluated based on contemporary realities.

"I don't know what happened in 1986," he said. "I was 7 then."

That's awesome.

Ron Newman

10-09-2007, 08:11 PM

tocoto: Wouldn't the smaller building (within the original agreement) provide all those same benefits?

KentXie

10-09-2007, 08:52 PM

Ugh, I don't feel like reading the newspaper anymore. These NIMBY's just pissed the crap out of me and put me in a bad mood.

daimio1

10-09-2007, 10:28 PM

another thing i had a problem with at the meeting.... why the issue over parking? correct me if i am wrong, but aren?t most streets in the back bay (north of boylston) residential or metered parking, thus preventing 9-5er's from parking there? And if these workers do decide to drive in and there is no parking avail in bldg, will they not park at a private garage? And why does it matter to these people? the only reason it would is if they are worried about competition for prime parking, which implies that they have a car, which would be hypocritical for someone in the back bay who drives to argue over parking. how will the expected influx (if the amount of drivers is even near the estimated percentage) affect the residents then?

someone at the meeting also brought up the issue of crowding of the greenline. why is a private development firm expected to solve the issues of the mbta?

i don't know what is more ridiculous; the nibmys, or the fact that the city of boston lets them have this much say.

JimboJones

10-10-2007, 01:52 AM

Er, they might not be opposed at all if the owners stayed within the guidelines they agreed to, earlier ...

If the office tower was 155 feet tall, maybe they would support it, or at least have little to argue about ...

JimboJones

11-20-2007, 03:05 PM

This article was in this week's Banker & Tradesman.

One of the residents says she's been there for 28 years, another for 40 years.

Good, they'll be sent off to retirement homes, soon. So don't let them decide what's right for the rest of us!

Proposed Pru Center Project Faces Towering Opposition

Opposition to a pair of proposed towers at Boston?s Prudential Center is mounting.

Tenants in the three luxury apartment buildings at the Pru voted overwhelmingly last Thursday to fight plans for a 19-story glass office tower on Boylston Street and a 30-story residential high-rise on Exeter Street.

?The revolution has begun,? said Celia Sniffin, who has lived at the Pru for nearly 40 years. ?There will be a lot more to come and this is just the opening skirmish in a long war. We intend to organize and get the facts out about this proposal.?

Boston Properties and Avalon Bay Communities have filed a controversial proposal with the Boston Redevelopment Authority that calls for a 438,993-square-foot building at 888 Boylston St., between the Mandarin Oriental Boston Hotel and the John B. Hynes Veterans Memorial Convention. The second project, Avalon Exeter, would be a residential tower on Exeter Street, across from the Boston Public Library.

Nancy Sonnabend organized a tenant petition drive to prevent construction of the two buildings. In a packed meeting of the Prudential Center Residents Association (PCRA) late last week, the longtime resident of the Pru?s Fairfield complex presented 157 signatures in opposition to the development. The letter demands that plans for the Exeter building be withdrawn and that the Boylston Street tower be limited to 11 stories.

?No. No. No. These buildings are too big for the small site they?re on,? said Sonnabend. ?They will cast big shadows on Boylston Street, exacerbate an already traffic-choked section of the city and destroy the light and the views.?

Sonnabend is one of 1,100 residents in three high-rise buildings adjacent to the Prudential Center. The towers, named Gloucester, Boylston and Fairfield, were purchased in 1998 by AvalonBay, a publicly traded real estate investment trust, for $129 million. The buildings at 770, 780 and 790 Boylston St. contain 781 units.

Anthony Selvaggi, PCRA president, did not return a call seeking comment.

Warren Markarian, a member of the association, declined to say how he voted, but acknowledged that there is growing unease about the development.

?The office tower was approved years ago at 11 stories, but now Boston Properties wants 19 stories,? he said. ?The apartment building is a harder sell because people live next door. At first, people questioned whether the Exeter building should be 30 stories; now some tenants don?t want anything built there at all.?

The vote is pivotal for Markarian, the tenants? representative on the Prudential Project Advisory Committee (PruPAC). Former Mayor Raymond Flynn established the 41-member group in the 1980s to advise City Hall on development projects at the Prudential Center. Mayor Thomas M. Menino has told Banker & Tradesman that he intends to take seriously the panel?s recommendation before the project moves forward.

Later this month, PruPAC subcommittees are expected to make recommendations to the full panel on whether to support the project.

?I don?t know how I will vote at PruPAC,? Markarian said. ?It?s clear that there was overwhelming opposition to both buildings among the tenants who attended the meeting. But PruPAC is still gathering information about the project and I haven?t decided which way to vote.?

But Sonnabend insisted that Markarian must reject the project when it comes to a vote at PruPAC.

?He represents the Prudential tenants and he must vote according to our wishes,? she said. ?The mandate is in.?

?Already Impassible?

State Rep. Martha M. Walz, a Back Bay Democrat, said she has heard from many Pru Center residents who have expressed strong opposition to the proposed office tower at 888 Boylston St.

The Boylston Street office building originally was approved by the BRA as a 287,493-square-foot, 11-story tower at the site. But Boston Properties has said that it needs more height to make the project economically viable. The developer is seeking to add 8 stories to the design and needs city approval.

Walz has asked Boston Properties to justify the reasons for the increase in height. Without the added density, the company has said, the developers cannot afford to design and build a plaza.

?The developers said they need additional height to do Class A office space,? she said. ?But Ron Druker plans to build a 120-foot-tall Class A office building on the very same side of the very same street.?

In September, Banker & Tradesman was the first to report that The Druker Co., which owns the former Shreve, Crump & Low building across from the Boston Public Garden, planned to replace the 5-story mid-rise with a new building. Earlier this month, Druker told the BRA that he intends to build a 120-foot building totaling 221,000 square feet at 330-360 Boylston St.

?Druker?s proposal completely undercuts Boston Properties? argument,? Walz said. ?How can Boston Properties say they can?t build at 155 feet when, a few steps away, Druker says he can do high-end office space at 120 feet??

At a packed public hearing at the Boston Public Library last month, many residents of the city?s Back Bay neighborhood said the 19-story glass office tower proposed for Boylston Street is too tall. In addition, they argued that 180 parking spaces are not enough for the 1,600 employees expected to fill the skyscraper. Meanwhile, others pleaded for more time to study the consequences of another tall building that would overlook the historic neighborhood.

So far, none of the developers are talking. Michael A. Cantalupa of Boston Properties declined to comment. Michael Roberts, vice president of development at Avalon, declined to comment. Druker did not return a reporter?s call.

Sonnabend said the fight has just begun.

?Boylston and Exeter Streets are already impassible,? she said. ?The area is looking more and more like [New York?s] midtown Manhattan.?

Source: Proposed Pru Center Project Faces Towering Opposition (http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/issues/5_310/commercial/197949-1.html) - By Thomas Grillo, Banker & Tradesman (subscription required)

cden4

11-20-2007, 03:15 PM

That's a pretty typical response. Everyone's looking out for themselves... mostly.

The developer want more floors so he can make more money, but says he needs them to make the project "economically viable".

The residents don't want to have their views blocked, and also don't want more traffic, but of course they also complain that the building doesn't have enough parking (wait, won't that mean MORE traffic?!).

11-20-2007, 03:57 PM

Only in Boston.......

A 19 story building is considered to tall even when located directly in front of a 52 story building.

gravedigger4444

11-20-2007, 05:27 PM

Are there those types of responses in places like NYC, Chicago, SF, Montreal, Toronto, etc.?

lucky

11-20-2007, 05:41 PM

If Ms Sonnabend had had her way, the tower that she calls home would never have been built.

JimboJones

11-20-2007, 06:05 PM

Yes, lucky.

Put another way, it's a case of, "I got mine, screw you!"

Cojapo

11-20-2007, 07:10 PM

?Boylston and Exeter Streets are already impassible,? she said. ?The area is looking more and more like [New York?s] midtown Manhattan.?

What!? Seriously? Last time I checked, nothing in Boston looks anything like NY. Street blocks of 500 foot plus condo towers for as far as the eye can see and there are, 3 towers, all well under 400 feet and it's "starting to look more and more like Mid-Town Manhattan!? I'd laugh if it wasn't so sad.

justin

11-20-2007, 08:30 PM

The Boylston St. office building should be exactly the height of Mandarin, and pick up its cornice lines. They'll make a much better ensemble that way.

justin

awood91

11-20-2007, 08:43 PM

hey jimbojones, would you mind posting the article from Banker & Tradesman on the front page about luxury condo sales?

Ron Newman

11-20-2007, 09:03 PM

I'll make my usual contrarian post: If the neighborhood and the developer already agreed on a previous design, why should the developer not build what was previously agreed?

JimboJones

11-20-2007, 09:12 PM

I'll leave it to our skilled moderator to figure out if this should be posted elsewhere ...

Hub?s Condo Market Enjoys Life of Luxury

Sales of ultra-luxury condominiums in downtown Boston are soaring.

A total of 81 condos with price tags of $2 million or more were sold through October, 37 percent higher than the same period in 2006. Sales are even more brisk than the same months in 2005, when the Bay State housing market hit its peak, according to statistics from The Warren Group, parent company of Banker & Tradesman.

Pumping up sales are some of the city?s newest luxury properties, including the Residences at InterContinental at 500 Atlantic Ave. Fifteen of the 81 $2 million-plus units that have been sold, nearly 19 percent, are part of that 130-unit waterfront development.

Local brokers say demand from suburban empty nesters and foreign investors is keeping sales strong.

?Boston is a city that still has a great deal of international appeal. With the falling dollar, one of the benefits of it can be the luxury residential market,? said Mark Lippolt, executive vice president of Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage New England.

Notable sales include a 14-room condo at 25 Commonwealth Ave. in the Back Bay area that fetched more than $8.22 million in March, and a four-bedroom unit at 171 Commonwealth Ave. that traded for $7.12 million in June.

While sales jumped, properties in that price range took about a month longer to sell.

Units sold during the first 10 months of 2007 took an average of 189 days to sell ? a little over six months ? compared to a 153-day average a year earlier, according to MLS Property Information Network.

Still, Realtors say buyers have found Boston?s full-service buildings that feature doormen, parking and other sought-after amenities enticing.

?This is what people really want,? said Beth Dickerson, who has over 18 years of experience selling real estate in Boston?s tony neighborhoods.

Because of the competition from newer upscale condos that boast such amenities, some sellers of older units are slashing prices by as much as 10 percent to move their properties.

A three-bedroom, three-bath condo at 65 Commonwealth Ave. that was originally listed for $2.8 million at the beginning of 2006 and re-listed at $2.49 million in July eventually sold for $2.14 million.

Dickerson, an agent with Gibson Sotheby?s International Realty, said the condo lacked central air conditioning and parking, a tough sell when newly built luxury units featuring both are available.

?It?s a very tough time for people who are trying to compete with these new projects,? said Dickerson.

Another unit at 67 Mount Vernon St. on Beacon Hill sold for $2.02 million ? 18 percent lower than the

$2.47 million asking price ? after seven months on the market.

But Dickerson said drastic price cuts and special incentives haven?t been widespread.

International Demand

Jeffrey Heighton, who manages the Back Bay and Beacon Hill offices of Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage, said Boston?s high-end market has been helped by a pickup in sales activity in affluent communities like Brookline, Newton, Wellesley and Weston.

Home sales are trending higher in those four communities compared to a year ago, giving an extra push for buyers in those towns considering a downtown move.

And even though prices have declined in many markets, Heighton said many people searching for multimillion-dollar condos have a lot of built-up home equity. ?They can afford to take 5 [percent] to 10 percent less [on their home] if they feel they can get a good opportunity downtown,? he said.

Another booster for 2007 sales was the big bonuses financial services and Wall Street firms doled out last year. ?We saw an immediate impact in Boston,? from those bonuses, said Heighton.

Heighton said brokers are closely watching foreign investment in the city. Economies in some western European countries are booming and the weakening U.S. dollar is encouraging foreign investors. ?We?re seeing a lot of South American and Irish money,? said Heighton.

Some foreign purchasers are also drawn to full-service luxury properties, which aren?t common in Europe. ?Clearly, there?s been a demand from the international buyers for full-service living,? said Heighton.

It?s not just foreign investors and empty nesters who are seeking Boston condos. Dickerson said she has sold to families who have combined multiple condos for more living space.

?People that were typically looking at only single-family homes to raise their children are now looking at combination units,? she said.

Dickerson and other industry watchers anticipate sales of super-luxury condos will be even higher next year when units under agreement at the Mandarin Oriental property and other projects actually close. The Mandarin Oriental, a 13-story mixed-used building featuring a 5-star hotel and 50 condos with prices starting at $3 million, is set to open next year. Realtors say units at that property have pre-sold by word of mouth.

Other lavish properties in the works are The Clarendon, a mix of 350 apartments and condos at the corner of Clarendon and Stuart streets, and 45 Province, a 32-story tower with 138 condos in Downtown Crossing that will open in 2009.

?I think you?ll continue see the number of luxury sales climb year over year, and demand will drive how many more of these projects will continue to be built,? Heighton said.

awood91

11-20-2007, 10:05 PM

thanks, jimbojones

tommym96

11-21-2007, 11:13 AM

?They will cast big shadows on Boylston Street, exacerbate an already traffic-choked section of the city and destroy the light and the views.?
that's what she cares about

JimboJones

11-21-2007, 01:20 PM

I feel as though the office building should remain the height that was agreed to, just five years ago. It seems realistic, to me.

The residential tower is another story. I am all for following the rules, but there's no reason that lot can't be built on, as high as possible. That street gets NO traffic, currently, plus it has an effect on very few people's views. In fact, it's the perfect location.

Can they switch the two buildings?

kz1000ps

11-21-2007, 01:42 PM

"that street gets NO traffic"

? ..that stretch of Exeter gets tons of traffic. Cars go flying through the intersection with Boylston on their way to the Huntington Ave. intersection, where there's almost always a queue six vehicles deep waiting for the light.

JimboJones

11-21-2007, 05:44 PM

I stand by my opinion.

kz1000ps

11-23-2007, 09:38 AM

Get a load of these selfless people..

Trouble in paradise

By Steve Bailey
Globe Columnist / November 23, 2007

Pity the poor urban millionaires of Trinity Place.

Things have gotten so bad over at the swank Copley Square condo tower that the owner of the double penthouse unit, priced at $15 million, the highest in Boston condo history, had to take it off the market after it sat there, unwanted, for six months. Instead, reports the Boston Condo Blog, the owner is offering one of the units - 11 rooms, five full baths, two fireplaces - at the bargain price of $7 million.

Tough times at the seven-year-old Trinity Place, indeed. But it gets worse, much worse.

Now Boston Properties wants to build an ugly 30-story apartment building at the Prudential Center that will block the views and cast shadows over their ugly 18-story Trinity Place. The urban millionaires are beside themselves.

"To approve their project as is would be nothing short of criminal to those of us who live in this neighborhood," William F. Thompson, a founder of Boston Ventures, fumed in a letter to the Boston Redevelopment Authority. Wrote Davida Stocklan, whose husband, Martin, is a Smith Barney executive: "It should not be difficult to understand that residents of Trinity Place are not interested in having the basic nature of their investments destroyed by diminished light and obstructed views."

And on and on. The Trinity millionaires have launched a letter-writing campaign in hopes of blocking Boston Properties' proposed 200-unit apartment building on Exeter Street over the Prudential garage and just beside the Lenox Hotel. They worry about traffic. They worry about shadows and wind. They worry about their property values. They worry about the character of their neighborhood.

"I am very concerned with the overdevelopment of the Back Bay," wrote Khalid Nooruddin. "This building will no doubt not only be an eyesore, but will also present major traffic problems, unwanted additional shading and dangerous wind tunnels."

In addition to the apartment building, Boston Properties wants to build a glass office building at the Boylston Street entrance to Pru Center. Together with the Mandarin Oriental Hotel and Residences, now nearing completion though tens of millions over budget, the construction would finally "complete" the Pru Center, or so says Boston Properties.

The company has approval to build an 11-story office building, but now insists it needs 19 stories. It is just getting started on the process for the apartment building. The two projects are drawing heavy fire from many of the usual suspects in the Back Bay who are ever vigilant - and appropriately so - about their neighborhood.

Tom Menino never met a big building he didn't like. The mayor's reasoning is straightforward enough: Big buildings pay more taxes than small buildings. Menino has spent years systematically killing the character that makes Boston so special by planting big, ugly buildings everywhere. Now there is a "shooting" in their own neighborhood, and the good people of Trinity Place are shocked. What a shock.

The Pru is as appropriate as any place in the city for height, and there remains ample room for compromise on both buildings. Should the apartment building be 30 stories? Or would 20 stories be better, given its historic neighbors, the Lenox and the Boston Public Library? One plus: Boston Properties promises 25 percent of the units will be set aside as affordable in the building or elsewhere at the Pru. At Trinity, "affordable" means a one-bedroom condo listed at $750,000.

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2007/11/23/trouble_in_paradise/

KentXie

11-23-2007, 01:33 PM

Hmmm I wonder why every building in Boston is so ugly. Ah I know, it's because every good looking building is shot down thanks to retarded reason such as shadows. Maybe if they can shut the hell up sometimes, they would have other better developers that chose not to build in Boston thanks to outspoken NIMBYs to design new towers in Boston.

Sometimes I just want to email some of these people and tell them to go live in the suburbs. The city is definitely not for them

palindrome

11-23-2007, 07:30 PM

"dangerous wind tunnels."

:confused::mad:

so dangerous....so so dangerous.

briv

11-24-2007, 04:58 PM

Menino has spent years systematically killing the character that makes Boston so special by planting big, ugly buildings everywhere. Now there is a "shooting" in their own neighborhood, and the good people of Trinity Place are shocked.

Wha?

Can someone lend me their Steve Bailey decoder ring so I can decipher the meaning of that last sentence?

And speaking of "big, ugly buildings", the loudest opponents of these proposals happen to live in some of the absolute ugliest big, ugly buildings in Boston. The apartment towers in the Pru look plucked right out of Soviet-era Warsaw. And Trinity Place is even worse because of its location. The 20-story concrete-paneled heap disgraces the BPL, Trinity Church & Copley Sq with its tacky cheapness.

I'm all for anything that will obscure these eyesores from view. A brick wall would be an improvement.

JimboJones

11-25-2007, 10:00 PM

can someone head over to the Globe's headquarters to slap that smug smile off Steve Bailey's face?

whighlander

01-05-2008, 02:56 AM

Re: Soviet Era Warsaw buildings: ?And speaking of "big, ugly buildings", the loudest opponents of these proposals happen to live in some of the absolute ugliest big, ugly buildings in Boston. The apartment towers in the Pru look plucked right out of Soviet-era Warsaw. And Trinity Place is even worse because of its location. The 20-story concrete-paneled heap disgraces the BPL, Trinity Church & Copley Sq with its tacky cheapness.??.

No Senator -- I've recently seen the worst of the Soviet era buildings in Warsaw and the Pru Center apartments aren?t even close to the worst of the Soviet era buildings in Warsaw. In fact they more closely resemble the post Soviet-era apartments and condos that have proliferated in Warszawa, Krakow, Gdańsk, etc., and most of the new EU Poland.

However, the idea of surrounding such structures with better buildings is also well underway in Warsaw. In particular, there is the ultimate Soviet era structure, the circa 1955 PAŁAC KULTURY I NAUKI{Palace of Culture and Science} or PKiN. PKiN is a massive Pru-scale complex {1.3 m sq ft total} consisting of a H-shaped footprint low rise sitting in the midst of a full and large city block with some parking lots and gardens with fountains surmounted by a Pru-height skyscraper {230.68 meters or 756.82 feet}. PKiN is considered Poland's highest building and features 42 floors, a very large, very high clock {EU?s and possibly the world?s highest tower clock dial that was installed for the Millenium}, some huge neon signs, a lot of Soviet Realist sculpture, some similar murals and some art deco-style brasswork.

The PKiN really was ?built for the people of Poland by the People of the USSR? -- the workers were brought from the USSR and lived in a camp outside of Warsaw. Unofficially it is known as ?the Gift? and less politically correctly as Stalin?s Penis. Since the end of Communist rule of Poland ? the private sector with the encouragement of the Warsaw City and Polish government has been busy building a bunch of modern similar height towers {although unofficially they have to be slightly shorter} that are gradually making the Gift less visible. There is a joke similar to one I?ve heard about the Pru ? ?why is the Gift the ideal place to live? The answer: It has the best view in the City as it is the one place from which you can?t see the Gift.?

If you want to see some views of and from it ? try:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Palace_of_Culture_and_Science
or its official website {complete with impressive multimedia {particularly in the Polish version} that the Pru could emulate}:
www.pkin.pl/
or the view from the top:
www.satellite-sightseer.com/id/3996/Poland/masovian_voivodship/Warsaw/Palac_Kultury__Warsaw_Palace_of_Culture_and_Scienc e_

Westy

tobyjug

01-05-2008, 09:48 AM

I always liked the massing of the Stalin "wedding cake" buildings such as the MSU main tower. In the early morning mist it has a fairytale quality. I would be happy to exchange most of the pre-1980 high rises in Boston for the stylistic equivalent. If you want a better analog to the Prudential Center residential buildings, try driving past the Gorbals in Glasgow. I don't recommend stopping.

Ron Newman

01-05-2008, 09:56 AM

The Prudential Tower was the third tallest building outside New York City at the time of its construction, topped by only Moscow State University and .... the Palace of Culture and Science in Warsaw. (Source: this list (http://www.zimbio.com/Petronas+Tower))

12345

07-09-2008, 01:53 PM

But the company could soon be making its mark in Boston. An 850-unit Prudential Center tower is on the drawing board, and other Boston projects are being planned, Blair said.

http://www.boston.com/realestate/news/articles/2008/07/09/straying_from_the_blueprint/?page=2

Is this the 30 story proposal? 850 units is alot.

Boston02124

08-16-2008, 09:05 AM

http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008056.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008051.jpg [IMG]http://i301.ph http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008056.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008054.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008052.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008053.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008055.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008057.jpg

KentXie

08-16-2008, 09:23 AM

The Exeter Tower looks like a mini Filene's tower. The designs are okay but the 888 Boylston design definitely looks better if it was actually a real tower.

bbfen

08-16-2008, 10:11 AM

The ass of Exeter (last pic) is terrible. I thought they'd try to unify a little more with Lenox and the existing residences, but whatever. It's fine.

I'm really in love with the first pic though--looking down at 888 from across the street. The redesigned entrance to the Boylston Arcade, etc. Very nice.

I do pity the diners at the table right there. The wind is awful coming off the pike and up Boylston. Maybe some of that will be mitigated with the Hynes remodel and hardscape/landscape.

briv

08-16-2008, 10:55 AM

I also think it's too bad that they didn't try a bit harder to create a more unified streetscape along this stretch of Exeter. And that steps/garage entrance arrangement looks uncannily like the one along that dead stretch of Congress St. at City Hall. Not great design, IMO. But even with its obvious shortcomings, this will be a massive improvement to this very dreary existing streetscape.

I just wish the Exeter building was maybe 50% taller to break up that oppressive monotony of the BB skyline. As proposed, this building will only add to that effect. Too bad.

888 Boylston, on the other hand, is oafishly proportioned. It looks like something out of Longwood. I actually think it was better at 12 stories. Not a big fan of plazas in general either. It wouldnt bug me one bit if this proposal got torpedoed.

Dan

08-16-2008, 12:16 PM

This building doesn't add anything to the skyline, nor given its location, should it.

This is not a bad location for a plaza. Open space does have its place.

DZH22

08-16-2008, 12:59 PM

I too am not liking what 888 brings to the table. It's proportioned like a steroid using suburban office building, and brings little if nothing to the table while blocking off a sightline to the Pru. It's something I like to think of as the Philadelphia effect, where there are no direct sightlines to some of the tallest/best buildings in the city (Liberty Place 1 and 2 especially) which really curtails the ability of these buildings to "soar" and instead makes them look more stumpy than anything else.
This type of development does indeed belong more in Longwood, or Cambridge (which could use a signature tower or 2 of its own in Kendall).

joebos

08-16-2008, 02:25 PM

"oafish" is a good description for the proposed 888 building. My first thought was that it was sad losing the plaza. But I walk through it every day when I'm finished at the gym and it's not used very often. I wonder if the outside dining area for the food court is going away with this proposal.

eaalkaline

08-16-2008, 08:23 PM

riffgo

08-17-2008, 02:09 AM

Yeah, there's no way this building has 850 units. Either multiple towers are going to be proposed or that's a typo.

There's also no way it is going to have thirty stories either. This proposal really should have seven to ten more stories. Also, is it shown sitting upon the back end of Lord & Taylor?

The building at 888 Boylston isn't merely oafish; it looks bloated.

statler

08-18-2008, 09:44 AM

Banker & Tradesman - August 18, 2008
Developer Blinks: Whacks Two Stories Off Controversial Prudential Tower Plan
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter

The developer of a controversial tower at the Prudential Center has agreed to lower the height by two stories, according to a source familiar with the project.

Boston Properties is expected to file an amended plan for 888 Boylston St. today with the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) for a 17-story office building. The city asked the developer to revise the $115 million high-rise following com-plaints about height from the Back Bay neighborhood and the Prudential Project Advisory Committee (PruPAC). The 25-member panel was founded to advise City Hall on development at the Pru.

The lowered height is strong evidence the developer has taken the criticism seriously, according to Betsy Johnson, Pru-PAC?s chairwoman.

?This will be looked at as an act of good faith on the part of the development team,? she said.

The project, to be built between the Mandarin Oriental Hotel and the John B. Hynes Veterans Memorial Convention Cen-ter, has been in the works for years. In 2002, the BRA approved the office building at 11 stories. But the 287,000-square-foot high-rise never broke ground. Last year, Boston Properties sought approval for a 19-story tower.

That proposal drew opposition from the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay (NABB), which argued that the building would be out of character with the historic district. NABB has organized its opposition among members of PruPAC.

Elliott Laffer, PruPAC?s vice chairman and NABB?s representative on the committee, said he has not seen the revised proposal.

?But it sure doesn?t sound like much of a reduction,? he said. ?Without seeing the impacts of shadows and wind, it?s diffi-cult to comment.?

Privately, some members of PruPAC are weary of NABB?s opposition.

?People told them they were getting to the absurd as they came back with more and more requests,? said the source, who asked not to be identified. ?It came across as they just want to kill this. Even without the lowered height, PruPAC was inclined to support it.?

Laffer disputed the claim.

?PruPAC has never taken a vote, but I disagree that the panel supports the project,? he said.

Also included in the BRA filing is an enhanced plaza in front of 888 Boylston, according to Michael A. Cantalupa, senior vice president of Boston Properties. In addition, the residential tower proposed for Exeter Street with Avalon Bay Communities will be reduced by three floors to 27 stories.

?The project is improved as a result of the public review process,? he said in an e-mailed statement. ?In light of this initial review, we have further evaluated the public spaces that will be created, putting a tremendous amount of energy and re-sources into their design. The new plaza on Boylston Street will be a signature element that will fill the streetscape with life and vitality, and will be a public space the city of Boston will be proud of.?

In an interview with Banker & Tradesman, Mayor Thomas M. Menino said he has not seen the new Boston Properties proposal and is reserving judgment.

?We will take a serious look at the revised plans for 888 Boylston and see how it fits with the overall scheme of development for the Pru,? he said.

Ron Newman

08-18-2008, 10:01 AM

Ugh, I don't much like that drawing of 888 Boylston. I'd much rather have it match the height of the building to its left. Why not instead add floors above the Hynes?

briv

08-18-2008, 10:53 AM

pelhamhall

08-18-2008, 01:02 PM

I wish we had a Mayor.

"I dunno what to say. I haven't seen the plans. I don't have a position."

Bull shit, Menino. Why didn't Tom Grillo (the reporter) "report" and needle him on that crap answer?

riffgo

08-19-2008, 04:22 PM

How these meager "concessions" improve these projects or benefit anyone is beyond me. They don't really seem to address the problems of either one of these proposals. 888 Boylston is still just as clumsy as it was before and the Exeter building is actually made worse by making it more stumpy.

Briv, I couldn't agree with you more. The ONLY "benefits" to be obtained are to those members of the population who crave validation for their control issues.

atlrvr

08-19-2008, 04:58 PM

And Boston Properties that I'm sure was eyeing 17 stories the entire time....win-win, sort of.

stellarfun

08-19-2008, 09:38 PM

Pru project size cut, height fight goes on
By Scott Van Voorhis | Tuesday, August 19, 2008
http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/33480572d5_prurendering08192008.jpg
Photo by Boston Redevelopment Authority

Boston Properties has scaled back the height of its planned Prudential campus expansion in a bid to calm neighborhood concerns.

Chaired by media mogul Mortimer Zuckerman, the publiclytraded real estate company has shaved two stories off its proposed 888 Boylston St. office complex, bringing it down to 17 stories.

Boston Properties also reduced the height of its planned Exeter Residences from 30 stories to 27. That project is slated for a site near the interior of the Pru campus along Exeter Street by the Lord & Taylor loading docks.

Whether the reductions will be enough to win over skeptics in the Back Bay remains to be seen. At least one elected representative of the neighborhood suggested yesterday that further cuts are needed.

Now at 17 stories, 888 Boylston St. was originally approved by City Hall in 2002 as an 11-story office building.

?The height reductions are very modest,? said state Rep. Marty Walz (D-Back Bay), in an e-mail. ?The proposed height of 888 Boylston Street continues to violate the Prudential Center?s master plan and I see no reason to vary from the plan.?

The reductions come after push-back from some neighborhood residents and a call by Mayor Thomas M. Menino (http://www.bostonherald.com/search/?topic=Thomas+M.+Menino) for a re-drafted proposal from Boston Properties that would address these concerns.

Jessica Shumaker, a spokeswoman for the Boston Redevelopment Authority, said City Hall is taking a wait-and-see approach to the Pru owner?s revamped proposal.

?It depends on how well it is received,? she said.

However, Boston Properties, in its latest proposal, defends the added height as necessary to attract top-tier tenants.

The changes make it ?a viable office building to meet today?s office standards and tenant demands for office space in the Back Bay,? Boston Properties? proposal reads.Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/business/real_estate/view.bg?articleid=1113724

Lrfox

08-19-2008, 09:54 PM

That rendering makes it look like Oscar night and the ceremonies are being held at 888 Boylston. Seriously, what's up with the strange bluish tint (glow?) radiating from the building. "888 Boylston, Boston's new 17 story lava lamp!"

atlrvr

08-20-2008, 07:37 AM

That's a signature plaza, huh? hmmmmm.....

KentXie

08-21-2008, 12:22 AM

For the height issue, the developers should just shave the floors but keep the height, like make the lobby 3 story tall. The NIMBYs will think that the height has been reduce when in fact, it has not. However, they should redesign some of the towers. Many look ugly.

Suffolk 83

08-21-2008, 12:54 AM

NIMBY's don't actually know how to read, so yes Dark, I believe your plan will work

Ginjitsuman

08-21-2008, 12:55 PM

I always find it ironic when towers in the back bay which are near the two tallest in Boston are considered too tall. I can understand the issue of blocking a historically awesome view, but wont this thing cast the same shadow as the pru, or if anything cast a shadow on the pru?

I want to confront these NIMBYs but I feel like an argument with them would be as aggravating and pointless as trying to reason with a terrorist that has a holy agenda.

At times I wish things were as easy as they are in China, but then that'd be no fun =/.

Tim Jackson

08-21-2008, 02:44 PM

People are simply paranoid about 'ruining the historical fabric' of the Back Bay. I completely understand and respect that position, but I find it humorous how little these residents actually want built. If the city remains stagnant, it will die. In Boston, companies need to expand up, because there is not enough room to expand out (unless you deck the pike, which is being evidenced as a complete nightmare - see CC).

I can understand why they would want to maintain a historical fabric, but it seems like they pick and choose the wrong fights. This is a great place for height, and it wouldn't require the destruction of any buildings of historical value (unless I am mistaken). Yet these people can't seem to care about the incredibly valuable SC&L building that will be replaced by a static cookie cutter design if it isn't saved. The lack of consistency is what kills their reputation.

Ron Newman

08-21-2008, 03:17 PM

This site is currently vacant, and has always been vacant. Before the Prudential Center it was part of a railroad yard, and before the railroad yard it was water.

riffgo

08-21-2008, 05:46 PM

NIMBYs always seem to pick the wrong fights: ones that are devoid of any real logic. It's like having the patients running the institution. We all lose!

Boston02124

08-21-2008, 09:49 PM

http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008051.jpg 888 Boylston should be turned to the right side and be alot slimmer and at least 26 stories high with some kind of tapered top/spire, Seeing it's an office tower it should look a little like the other Pru office (111 Huntington,Pru tower' ect) tower's,I only say this because,I for one will miss the drama of walking/driveing down Boylston st, pass the Hynes and then suddenly there it is 52 stories from top to bottom! a real skyscraper in Boston! Same feeling when you walk into Copely sq. from Boylston st and behold the Hancock tower. http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxx1.jpg As far as the Exeter st tower, I like the staircase,but think it should not have a tower over it,leave it open,put some plants,trees,3 story water feature on side of building? and make it a place people want to go to,photograph ect, instead of just a cut thru you don,t notice(unless its raining!),take the space above it and add some of the hieght to the tower so you might actually notice it amongst the other boxes around it! http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008057.jpg

ablarc

08-21-2008, 10:40 PM

Damn ground floors of both buildings look to be just lobbies.

kz1000ps

08-21-2008, 10:50 PM

The residential tower originally was to have around 1,000 square feet of retail space on the first floor, and I vaguely remember there being some on the second as well. It would be at the corner next to the Lenox, and appears to be there behind the trees.

As for wishing the stairs weren't under the tower, well, the tower footprint would become too small to do anything with. It's really hemmed in there.

GW2500

08-22-2008, 09:36 AM

So how many buildings are being proposed here? Is it 2?

Beton Brut

08-22-2008, 10:32 AM

...I for one will miss the drama of walking/driveing down Boylston st, pass the Hynes and then suddenly there it is 52 stories from top to bottom! a real skyscraper in Boston!

Agreed. If we loose the drama, it needs to be replaced with something dramatic. 888 Boylston ain't it.

Tim Jackson

08-22-2008, 10:53 AM

So how many buildings are being proposed here? Is it 2?

Yes, these are two separate projects. Boston Properties is involved with both. 888 Boylston will be the final 'piece' of the Prudential Center, and this Avalon building is being built over on Exeter Street by both BP and AvalonBay Communities.

GW2500

08-22-2008, 02:48 PM

Thanks

riffgo

08-22-2008, 11:53 PM

The Exeter Street building is sitting exactly where the rear end of Lord & Taylor is now. How is this to be accomplished?

AdamBC

08-23-2008, 08:12 PM

The Exeter Street building is sitting exactly where the rear end of Lord & Taylor is now. How is this to be accomplished?

I walked over to the site a couple days ago (as I couldn't visualize where it was) and had the same question... it looks like some loading/fire escapes now.... what would building here do to the fire escapes et al?

ablarc

08-23-2008, 09:03 PM

I for one will miss the drama of walking/driving down Boylston st, pass the Hynes and then suddenly there it is 52 stories from top to bottom! a real skyscraper in Boston!

Agreed.
If there weren't height-obsessed NIMBYs and if this were a rational world in which real aesthetics (which are always particular to the case at hand) counted more than moronic theories (which are always claimed to be universal --"height is always bad"), 888 Boylston would be stacked in its entirety on top of the Exeter building, and the dramatic view to the Prudential Tower would be preserved in perpetuity.

Tim Jackson

08-23-2008, 11:03 PM

I walked over to the site a couple days ago (as I couldn't visualize where it was) and had the same question... it looks like some loading/fire escapes now.... what would building here do to the fire escapes et al?

I've read articles on the project and looked it up on the BRA website, and it mentions nothing regarding how the new building would interact with the current structure. You could say that the Avalon would go right on top of the building, but the renderings of the base don't seem to support that.

Just a question, when does L&T's lease run out on that building? Could we see this building be demolished to make room for the Avalon? I really have no idea, I'm just speculating.

aquaman

08-24-2008, 05:00 PM

I can understand why they would want to maintain a historical fabric, but it seems like they pick and choose the wrong fights. This is a great place for height, and it wouldn't require the destruction of any buildings of historical value (unless I am mistaken). Yet these people can't seem to care about the incredibly valuable SC&L building that will be replaced by a static cookie cutter design if it isn't saved. The lack of consistency is what kills their reputation.

I don't understand it either. It seems that opposition to the Shreve building would be greater if the new structure would cast a shadow. No new shadow? Who cares??

Personally, I'd much rather live in a city with tall, slim buildings that cast an occasional shadow (like the centerpiece on a sun dial), provided the city preserved an interesting street-level atmosphere than live in a city with few tall towers and bland, office park-type lowrisers.

Boston02124

08-24-2008, 05:32 PM

L&T looks like it's here to stay for now.http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull200863189.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull200863190.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull200863191.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull200863192.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull200863193.jpg 888 could be taller/thinner and turned sideways to presevre the view,something of a cross between 111 Hunington and 150 federal st would be cool! http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/boston2008marchHighst.jpg

JimboJones

08-24-2008, 07:55 PM

No, the opposition to 888 isn't height, it's density, silly.

Well, height as well. But mostly density.

That's my take, as well. At least, it's my concern.

Tim Jackson

08-24-2008, 08:15 PM

Thanks for those renderings, Boston02124! I hadn't seen those before and it definitely clears the L&T thing up.

atlrvr

08-24-2008, 08:44 PM

The idea of height in this location is non-sensical....as far as traffic, etc, the easy neighborhood request if for Boston Properties to pay whatever it would take to reopen the Boylston St. entrance for the Hynes T stop, and maybe put money in an operating fund....this is a win for everyone...too logical? Probably.

JimboJones

08-25-2008, 12:29 AM

It's funny, from the rendering above, the Gloucester is putting shadows on the new Avalon tower, not the other way around ...

So, suck it, current residents.

awood91

09-08-2008, 11:27 PM

new b and t article about future retail at the prudential center:

http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/pub/5_354/commercial/200821-1.html

vanshnookenraggen

09-08-2008, 11:37 PM

High-Priced Haggle

Upscale Retailers Battle it out Over Proposed Pru Property
By Thomas Grillo
Banker & Tradesman Staff Writer

Nordstrom and Bloomingdale?s are vying to be the retail centerpiece of a proposed Prudential Center tower.

The upscale retailers are in discussions with Boston Properties for 100,000 square feet of space on four floors at 888 Boylston St., ac-cording to sources familiar with the negotiations.

?Nordstrom?s has been looking to get into downtown Boston for years, while Bloomingdale?s would like to be there as a preemptive strike to keep competitors out,? said Michael Tessler, a retail analyst and adjunct marketing professor at Bentley College.

But before anyone can sign a lease for the showcase location, Boston Properties, the Pru?s owner, needs approval for the 17-story building to be built between the Mandarin Oriental Hotel and the John B. Hynes Veterans Memorial Convention Center.

Stories Are Whacked
In August, Banker & Tradesman was the first to report that the developer agreed to lower the height by two stories following opposition by some neighbors. The Boston Redevelopment Authority asked the developer to revise the $115 million office high-rise following com-plaints about height from the Back Bay neighborhood and the Prudential Project Advisory Committee (PruPAC), a 25-member panel was founded to advise City Hall on development at the Pru.

In 2002, the BRA approved the office building at 11 stories. But the 287,000-square-foot high-rise never broke ground. Last year, Boston Properties sought approval for a 19-story tower, but retreated in the face of opposition and a call by Mayor Thomas M. Menino to each a compromise with opponents.

Michael A. Cantalupa, senior vice president of Boston Properties, declined to confirm or deny negotiations with the two retailers. Spokesmen for Nordstrom and Bloomingdale?s also declined comment.

Bloomingdale?s has a store in Chestnut Hill, while Nordstrom has shops in Burlington and Natick. The addition of either luxury retailers would add another choice for customers at the Shops at the Prudential Center. Today, the Pru has more than 75 shops and restaurants including Saks Fifth Avenue, Barnes & Noble, Lacoste and Sephora.

Nearby Copley Place features another 75 stores such as Neiman Marcus, Tiffany & Co., Barneys New York, Jimmy Choo, Gucci, Louis Vuitton and Emporio Armani.

http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/newspics/page17_090808.jpg

And to think we can't even get a JCPennys in at DTX. Location, location, location.

atlrvr

09-09-2008, 08:19 AM

aquaman

09-09-2008, 08:34 AM

Either store should really help Boylston continue to revive northward.

Does L&T do that well? Since it is owned by Federated, I always assumed they would rebrand it as a Bloomies, but I suppose it does cater to the large older population in Back Bay and Beacon Hill.

A couple of years ago, there was a rumor than L&T would leave Back Bay and that Bloomingdales would occupy that space. L&T ended up signing a long-term lease to remain in its current location and the streetfront was rehabbed a bit. I'd suspect L&T will remain for some time. Honestly, though, I don't know how L&T survives as I feel like the store is empty 95% of the time I'm in there.

My preference for the new space would be a Nordstrom, which I love as a retailer. Selfishly, I like the Bloomingdales mens store in Chestnut Hill and I think opening a Pru Bloomies would be to the detriment of the entire Chestnut Hill Mall.

Batterymarch

09-09-2008, 09:30 AM

L & T is not owned by federated. It was sold off a couple of years ago and is now privately owned.

JimboJones

09-09-2008, 01:56 PM

Don't forget about the rumor that Jordan's Furniture was going to go into the L&T building.

Tim Jackson

09-19-2008, 09:37 AM

The new face of the Pru?; New renderings of Prudential Towers unveiled

by Dan Salerno

Boston Properties unveiled a series of updated renderings for its two ambitious development projects for the Prudential, showing designs tweaked to address the concerns of a public advisory body.

The two buildings?an office and retail mixed use tower at 888 Boylston and a residential tower on Exeter Street?have both undergone intense design review by members of the Prudential Project Advisory Committee (PruPAC), which has worked with the developers and architects since 2007.

The centerpiece of last week?s presentation were the new visualizations of 888 Boylston Street: a 17 story glass office tower with ground floor retail fronted by a sprawling new tree-lined pedestrian plaza. The images showed a redesigned building base that clearly distinguished the bottom two retail levels from the office stories stretching above. The glass fa?ade will be transparent enough to provide a sense of activity to pedestrians in the plaza.

The response to the latest designs were generally highly positive.

?The redesign makes the resolution at the base quite nice,? said PruPAC member Eliot Laffer. ?The space really works a lot better now.?

Design subcommittee chairperson David Racino said that he was impressed by the plaza. ?It will help the place to be that much more active,? he said.

The ground floor retail levels of the new tower could end up being the home of a major new department store retail anchor, according to Boston Properties. Rumors have been floated that either Bloomingdales or Nordstrom?s could eventually fill the space, though the developers would not confirm that. There will be approximately 100,000 potential square feet of retail space, depending on how many floors are eventually dedicated to that use.

In addition to the tower and plaza, the 888 Boylston Street development will include the complete redesign and refurbishment of the entrance to the Shops at the Prudential Center. The new entrance will be done in the same glass design as the new tower.

?The new entrance is hands down a stroke of genius,? said Meg Mainzer Cohen, a PruPAC member and head of the Back Bay Association.

The new renderings for the Exeter Street residences also met with a generally favorable response. PruPAC members responded particularly well to the incorporation of design elements from the historic Lenox Hotel into the new building, though there was some skepticism expressed about an exterior staircase that bisects part of the building, allowing pedestrian access to a central courtyard.

Both designs will be presented at a public meeting on September 23, to be held at 6 p.m. in the mezzanine conference room of the Boston Public Library.

LINK (http://www.backbaysun.com/#ST932)

Can't find these renderings...can anyone else?

vanshnookenraggen

09-19-2008, 10:44 AM

The glass fa?ade will be transparent enough to provide a sense of activity to pedestrians in the plaza.

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.

theculprit

09-19-2008, 01:06 PM

I really don't think anything 17 stories should qualify as a "tower." When I hear a TOWER is being built I get all excited. Then I feel all mislead when i read it's only 17 stories. By the way, what's the deal with airplane peanuts......

Ron Newman

09-19-2008, 01:51 PM

Tower describes a ratio of height to width, not height alone. The Custom Hosue isn't very tall by current standards, but it's still a tower. I'd have to see a drawing to decide whether this is a tower.

Glass at street level is always a good thing for a building with retail stores.

Boston02124

09-19-2008, 03:23 PM

Can't find these renderings...can anyone else?these are on here already!http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008053.jpghttp://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008051.jpg

tobyjug

09-19-2008, 04:27 PM

It would be interesting if it were lit in a violet color. Artistic license, one supposes.

bbfen

09-19-2008, 05:06 PM

It would be interesting if it were lit in a violet color. Artistic license, one supposes.

The same artistic license that gave the Prudential a non-square shape, I suppose.

Isn't perspective in like, Art 101 or something?

tobyjug

09-19-2008, 11:42 PM

Ha! Tell it to Frank Gehry!

briv

09-20-2008, 12:51 AM

The rendering in the latest Sun of 888 Boylston is slightly different than those posted in this thread. It's the same as the old ones in every way, except now the first two floors of the building step back horizontally along the plaza instead of curving with the facade. Nothing earth-shattering.

I'll scan the image and post it when I get a chance.

There was no new rendering of the Exeter tower.

Merper

09-20-2008, 05:57 PM

at the risk of sounding like a nimby, i'm not sure an all glass tower of this scale is appropriate here.

... btw, this is definitely NOT a tower.

Bubbybu

09-20-2008, 06:22 PM

How far off the curb would the Pru Tower be? One thing I don't like about the Mandarin is that it's so linear along the street. That whole sidealk along the hotel is not very nice imo and I wouldn't want that side of upper Boylston street to become this tall clustered avenue imposing itself against the opposite side which is very nice and walkable and generally short in height.

Though the height of the Pru tower doesn't seem too bad I just hope it would be pushed back off the street along with the new Pru entrance. One thing I don't like about the Filene's Franklin tower is that it is too tall and not ideal for that location.

The Exeter 'tower' looks fine....nothing much to say about that....it's a low impact undertaking.

kz1000ps

09-20-2008, 07:08 PM

The proposed Pru tower will be set back by 70ish feet from the lot line last I knew, although there have been design changes since I learned of that info two years ago.

But why is the Filene's tower too tall/not ideal? This is a natural location for a 40-ish story tower to go up, as it's on the edge of the existing skyscraper core (33 Arch and 99 Summer are a stone's throw away) and it's one of the few sites in the financial district big enough to support modern office floorplates. Also, I feel its mixed uses, although more high-end than what exists in the immediate vicinity, should be a boon to the area.

Also, this is of course of personal opinion, but I like the high streetwall the Mandarin creates. I keep wishing that the north side of Boylston (like where Anthropologie is) would be redeveloped to complete the canyon effect. I mean, who needs to see the sky anyway? ;)

riffgo

09-23-2008, 12:54 PM

You're right, KZ. I, too, like the high steet wall created by the Mandarin, and I find disappointment in some of the pathetic, cringing structures currently occupying the other side of Boylston....AND, the Filene's Tower could actually be about 50 to 60 feet taller to achieve a better sense of proportion.

pelhamhall

09-23-2008, 01:20 PM

Final public meeting is tonight, 6pm, Boston Public Library. If you can't go to the meeting, it is really, really easy to drop a quick email in support to the BRA. If you like any of these projects, it literally takes 2-3 minutes to shoot over and email (email address is below).

This is from the NABB e-mail chain (I got myself on it so I can have a good laugh!):

The BRA scheduled the final public meeting in the Article 80 process for these projects for September 23rd at 6PM in the Boston Public Library, Conference Room C0506. We encourage you to attend this meeting and to comment. These proposals exceed the limits of height and density in the approved Prudential Center Master Plan and the Boston Zoning Code. The Draft Project Impact Report indicates that our neighborhood will bear the burden of the environmental impacts: solar glare impacts, additional wind at street level, and new shadows in the neighborhood.

For an advance look at the design, go to the project page on the BRA website:
http://www.cityofboston.gov/bra/DevelopmentProjects/PipeDocs/Prudential%20Redevelopment/DPIR/Prudential%20Redevelopment_DPIR.pdf.

Please get involved. Attend the meeting if you can and submit your written comments as listed in the Courant Ad to:
John O?Brien, Project Director, BRA
22 Drydock Avenue, South Boston, MA 02210
Phone: 617-918-6224
John.Obrien.BRA@cityofboston.gov

Bubbybu

09-23-2008, 01:27 PM

who are the architects for each project?
Does CBT have one and Elkus/Manfedi the other?

Tim Jackson

09-23-2008, 01:38 PM

Yes, I believe that Elkus/Manfredi did the AvalonExeter building, and CBT did 888 Boylston.

Bubbybu

09-23-2008, 01:54 PM

What is Jung Brannen up to these days? Besides their Dubai projects...

CBT and now also Elkus/Manfredi seem to be involved with everything these last few years...

ShawnA

09-23-2008, 02:31 PM

I too like the mandairn hotel. But, what make me mad about boston a developer builds a 13 story building. And two years later he wants to build antoher 13 story building. If you recall the developers of the Mandarin now is looking for another site to build on. Why not kill two birds with one stone and build the mardian taller and save the site for someone else to build on it.

atlrvr

09-23-2008, 04:39 PM

As a very nearby property owner subject to the deadly (?) affects of solar glare, I just sent a letter stating my approval of the project.

As far as the streetwall goes, I like the way it steps up.....I do think the neighborhood would be overpowered if highrises went up on the north side of Boylston. That said, I think the Millenium Partners 59+ story proposal was fine, and would think something up tow perhaps 200' stories would be ok on the cap section between Hynes (old ICA) and Boylston.

riffgo

09-23-2008, 11:43 PM

Who said anything about high rises on the north side of Boylston Street? It's just that one and two stories on that side look a bit pathetic. This isn't Sioux Falls or Juarez, you know.

atlrvr

09-24-2008, 08:08 AM

Ok....let me say this differently.....the majority of the existing 2-3 story buildings are infintitely superior to the new midrises on the north side (Exeter Place comes to mind).

When people talk about wanting Boylston to be a canyon, I imagine buildings like that or 888 proposed....888 is better than an awkwardly stretching naked man, but I'll take Anthropologie and Crate & Barrelll anyday.

JimboJones

09-30-2008, 09:13 AM

I can understand concerns over density on Boylston Street. It has a nice selection of bars, restaurants and shops on one side. Putting up a monolithic building on the other side might have a detrimental effect. Might, I say.

The Exeter Street building, however, seems like a no-brainer. It's a great location for a building of that size.

The only ONLY people who would be adversely affected would be the people in the RENTAL building next door.

To whom I say, if you're unhappy about it, move, bitches.

Boston Needs A ShakeShack

09-30-2008, 11:03 AM

Shirley Kressel called for the destruction of the BRA!

hahah go Shirley!

Residents Voice Staunch Resistance To New Pru Towers

by Dan Salerno

Two new high rise buildings proposed by the owners of the Prudential Center provoked vocal disapproval from a number of neighbors at a BRA sponsored community meeting last week.

The ill feelings centered most viscerally on the height of 888 Boylston Street, envisioned as the new 11 story centerpiece of the Prudential center. At 242 feet, the building far exceeds what is permissible by zoning, and the developers would have to seek a variance from the zoning board of appeal. The project has the backing of the Boston Redevelopment Authority.

?I think this is a travesty; I?m disappointed in the BRA,? said resident Rick Gleason, who criticized the height of the building and questioned the value of zoning codes that are not enforced.

Shirley Kressel, a local activist and landscape architect, also criticized both the buildings and the development process. ?We?re all led to believe that these buildings are a done deal and inevitable, but they?re not,? said Kressel, stating that the BRA had no power to change zoning and that the project could still be stopped by community involvement.

Kressel then called for the complete dissolution of the BRA, which she said is in the pocket of developers and not responsive to community needs. ?We don?t have a real planning authority [in Boston],? she said.

Several residents call on the developers to draft new plans that meet the requirements laid out in zoning and Boylston Street?s planned development area (PDA) guidelines,

?It?s very hard to discuss a plan that doesn?t respond to zoning,? said Jackie Yessian, president of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay.

Residents said they would support a building of 155 feet, but that there was no demonstrable hardship that would excuse the additional height. Back Bay resident Sue Pringle also pointed out that new shadows from the towers would extend all the way to the Commonwealth Avenue Mall.

The developers, for their part, stressed the positive impact the buildings could have on the neighborhood, brining office and residential space?including affordable units mandated by law?as well as additional prime retail to the Prudential area, according to Michael Cantalupa of Boston Properties.

Still, not a single resident present at the meeting spoke in support of the project.

?This building is the exact opposite of what this city needs,? said Mary Sonnabend, who criticized ?the secretive process? of the development

The project, which could start construction as early as June if the necessary approvals are obtained, calls from two new towers: an office and retail complex at 888 Boylston Street, and a residential tower next to the Lenox Hotel on Exeter Street. The 888 Boylston building has been rumored to be courting Bloomingdale?s to take up residence in its proposed lower retail section. The building would also be fronted by an expansive new pedestrian plaza with elaborate plantings and fountains.

The Prudential Public Advisory Committee?made of local residents, business owners, and officials--has been working with the developers on the project for over a year.

kz1000ps

10-05-2008, 09:35 AM

Pru advisory panel vows openness
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/1606/bostoncpru888r1plazawl9.jpg

By Justin A. Rice
Globe Correspondent / October 5, 2008

As the fight over the height of two new towers continues, the embattled advisory board charged with overseeing Prudential Center expansions since 1988 is bowing to community pressure to be more transparent.

To the chagrin of many Back Bay residents, the Prudential Project Advisory Committee, or PruPAC, is poised to allow the towers at the already mammoth complex to exceed the 155-foot limit under current zoning.

But at a Sept. 25 meeting of PruPAC's subcommittee on community benefits, the group showed signs of a new openness. Democratic state Representative Marty Walz of Back Bay, a member of PruPAC for almost two years, called the subcommittee together to clarify how PruPAC doles out community benefits payments pledged by developers.

As with past Prudential Center developments, community benefits for the proposed 242-foot office building at 888 Boylston St. and a proposed 27-story residential tower on Exeter Street would be allocated to neighborhood organizations that PruPAC approves. PruPAC also recommends Pru projects for Boston Redevelopment Authority approval.

"In the past, PruPAC did not meet in public and does now, and that is a good thing in my view," said Walz, who was unable to attend the Sept. 25 meeting. "So it is a step in the right direction."

Walz said PruPAC members affiliated with an applicant for funds should disclose those connections in the future.

Disclosure is a sticking point for longtime Back Bay resident and neighborhood activist Shirley Kressel, who is trained as a landscape architect. At the Sept. 25 meeting she argued that money is motivating PruPAC's inclination to sign off on the taller towers.

"The more square feet that's approved, the more money you get," Kressel said, referring to the fact that PruPAC would control $1.25 in community benefits per square foot. "That's an incentive to approve it."

Boston Properties pledged a combined $471,999 in community benefits when the two towers were first proposed in 1990. That money remains on the table, although PruPAC members said they will eventually ask for an inflation adjustment. Then, PruPAC would accept grant applications from community groups.

In the interest of transparency, PruPAC members agreed to hold off on funding decisions.

"The initial consensus is we shouldn't have a meeting until after PruPAC puts in recommendations so it doesn't look like we're being bought off," PruPAC president Betsy Johnson said at the meeting.

Johnson pointed out the current conflict of interest of board vice president, Elliott Laffer, who was not at the meeting. Laffer is executive director of the Boston Ground Water Trust, which was allotted $50,000 in community benefits for the first four phases of Prudential construction. However, he was not employed by the city at that time.

Johnson also said the South End Land Trust, for which she volunteers, received $100,000 last time around, but said another PruPAC member nominated the group for funding.

On Sept. 25, Johnson suggested she'd be willing to forgo future money donated to the Land Trust, but during a phone interview the next day she was disappointed by the lack of trust in PruPAC.

"It's harming a neighborhood and 600 other people for what seems to be pettiness," she said.

In 1989, PruPAC handled $1,384,000 in community benefits tied to the complex's shopping arcade, the Prudential tower, the Belvedere apartments, Shaw's Supermarket, and the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, which opens this week.

Responding to Kressel's claim that money is motivating PruPAC's support of height increases, both Johnson and BRA senior project manager John O'Brien said they made developers come down from 265 feet to 242 feet on the 888 Boylston building to minimize shadows.

"Your argument that the bigger the better, it's not true, it's not true," O'Brien told Kressel on Sept. 25. "We got it down in size."

Walz is also opposed to building above 155 feet, which Johnson says is allowed because the two towers are designated Special Project Development Areas. A similar exemption was given to the Mandarin hotel in 2002, according to Kressel, allowing it to increase in height from 120 feet to 150.

Johnson said she understands that neighbors who helped hash out the original Back Bay zoning code don't like the idea of overhauling it, but she said there's a bigger picture to consider in terms of discouraging sprawl.

"It's five stories on the back side of the Pru within a corridor of Back Bay's tallest buildings," Johnson said.

About 20 residents expressed their disapproval of the project during a BRA meeting at the Boston Public Library on Sept. 23. The BRA said the public comment period would end Oct. 31. Johnson, however, said PruPAC's vote was likely to come the week of Oct. 13 or 27.

Link (http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/10/05/pru_advisory_panel_vows_openness/)

tobyjug

10-05-2008, 10:16 AM

You can fit a lot of duck boats on that plaza.

ablarc

10-05-2008, 11:16 AM

What is Jung Brannen up to these days?
Thank God they're out of the picture.

Hacks.

ablarc

10-05-2008, 11:30 AM

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/1606/bostoncpru888r1plazawl9.jpg
Plaza is really quite nice. Big improvement over the previous design. Maybe PruPAC is worth something after all.

Lurker

10-05-2008, 12:17 PM

What is Jung Brannen up to these days?

Mercifully nothing of major importance within the city limits!

I honestly think there is nothing wrong with the current, or a taller version, of 888 Boylston in its current design. The proximity to the Prudential tower and that terrible Pomo building across the street leads me to believe there isn't anything dastardly about what shadows would be produced.

jass

10-05-2008, 02:24 PM

I like the plaza alot. I thought it was going away, but I see the building is set back significantly

tobyjug

10-05-2008, 07:13 PM

Maybe they can relocate that statue thing there... naked gold dude? I forget.

tommym96

10-06-2008, 12:16 PM

Regarding the whole development, I could take it or leave it. It's not something I would get excited about but it's nothing I would oppose either. The redesign is much better in my opinion.

Padre Mike

10-08-2008, 05:15 AM

Maybe they can relocate that statue thing there... naked gold dude? I forget.

I hope they keep the sculpture in front of the Pru. It's was done by Donald DeLue, one of the leading bronze sculptors of the 20th century, now deceased. You can see many of his maquettes (small versions) of his work at Child's (sp?) Gallery on Newbury St. He designed a similar statue for the New York World's Fair (which I think is extant in the former fair grounds). He's known for his highly stylized nudes and ability to convey strength and motion.

jass

10-12-2008, 06:14 PM

Not sure where we're sticking these pics. Taken today

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/jamesinclair/IMG_6353.jpg

CDubs

10-13-2008, 01:17 PM

Maybe they can relocate that statue thing there... naked gold dude? I forget.

I hope that wherever he ends up, it's more contextually appropriate than the previous location - it always looked to me as if he were inexplicably just floating there, or trying to glide up and over the Hynes. A beautiful statue, but it needs to have some relationship to its surroundings.

ablarc

10-13-2008, 01:53 PM

it always looked to me as if he were inexplicably just floating there, or trying to glide up and over the Hynes.
That was his relationship to his surroundings.

CDubs

10-13-2008, 02:05 PM

That was his relationship to his surroundings.

Yes, IMO not a good relationship, but a chortle-inducing one. He wants to get out of that plaza, and so doesn't everyone else!

Padre Mike

10-14-2008, 02:31 PM

The original context did not include the present Hynes. The old Hynes was set back and the ring road took up much more space in front of it. The statue's context actually was that of looking up at it with the Pru tower in the background surrounded by sky and clouds. I guess the thought was to promote the "soaring achievement" of man in his quest for building to the sky. It was a truly optimistic vision, freqently expressed in the sixties' space race, advancements of the computer age, the IBM "Selectric" typewriter, and dreams of a post-war utopia (remember WWII was only 20 years earlier) where monorails would skirt the skies above cities, povery would be eliminated, decent housing would become available for all (recall that much of Boston's central housing stock was rather slum-like, even the Back Bay!), and moving sidewalks would whisk shoppers from store to store. The whole thing was gloriously summed up in the NY World's Fair and obliterated by the 1968 assasinations, race riots, Viet Nam war, and Watergate.

CDubs

10-14-2008, 02:42 PM

^Thanks - I appreciate the explanation! That makes a lot more sense, it always looked to me as if that statue should have a lot more room to soar.

JimboJones

10-15-2008, 01:22 PM

So I was over by the Prudential (as I am, every day) and took a couple photos of the location of the new AvalonExeter residential building.

As you can see, that block is already bathed in shade. The new building would not increase the shade at all, or, a little bit. Pretty much, the whole Prudential Plaza (and Boylston Street) is shady for about half the day. (Remember the guy who pulled out of the Mandarin Oriental because he found out his 8,000 square foot condo would be in the shade all day?)

The new residential tower was reduced in height to 27-stories. I don't know whether or not this includes mechanicals; but, as a comparison, the Gloucester rental building, right next door, is 24-stories, by my count.

If you listen carefully to Marty Walz, her main opposition seems to be the design of the residential building, not its height or use.

Final comment period ends Oct. 31, I believe.

http://i369.photobucket.com/albums/oo139/JohnAKeith/gloucester.jpg

http://i369.photobucket.com/albums/oo139/JohnAKeith/gloucester2.jpg

bbfen

10-15-2008, 09:01 PM

If you listen carefully to Marty Walz, her main opposition seems to be the design of the residential building, not its height or use.

Final comment period ends Oct. 31, I believe.

http://i369.photobucket.com/albums/oo139/JohnAKeith/gloucester.jpg

http://i369.photobucket.com/albums/oo139/JohnAKeith/gloucester2.jpg

Final comment period technically ends then, but the vote will be before then. Moot point with the comment period, eh?

Ms Walz is opposed to whatever she thinks will prevent her from keeping her stranglehold on the Back Bay.

JimboJones

11-11-2008, 03:08 PM

Proposed Pru projects divide advisory panel (http://bostonherald.com/business/real_estate/view.bg?articleid=1131616)
By Thomas Grillo

For the first time in its 20-year history, a panel overseeing Prudential Center expansion can?t reach consensus on future development.

In a high stakes vote last night, the Prudential Project Advisory Committee (PruPAC), barely mustered majority support for a proposal by Boston Properties for a 17-story office tower proposed for 888 Boylston St. Proponents won by three votes.

In a separate ballot, members were evenly split on Avalon Bay?s plans for a 27-story residential high-rise on Exeter Street. The 24-member panel comprised of representatives from community groups and commercial interests, advises City Hall on commercial real estate projects at the Pru.

?For two decades, PruPac votes on projects around the Prudential Center have reached almost unanimous support,? said Betsy Johnson, PruPac?s chairwoman. ?But the opponents dug in their heels very early on the height issue and refused to consider any zoning changes.?

Michael A. Cantalupa, senior vice president of Boston Properties, and Michael Roberts, vice president of development at Avalon, declined to comment following the meeting.

Originally, Boston Properties proposed a 19-story tower while Avalon Bay filed plans for a 30-story apartment building. But Mayor Thomas M. Menino asked the developers to compromise following protests from the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay that the buildings were out of character in the historic district.

The Boston Redevelopment Authority will consider the project at a public hearing on Dec. 4.

ablarc

11-11-2008, 03:34 PM

The "historic" district these projects are proposed for is the Prudential Center, and the projects are completely in character with this district.

Boston Needs A ShakeShack

11-11-2008, 05:56 PM

This is very surprising to me. NABB and our elected officials fight tooth and nail to stop these perfectly reasonable buildings replacing nothing at all, and they let the Arlington go to the wrecking ball. Sad.

One rep. from NABB told me that, and I'm paraphrasing, that some of the residents near the Exeter residences were concerned about the loss of empty space that they expected to be there when they bought their condos. Yes...they want to preserve the sky.

Our elected officials--Mike Ross, Marty Walz, Bill Linehan, Byron Rushing--voted against almost all of it. Only Linehan cast an approving vote for 888 Boylston. The rest voted against both projects.

Meg Mainzer-Cohen of the Back Bay Association strongly supports both buildings.

The final vote was 13-11 FOR 88 Boylston, 11-11-2 tie over Exeter Residences. What happens now is really up to the BRA.

Beton Brut

11-11-2008, 06:18 PM

bbfen

11-11-2008, 08:30 PM

Are they putting "Vitamin Stupid" in the Back Bay water supply?

No, I privately think they've all sold out to developers who have yet to release public renderings for a grotesque monstrosity west of the Hynes (air rights, the garage and the old church parcel).

In my theory, if these officials and neighborhood "leaders" appear too pro-development now, then later, when Party X comes along with a terrible plan---and enough cash-filled suitcases---they could say, "We've been against unchecked development for years, but this air rights project is a Good Building In Boston!"

Their ignorant followers will barely raise an eyebrow until it's too late, because they "trusted" their leaders to play the game fairly.

If they only knew what was coming.

a630

11-11-2008, 08:56 PM

"Yes...they want to preserve the sky. "

Yes of course they do. Assumedly these people bought in towers partially because they wanted views, and the value of their property, both the monetary value and utility, is tied to their view. So it's not strange at all that they want to preserve sky. A building on Exeter at the eastern end of the Pru would block views towards the Hancock and downtown. So you say, okay, it blocks maybe 40% of 20 peoples views.
Well, an old and empirically tested theory of zoning economics explains, that even when the utility of your property is even only partially threatened, or not even directly threatened by a development, for example in this case if your apt faces west, if your property is of a similar character to the threatened property, it is in your interest also to oppose the development. You are sending a clear signal about what people expect out of property like yours. This explains why non-abbutters, sometimes from miles away, inevitably get involved in the development process. PruPac may be sending a signal that the Pru has become, in the eyes of property holders, over-developed. I don't agree with them, and I don't care about their opinions or views of downtown, but I don't think there's anything in the water. It's textbook behavior.

kz1000ps

11-11-2008, 11:46 PM

a630, everything you say is true except for the fact that the people complaining aren't necessarily the ones in the existing Prudential/Avalon towers, as those are rentals; it's the people in NABB's district, which is everything north of Boylston Street, that are making the ruckus. Casting any new shadows on the precious and fragile Back Bay is a complete non-starter to them.

Actually, has anyone in the Avalon rentals taken a stand on these developments, one way or the other?

JimboJones

11-12-2008, 12:32 AM

A couple of the renters in the Exeter have said they are against the residential building. Presumably, because their views would be (adversely) affected. One of them, a real estate agent, has lived in the building for over 20 years.

If we wait long enough, she'll "be gone" by the time they want to break ground.

kz1000ps

11-16-2008, 10:38 AM

Future of new Prudential towers left with BRA, mayor's office

November 16, 2008

The fate of two towers proposed at the Prudential Center now lies in the hands of City Hall officials, but without a clear way forward after the advisory board charged with overseeing the Pru's expansions since 1988 last week failed to reach a consensus for the first time.

The Boston Redevelopment Authority and Mayor Thomas M. Menino will have to decide whether to approve or halt the projects.

"It's the mayor's decision at this point," PruPAC chairwoman Betsy Johnson said in an interview after voting in favor of both projects herself. "Certain people weren't going to change their position no matter what was said."

"Our process was to hopefully end up with a better project for the community; if the project does not go ahead that's due to a lot of reasons, the economy for one," she said. "If the project does go forward it's a better project than it was a year ago."

PruPAC, the Prudential Policy Advisory Committee, has advised the BRA on commercial development at the Pru for 20 years, and has often been charged by community members with working secretly, until now.

The vote "is a testament to opening this up to the public process," said neighborhood activist Shirley Kressel. "What the BRA does with this will be the next test. From the community's point of view, they are overwhelmingly against it."

Representatives from both development teams declined to comment on the vote.

"We still have more process to go," Michael Cantalupa, senior vice president of Boston Properties, said.

PruPAC's 24 members split their vote last Monday on a 311-foot Exeter Street residential tower proposed by Avalon Bay. In the other vote, the panel, made up of representatives from commercial interests and community groups, approved Boston Properties' proposed 242-foot office tower at 888 Boylston St. by only three votes.

The BRA will hold a public hearing on the project at City Hall on Dec. 4.

JUSTIN A. RICE

Link (http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/11/16/future_of_new_prudential_towers_left_with_bra_mayo rs_office/)

pelhamhall

11-17-2008, 09:05 AM

Since Shirley posts on this board from time to time, I am interested to hear her source for the blanket comment "The community is overwhelmingly against this..."

We have a robust community process that allows neighbors to speak for themselves, so I have a huge issue when unelected persons from the neighborhood attempt to speak for or represent the views of others.

The Back Bay noisy ladies-who-lunch crowd may have the time and energy to fight this project (and let's face it - all projects) but I believe the overall Boston community would be nothing more than ambivalent.

So who is this "community" that Shirley is speaking on behalf of? The one that is so "overwhelmingly" against this project?

Stop 10 random people on Boylston Street, show them the renderings and ask them their opinions - would anyone of them be against this plan or would they shrug and say "New buildings at the Pru? Sure, who cares? That's where tall buildings go, right?"

This is the community that doesn't have the time or energy to even consider attending some meeting where people discuss why they are in favor of buildings or against them. The whole process is just so silly to them - to even consider attending a meeting after a busy day of work to say "that's a nice building, please build it." - the whole process is just so fanciful and silly when you're of the opinion that there is no problem with a city building urban buildings.

So I believe Ms. Kressel's comment should have been "of the crowd that is always very actively against real estate development in this city, it should come as no surprise to anybody that they are also 'overwhelmingly' against real estate development here"

The non-activist, massive majority of Boston's residents and workers are most assuredly ambivalent towards some mid-rises going up in the Prudential Center core.

kennedy

11-17-2008, 09:31 AM

Wait a minute, do we actually have a rendering? Someone should so just that-take a poll. Of every project we think is good. And send it to tommy and the BRA

pelhamhall

11-17-2008, 09:53 AM

We know what being anti-development in this city looks like... but pro-development in Boston is just a shrug and a "whatever"... it's invisible.

Can you even imagine a regular, working person in the South End or Back Bay taking a few hours out of their day after a hellish day in the office to attend a civic meeting where they will be bored to tears just to support a real estate development?

This is why pro-development voices in this city are silent. You have to be subjected to torture. Example - I convinced some neighbors to come to a civic meeting to support the redevelopment of the Bayside Expo Center, and we had to listen to literal, actual crazy people talk about sewage and back when the Harbor smelled... my neighbors never forgave me for stealing those two hours of their lives and now will never attend another meeting like that. And these are people that support development... so it's kind of a lost cause.

The ladies-who-lunch, the trust-funders and the under-employed have all the time in the world. The rest of us have to earn a living.

Who has the time to go to a meeting to support Boston Properties to build two mid-rise, faceless, no-impact-on-your-life buildings? There is only a certain psychological and demographic profile of the people that attend these meetings, and they are certainly not the pro-progress and pro-investment types, they are the "no change, nothing different, I want my old neighborhood to never change, hey kids - get off my lawn" demographic.

So in conclusion, we're all fucked as long as Tommy is our Mayor - maybe in 8-12 years something will change.

bbfen

11-17-2008, 12:17 PM

I pretty much agree, pelhamhall.

I laughed at the earlier post about the resident who lived in the Exeter for 20 years and is growth. People were once very much against residential development over the railyards.

The concept of urban planning over an extended period of time has been a giant success at the Pru, and is in the final stage. What are these people fighting for? I don't know what they think a "win" looks like.

Finally, on the pro-development opinions getting through, I make sure to let NABB, BBA, people at the BRA, and especially, elected officials know how I feel.

When I hear "everyone is against this" or "the entire neighborhood hates this" I make a point to talk to that person. Ms. Kressel and Ms. Walz are the two worst offenders of the EVERYONE syndrome (and I once had a conversation with Jackie Yessian about this problem).

Boston02124

11-17-2008, 01:16 PM

Wait a minute, do we actually have a rendering? Someone should so just that-take a poll. Of every project we think is good. And send it to tommy and the BRA
these have been on here for months! http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008053.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008051.jpg

tobyjug

11-17-2008, 02:50 PM

I like the way the building in the first rendering blocks the view of Grozny.

kz1000ps

11-17-2008, 06:00 PM

..I once had a conversation with Jackie Yessian about this problem.

How reasonable is she to talk to? I once had a pleasant conversation with her back at a meeting for the Apple Store, but at the time we were in agreement on where the process was at, and I didn't know of her standing in the community. So I feel like I don't really know how zealous her anti-development bias is, despite what she says at meetings and in the papers.

Boston Needs A ShakeShack

11-18-2008, 09:52 PM

One argument I am sympathetic to is what Eliot Laffer of NABB said at the meeting. Basically, the people who live in those buildings have been subjected to NON STOP CONSTRUCTION for YEARS. And now, when its finally ending, here comes another major project that will also take years, and be a noisy disruption of life for all.

Now, I don't know if that is a reason not to build it, but I do sympathize.

kennedy

11-19-2008, 12:10 AM

these have been on here for months! http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008053.jpg http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn80/boston02124/proposed%20and%20then%20what%20was%20built/xxxxxhullseagull2008051.jpg

In the first, I don't see anything new. I mean, I know whats new, but it just doesn't make any impact at all it seems.

The one in the second looks like a bloated, convex Intercontinental.

el raval

11-19-2008, 09:35 AM

The housing tower along Exeter would probably help, however the office project on Boylston adds nothing.

With the Mandarin completed, they have finally filled in the Boylston streetwall to the point where the plaza in front of the Pru is well defined on three sides, with the Pru as a backdrop there's potential for some real urban drama. With a bit of cosmetic work and some active retail it could really become one of Boston's best urban spaces, but now they want to fill it in with another insipid building.

Arborway

11-19-2008, 09:50 AM

The tower on Boylston looks like some South Boston Waterfront generic trash architecture, and the billowing front just looks ridiculous.

nm88

11-19-2008, 07:08 PM

With today's economy both of these buildings are toast for the forseeable future.

bbfen

11-19-2008, 09:45 PM

How reasonable is she to talk to? I once had a pleasant conversation with her back at a meeting for the Apple Store, but at the time we were in agreement on where the process was at, and I didn't know of her standing in the community. So I feel like I don't really know how zealous her anti-development bias is, despite what she says at meetings and in the papers.

I think she's one of the most reasonable of the NIMBY/NABB bunch, and also think is genuinely interested in hearing all points of view. I think she's respected, but wonder how effective she was as president of NABB (didn't she just finish a term last spring?) I never joined NABB, but nearly every time I see her, she extends the invitation and reminds me NABB "does more than argue with people about buildings." I just nearly always happen to see her in a professional capacity when....there's arguments about buildings.

kz1000ps

11-20-2008, 12:22 AM

That's great to hear; next time I'm at a meeting with her I'll be sure to strike up a conversation (for sure, it couldn't be worse than talking to Marty W.). And as for her standing within NABB, the last public meeting I attended was for the Copley Place tower back in late July and she was president then.

pelhamhall

11-20-2008, 08:53 AM

From what I understand 111 Huntington is 100% leased, and has two tenants that are growing.

One, Bain Capital, is growing a lot and will need to either move out, or Boston Properties will need to move another 111 Huntington out to make room for a growing Bain.

Enter this squat piece of crap on Boylston Street... if Boston Properties can find 250k-500k worth of space in their very popular Pru Complex, they can move a tenant out of 111 Huntington, name this little crap building after that tenant, and allow 111 Huntington to become Bain Tower - giving them all the space they could want.

The problem is that none of the tenants in 111 Huntington have any interest in moving from that great building into this squat little office turd... thus, the (failed) attempt to make it into a 20-story building - to try to make 888 special. But it isn't, and nobody at 111 is budging... yet.

Even in this economy, this little blue box is a good bet for Boston Properties because of the active tenant roster they control at the Pru. The Pru remains extremely popular - which I find funny because I can't imagine being a serious business executive and having to go to work at a mall. The crowds at Christmas alone are enough to make me never want to work there. The lines at the parking lot, the lines to buy a newspaper or cup of coffee.

To me, it would be nice to work near the Pru mall, just not in it.