Jump to content

PROPOSED: Parcel 12 (Triangle Parcel)

Frankie811

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 311
  • Created
  • Last Reply
brick Burg

brick

Posted
Posted

Boy, this project (like the likewise long delayed Capital Cove) can't happen fast enough for me. Those two large pieces of land have been empty for far too long.

don't get too excited. Even if they are really taking core samples it could easily be only for feasibility studies and could even suggest an entirely new design...which could mean months before any progress... <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frankie811 City

Frankie811

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Boy, this project (like the likewise long delayed Capital Cove) can't happen fast enough for me. Those two large pieces of land have been empty for far too long.

- Garris

How about parcel 4 in Capital Center? The Capital Center Comission, which was created in the late '80's, allowed a Quebec, Canada company to keep an option on this land for 11 YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHY!? The Beacon Companies of Boston was then granted development rights for a project called Park Row West which we all know was never built. I think a change is needed at the CCC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Thom Unincorporated Area

Thom

Posted
Posted

Building plans were submitted on Monday to begin the design process. I emailed Cotuit the rendering so that he could post it. (I'll have to figure out how to do that.) The design process through CCC will take a few months or more so I don't expect construction until late Fall early winter at the earliest. The flag has changed; it will not be an intercontinental. Developer doesn't feel this market is ready for that flag. Is in discussions for a W. Will get more details in the coming weeks. My biggest concern is that Carpionato is just holding this property until the time is right and for him if that takes six years so be it. Fortunately, we have him under a pretty tight p&s that requires performance, so we will see how he moves. I should also say I'm not crazy about the design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cotuit Megalopolis

Cotuit

Posted
Posted

Building plans were submitted on Monday to begin the design process. I emailed Cotuit the rendering so that he could post it.

Now I have to decide if I want to post it. :whistling:

The flag has changed; it will not be an intercontinental. Developer doesn't feel this market is ready for that flag. Is in discussions for a W.

Is this perhaps the aloft rumour I heard? aloft being a new W brand.

I should also say I'm not crazy about the design.

Me neither.

Don't worry, I'll post it...

tomorrow morning. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cotuit Megalopolis

Cotuit

Posted
Posted

It's almost tomorrow morning. Here's the rendering from Thom.

parcel12-rend001-resize.jpg

Thom do you know what elevation this is? Exchange Street? Any word on their parking solution? There was talk I believe of them taking the remaining Union Station parcel for parking. One last question, is this still scalable? The Journal article from a few months back said they weren't sure of height, and would base it on sales expectations, could this rendering be stretched if the market were right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thom Unincorporated Area

Thom

Posted
Posted

Imagine yourself standing in Burnside Park and looking right at the point of the triangle; the three arched poticos are on that point. To the left and right is the facade on the side streets. Parking is internal above the ground floor and rises 3 or 4 stories. The design is such that the floor pattern could be repeated to make the building taller. At this time, this is all hotel, but if the market were strong enough, I could see some condos happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KRC Hamlet

KRC

Posted
Posted

Man, that's one ugly building.

I don't mind some aspects. I like some of the detailing and all the balconies, but the building it is too short! It looks like it's squatting in this form. If it were 30 or more stories maybe, but less than 20...I don't know. This is one I'd have to get used to if I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger Burg

Lone Ranger

Posted
Posted

Too many balconies, too much clutter, resulting in the aforementioned resemblance to a radiator, but I like the basic form of the building. I don't like the proportions of the tower in relation to the pedestal: either make the pedestal the same width as the main body of the building, or (if the pedestal must remain that wide) make the tower taller. But I mostly like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brick Burg

brick

Posted
Posted

I like the bottom and the top, just not together. And the middle makes me go cross eyed...looking for the hidden picture inside.

The top and bottom would be fine together if the middle weren't so cluttered. I think it just needs to be a little sleeker. (err, I looked again, scratch that. They won't really look good together)

I would like, however, if the bottom portion matched the height of the two fed buildings and/or Union Station which would kind of close up that area with a similar height and then have the tower coming out of it for more dramatic effect. For all I know, this render shows that, I just can't tell. It does seem slightly short though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mental757 Burg

mental757

Posted
Posted

I agree with the last 2 posts - way too busy or needs to be hightened to pull it up or something. Maybe Sierra Suites could steal some of what this seems to have too much of. What is that arch with the circle-thing at the top for - OMG it's the cyclopse building!

BTW, after staring at it long enough, I think I see walso on the 8th floor...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Garris Town

Garris

Posted
Posted

Interesting... Not at all what I expected. I like both the top and bottom quite a bit, but I think the busy middle is making this look shorter than it probably would be in reality. As Cotuit is fond of saying, it needs more vertical orientation in design detailing. As it is now, it looks kind of squished... (the oval rather than round design element on top only reinforcing the squished impression). I can't blame them for wanting a ton of balconies, as that site will have one of the most dramatic views of the city.

While I must say I liked the previous render for that site much, much better, this is no trainwreck like the first Sierra Suite design.

- Garris

PS: Capitol Cove given a 6 month extension? Why? I wish someone would hold this group's feet to the fire...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CtownMikey Burg

CtownMikey

Posted
Posted

Maybe Thom could give out our link to a member of the design reiew committee!!!?!?!?! We could make an actual difference.

Anyways i agree... i like the old intercontinental render better as of now.. unless they go taller. The rumor is a W brand hotel. So that means upscale. The design should reflect that.

Is there any chance that the next proposed downcity hotel could give us some cheap rates? I feel like we are building too many 'luxury' hotels at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Magellan98 Whistle-Stop

Magellan98

Posted
Posted

I think the most current design strives for a Westin-esque ciche, that would be more becoming of a Fairmont or Ritz Carlton brand in market like Atlanta or Charlotte than a W in the northeast. Still, while the design is lacking (I can even imagine the cheap materials they'll probably use), this could be much worse.

Why don't they put this building up at the Sierra Suites site and come up with something better for parcel 12?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.