The complexity of Huntington Ave

One Stretch of Huntington Ave, three proposed high-rise dorms, and three different sets of rules of the game for their development.

Huntington avenue tells an interesting story about Boston's character, economy and development. On one end of Huntington the Prudential Center is built on the air rights of the Massachusetts Turnpike, state jurisdiction. Just a bit further the Christian Science Center constitutes the largest privately owned open space in Boston (exempt from city property taxes). Next comes a long stretch of Huntington which is dominated by the colleges and universities of the Fenway and their students, after which you come upon Brigham Circle, where Longwood Medical Campus is packed full of hospitals and research centers on one side and Mission Hill sits on the other.

In the last ten years the development in this corridor has been marked by the institutes of medicine and higher education there. Northeastern was the first to build a highrise dorm on Huntington Ave, setting a new precedent in a tactic to remove students from the rental housing market in nearby neighborhoods, and for the developers of student housing to capture some serious bucks.

And so in the beginning of 2010 there are alot of student housing developments in the planning and approval phases. But what I've been really thinking about the last few days is the totally different planning, approval and financing process for each dorm. Three high rise dorms in pre-development on a short stretch of Huntington Ave illustrate my point. The Grandmarc at St. Botolph, currently envisioned as a 24 story privately operated dormitory for students from various institutions, the 21 story Northeastern Resident Hall K across the street, and a 21 story signature dormitory at MassArt down the avenue each address the need for student housing in an area bursting at the seams with students.

The Grandmarc is a private development subject to the BRA article 80 review process and has been scrutinized by neighborhood associations and Northeastern University, who must feel a little like private developers are coming and building a new dorm on campus. Across the street Northeastern is planning on locating student housing on St. Botolph for the first time at Residence Hall K, which is a part of the institutional master plan required by the city. Although this dorm was also subject to article 80 review by the BRA it was as a part of a master planned document for the university, which was updated with Residence Hall K along with a number of other changes the university is planning. The difference between the review process may seem subtle but it has resulted in little or no public scrutiny for Residence Hall K, right across the street from the embattled Grandmarc private dorm.

There is nothing subtle about the difference in the review for MassArt's new dorm. Since MassArt is a state college the development, financing and review of this project was subject to state legislation regulating the Massachusetts State College Building Authority, which develops the housing for state colleges. As far as I know there was absolutely no scrutiny of this student high-rise and the financing is from a bond issue, making the pre-development process smooth and inexpensive.

No doubt the revenues that can be obtained from housing wealthy undergraduate students in the neighborhood is responsible for the growing number of high rises along Huntington Ave. In the race for approval and financing of these projects it certainly isn't an even match-up. While the Grandmarc at St. Botolph has spent a lot of time and money navagating the review process and the community politics of the neighborhood (so far the related impact report of the project on the BRA's website runs to over 500 pages), Northeastern has the advantage of the institutional master planning process and MassArt has followed a state protocol which is entirely different and removed from local politics.

Take a look at the consultants listed by the Grandmarc at St Botolph from the impact report on the BRA website:






They sure are spreading a lot of money around getting this project off the ground. I can only wonder if any 'friends' of those who have some influence in the review process were recommended to the development team to serve as historic preservation consultant, or solar glare consultant? Spending so much money on the pre-development and review process not only creates an inequitable and inefficient development process, it might also create a corrupt one too.

These complexities in the development process really do make a difference. Next time you're riding down Huntington Ave and looking at the skyline growing up around you, take a minute to think about the abstract constructs of Boston real estate development that shape a small stretch of the city, and who the winners and losers might be. Ah, one of the many reasons why I love the city....