For the past several months, Boston officials have been fighting with city conservancy groups and advocates for the Boston Public Garden and Boston Common. What caused it? Shadows. The Winthrop Square Tower, a proposed 775-foot building, is meant to cast a considerably large shadow over the Garden and Common, and Mayor Martin Walsh is spearheading the skyscraper’s campaign.
Though there are several shadow laws in place to protect the public spaces of the city, Walsh is attempting to rewrite these laws while pushing Winthrop Tower through as the one and only exception. Walsh claimed that, “This is truly a once in a generation opportunity for Boston to pursue a unique project that will deliver positive benefits to the City of Boston.”
When you take a quick glance at the situation, one additional shadow in a park already shrouded by buildings doesn’t necessitate so much discussion. Walsh’s administration wants this building for one reason — the revenue. The removal of an unattractive parking lot paired with the reported over $150 million in benefits to the city seems like a pretty great pairing. The money would be put toward the Common, Franklin Park, Emerald Necklace and affordable housing. Even though it will create a shadow, it seems like the potential benefits from the building outweigh that fault.
Even Common and Garden advocates can’t deny that there would be advantages to Winthrop Tower. Other than the revenue, this will help put an end to urban sprawl. People are constantly moving out of cities to the nearby suburbs, increasing pollution on their drives to work and putting a burden on transportation. There are many options to fight this, including more apartment buildings being built and businesses being centered in cities. This would enable more people to be in concentrated areas, easing traffic and saving the environment. Boston should be focusing on building up, not spreading out. There aren’t many opportunities to do so because of Boston’s historic neighborhoods which can’t be renovated. It would be a mistake for the city to pass up a chance to combat urban sprawl, though it might cost the public space. However, the shadows created from Winthrop Tower would last an hour and a half at most, before most of Boston’s population would even leave their beds. It would impact the Common and Garden but not at a time when it would impact the people.
The main issue with the construction of this tower is that it would be setting a terrible precedent. Though Walsh has promised that absolutely no other buildings would be exempt from the new legislation, it seems risky to trust an administration that is so adamantly pushing for the erection of this tower. It’s clear to see the benefits this building could bring, but this could be a slippery slope for Walsh.
The Common and Garden are both historically important to Boston, almost on the level of landmark status. Therefore, they deserve a certain amount of respect. Many are saying that there’s already a huge shadow and this addition would only increase it a bit more. But if you add a little more shadow here, a little more there, that’s when it becomes a problem. It’s hard to tell what qualifies this building as an exception and if other buildings could potentially fall under those qualifications as well. Boston is praised for providing such a beautiful green space in the center of the city and it would be a shame to cover the entire space in shadows. This might not be an absolutely horrendous problem right now, but this could be a sign of how the city will face this issue in the future.
Despite the importance of these two parks, despite the precedent, Winthrop Tower is worth building. The shadow, though problematic, will not be cast for the entire day. The majority of Boston citizens won’t be directly affected by the shadow’s coverage. The city should be allowed to ask for an exception, as long as that truly is what Winthrop Tower is.
