Congress Street Garage Development [Archive]

statler

09-21-2006, 05:13 AM

Downtown garage will go on block
Proximity to Greenway could entice developers

By Thomas C. Palmer Jr., Globe Staff | September 21, 2006

Boston's largest parking garage, the imposing concrete structure at the mouth of Congress Street, near Haymarket, is for sale.

While parking structures are valuable properties in Boston, One Congress Street may draw big interest from investors as a development site, because of its location at the edge of the new Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway, in a part of downtown transformed by the removal of the elevated Central Artery.

Indeed, marketing materials focus on the property's ``stunning views of the Boston Harbor and the Financial District."

Standing 11 stories and spanning four acres over two city blocks, One Congress, the promotional materials add, ``includes significant air rights, and could ideally accommodate Boston's next office, residential, or mixed-use tower."

``We're not the people to do that," owner Randy Kohana said of redeveloping One Congress Street. ``I believe it's the best site in Boston, with 360-degree views that are completely protected."

His New York City firm, RAK Group, owns the property with Stockbridge Real Estate Funds, also of New York.

The property goes on the market tomorrow, but with no listed asking price. The current owners bought it in 2000 for $118.5 million. ``It's worth a lot more than we paid for it," Kohana said. ``Sometimes it's good to take the chips off the table."

One Congress Street has parking for 2,310 cars, is topped by two huge floors of glass-enclosed office space, and has a busy MBTA stop for buses, and entrances to the Orange and Green subway lines on the ground level.

While not a high-rise, One Congress is unusually long for a downtown building, with office floor plates five times the size of those in a standard tower. The garage portion was designed by Samuel Glaser Associates and Kallmann, McKinnell & Wood, the firm that created Boston's concrete City Hall.

It was built as part of the Government Center urban renewal project, which replaced colorful Scollay Square. It was closed in 1980, deemed unsafe because of corrosion and cracking, and reopened about six months later after about $120,000 worth of repairs. The city sold the garage off in 1983. It has been added onto over time, with the upper-floor office space built in 1990.

It's unusual for a parking facility to be offered for sale, and Boston has the second-most-expensive parking market in the United States, after New York City's, according to Cushman & Wakefield of Massachusetts Inc. ``Few parking garages ever come on the market, and this one has development potential, too," said Rob Griffin, president of Cushman & Wakefield, which is marketing the property for RAK Group.

The 294,505 square feet of office space on the top two floors are mostly leased, through 2009, to the US Environmental Protection Agency.

There is also retail space, occupied by Kaplan, an educational and career services firm owned by the Washington Post Co., Dunkin' Donuts, and a food market. The building's lower space was once home to Destinations, a nightclub that opened in 1991 with Kool & the Gang.

The property was among several featured in a Boston Globe Spotlight Team report in 1989, when it became known that former Massachusetts Attorney General Edward J. McCormack Jr., a friend of former Mayor Kevin White, had been an investor in that and other properties that had won City Hall approvals and increased in value.

One article said parking spaces are ``like large bars of gold" and called the garage ``McCormack's Fort Knox."

Thomas C. Palmer Jr. can be reached at tpalmer@globe.com.
Lnk (http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2006/09/21/downtown_garage_will_go_on_block/)

DowntownDave

09-21-2006, 05:38 AM

WOW, this is excellent news. Since the EPA controls the number of parking spaces downtown, can the rights to create spaces be sold? The buyer could then sell off spaces to other developers, raze the garage, and include underground parking beneath whatever is developed on the site.

JSic

09-21-2006, 06:14 AM

:D :D :D :D :D Awesome! This is the ugliest building in town.

Now, State Service Center, you're next. :twisted:

Joe_Schmoe

09-21-2006, 08:08 AM

Hooray! The article didn't mention tearing it down, but come on! Whoever buys it has got to tear it down and open up Congress Street to the Bulfinch triangle. And reestablish a real Haymarket Sq. Dream dream dream...

JSic

09-21-2006, 08:51 AM

Aside from whatever gets built, they should strive to bring back the old street grid as much as possible. And a new Haymarket Square would be awesome.

Corey

09-21-2006, 09:26 AM

yay!

LeTaureau

09-21-2006, 10:23 AM

This is great news! Lets hope they put it on the chopping block after the auction block.

Beton Brut

09-21-2006, 10:51 AM

This is a better development site for the sort of iconic tower Menino wants to see built in Winthrop Square...More land, better access to public transportation, zero interference from the FAA...If the city wants to seriously court developers to build big (>800'), this is one place to do it (the other, for all the same reasons, is the site of the old Boston Garden)...

Now, State Service Center, you're next.

More tomatoes for Paul Rudolph's unfinished masterpiece...My idea has always been to "relocate" the soon-to-be displaced arts community in the Fort Point Channel area to the Hurley...The state should sell to a developer interested in the adaptive re-use of architecturally significant buildings (and I'd argue that the Hurley is of equivalent value to any of Greater Boston's other modern icons -- Hancock, Carpenter Center, City Hall, Christian Science Center, etc); the developer should bring in some talent (Norman Foster, Zaha Hadid) and convert the building to non-conventional lofts, with collective studio, exhibition, and performance spaces, and put a winter-garden over the park...The state has never been a worthy occupant for this building, and has really exacerbated its problems with maintenance ranging from careless to poor...

I know modernism isn't for everyone -- neither is French Second Empire, but I'd never recommend dynamiting Comm. Ave...

I'll leave you with this: in 1950, the City of Buffalo bulldozed this --

http://www.planetclaire.org/fllw/fllwimag/larkinco/lcebwthr.jpg

http://rebirthofreason.com/Articles/Cresswell/Img/Larkin.jpg

http://vrcoll.fa.pitt.edu/ftoker/1531/ar.97.02401.jpg

They replaced it with a parking lot that remains to this day...

statler

09-21-2006, 11:01 AM

vanshnookenraggen

09-21-2006, 11:04 AM

castevens

09-21-2006, 11:28 AM

ya. That would look awkward as literally the last tall building to the north. Well, next to the soaring JFK building

IMAngry

09-21-2006, 11:59 AM

How about a 500-foot tower, like 60 State Street? Maybe tapered, even, say 600-feet tall at the top. sloping down toward the Greenway?

Joe_Schmoe

09-21-2006, 12:36 PM

Roxxma

09-21-2006, 12:38 PM

Ron Newman

09-21-2006, 01:31 PM

It's nowhere near Beacon Hill.

castevens

09-21-2006, 02:00 PM

Haha, well the half-mile shadow at 6am would be

vanshnookenraggen

09-21-2006, 04:23 PM

I think demolishing the garage and building two moderately sized twin towers, say, 20 stories or so, one on each side of Congress St, which form a semicircle on the Bulfinch side to recreate Haymarket Sq, would be super cool.

Since Boston needs more parking than office space and condos, this will probably stay a garage. But if anything was to be built, a low building, say 10 to 15 stories would be good right in Haymarket Sq, on the edge of the North End, and further up the hill you could built taller buildings, perhapse even a 30 story condo/office building.

Anything more would kill the scale.

Beton Brut

09-21-2006, 04:35 PM

The garage was recently given a spiffy paint job. It gave it sort of a glossy smooth look.
An off-topic question for Beton Brut (Or ablarc, or anyone else): Would painting City Hall like this ruin part of what is considered beautiful about it, that is, the 'rough concrete' look? Would it still be considered an architectual masterpiece in the eyes of those who now proclaim it so?

Not so off-topic, statler...

Justin once astutely observed that concrete "records its own history" (check out the board-markings, and even woodgrain in City Hall)...Painting would spoil this...

Better, I think, to power-wash, and (possibly) clear-coat with a sealing agent...The extremes of weather and temperature are tougher in Boston than in Los Angeles, one of America's laboratories for concrete buildings...

I knew that my suggestion of building tall in this location would be controversial...I look forward to the next few years, and the potential revitalization for the Bulfinch Triangle...This can and should be a vital, 24-hour neighborhood, with housing, restaurants, bars, entertainment, and shopping...There's no reason at all why tall buildings with well-designed street-presence can't co-exist, and dare I say enhance an historic district...I wouldn't put anything over 30-stories fronting on the Greenway, but at the "back" of the site, where the "drum" and elevator-tower of the garage is located, go large -- 75 stories...

This isn't unprecedented -- about 20 years ago the Feds killed a plan for a 40+ story hotel on the eastern-most end of City Hall Plaza, replacing the low-rise portion of the JFK Building (this is still a good idea)...

I'm all for restoring the old street-grid (including Hanover Street), and opening up the view from State Street to North Station...The Greenway side of the site may also be a good spot for a farmers' market under a glazed canopy, facing the Y (if they ever build it)...

JPC

09-21-2006, 04:56 PM

I believe that a tall tower would be good for the area. The Nashua Street Residences are going to start construction in the next year.
A residential tower is envisioned as just the first step in a grand redevelopment plan next to the arena that someday might rival the Back Bay?s Prudential Center.
If more towers are constructed by the Garden, this lot would be a great place to draw the skyline together. It would also look quite sleek having an 800ft tower rise from a relatively mid-rise area and would help alleviate the concrete void of the government center by surrounding it with more high rises.

vanshnookenraggen

09-21-2006, 05:50 PM

If the tower was very slender, like that new building they are proposing in Chicago, then I would be all for it. It is the bulky, square towers that seem to be the norm in Boston that would ruin the scale.

Actually, I think Boston would look really cool with a few slender, tall towers.

In regards to the Feds, as long as they are in that building nothing good will happen to Gov't Center.

DudeUrSistersHot

09-21-2006, 09:21 PM

vanshnookenraggen

09-21-2006, 09:25 PM

DudeUrSistersHot

09-21-2006, 09:28 PM

vanshnookenraggen

09-21-2006, 09:45 PM

I'd bet a lot of money that, if given free reign in each of these areas, developers and local corporations would salivate at the prospect of building enormous buildings on every one of these sites.

I'd bet a lot of money that you are wrong. This isn't Manhattan, and even here there arn't as many towers as you think there are (but there are a lot). Hell even the Freedom Tower needs to be saved by filling it with New York State and Federal Government offices. And I am willing to bet that won't be under construction for at least 2 more years.

Developers build towers because they think they can find someone to lease the space, weather office or luxury condos. These are small markets, even in big cities. Offices need to be convinced that it is worth the extra money to move into an expensive tower rather than a cheap office park in the suburbs, close to the people who would be working in them. Luxury condos, while the new big thing, only are for the top 1% of people, really rich people who don't really add anything to the city other than a limo blocking traffic as they get picked up (generalization, I know).

Then there is the actual cost of the building. When a building goes taller than 20 or 30 floors you need to start redesigning the tower to support the higher floors, elevators, AC/Heating, etc. That raises the bill.

The Pru and Hancock were only built to stroke the ego's of their companies and even they have left. Same for the Sears Tower in Chicago.

KentXie

09-22-2006, 05:07 AM

[quote="DudeUrSistersHot"]
[quote]
I'd bet a lot of money that you are wrong. This isn't Manhattan, and even here there arn't as many towers as you think there are (but there are a lot). Hell even the Freedom Tower needs to be saved by filling it with New York State and Federal Government offices. And I am willing to bet that won't be under construction for at least 2 more years.

Actually the Freedom TOwer has already started construction.

http://i10.tinypic.com/2wf00zn.jpg

type001

09-22-2006, 08:12 AM

Nope, the Freedom Tower construction has not started yet. I just got back from NYC last night, and I was down on Wall St. I go to the city a lot, and I always stop by Ground Zero to check for any sort of status. That construction going on right now is just preparation for anything that might be going there in the future.

Also the NY1 news channel reported on Tuesday morning that the Port Authority directors have withdrawn their agreements to move into that space when completed. They feel it is too big of a terror threat and kindly backed out. Bloomberg is not too happy about that, and he commented about this on Monday. He said that he basically has no tenants to take the space. This is a huge problem that the city is facing right now, but construction seems to be booming up in the midtown area. The NY Times building is coming along.

PaulC

09-22-2006, 09:05 AM

no your wrong!!!

That small blue tarp covered object in the bottom middle of the picture is the corner stone. It was laid a few years back so the things would keep on the schedule Gov Pataki chose.

vanshnookenraggen

09-22-2006, 09:51 AM

That small blue tarp covered object in the bottom middle of the picture is the corner stone. It was laid a few years back so the things would keep on the schedule Gov Pataki chose.

Actually the corner stone was removed as they have since changed the position of the Freedom Tower in the master plan. They laid it to try and show that they had unity in building the Freedom town but obviously this is still a hot issue.

castevens

09-22-2006, 12:12 PM

"Construction" began on July 4, 2006. Yes, the work that they are doing is considered "prep" work, but I would still consider it construction.

They are re-reenforcing the bowl they made for the foundation under the Twin Towers, and they are working the piplines from the city through this bowl in a specific way for the building.

Me and my fellow NYC editors at Emporis had a discussion about this topic and decided to list it as Under Construction

vanshnookenraggen

09-22-2006, 12:24 PM

quadratdackel

09-22-2006, 04:23 PM

Having very tall (> 70 floors) buildings at the edge of the skyscraper district reminds me of the Chicago skyline, which has its tallest buildings off to the side, creating, oh what do they call it, a "bridge" I think.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Chicago_Skyline_at_Sunset.png/800px-Chicago_Skyline_at_Sunset.png
OK, this isn't a fair comparison to our garage site, since this still has modestly tall buildings past the biggest ones, but I'm still OK with a very tall building at that site, but then again, I just like tall buildings.

bostonman

09-25-2006, 05:35 PM

Interest Could Push Parking Garage Sale Over $200M
By Beverly Ford Email this story | Printer-friendly | Reprints

BOSTON-The calls from investors, pension fund advisors and parking lot operators started coming into Cushman & Wakefield?s Boston office even before the city?s largest parking garage hit the market.
?We?ve had so many different people calling,? Robert Griffin, with Cushman & Wakefield, tells GlobeSt.com, referring to the interest in One Congress St., the landmark parking garage near the Haymarket. Although no price has been set for the property, Griffin believes it will fetch well beyond $200 million.

Griffin says the scarcity of parking garages in Boston combined with the property?s location, strong tenant base and potential air rights that could allow a tower to be built on the site, should bring out a number of bidders during the 25 to 45 days the garage is expected to be on the market.

The 11-story, 2,310-car garage, which spans four acres on over two city blocks, goes on the market today and Griffin is sure that the competition is bound to be stiff. Owned by the RAK Group of New York City, the property commands a prominent spot on the fringes of Government Center, the North End and the Bulfinch Triangle area, has 313,527 sf of office and retail space, a large portion of it leased to the federal government, and has views of the Boston Harbor and Financial District, according to Cushman & Wakefield, the garage?s exclusive marketing agent.

PaulC

09-25-2006, 05:42 PM

The more it cost to buy the more that has to be built to get the investment back. A large residential and hotel project could add a lot of life to this area.

Removing the garage over Congress has to be a requirement in any plan.

vanshnookenraggen

09-25-2006, 06:26 PM

The problem is Boston seriously needs parking. SO if you tear down this garage and build an underground one of similar capacity, let alone larger, it will seriously add to the cost.

Bust this really is a PERFECT place for a hotel.

awood91

09-25-2006, 06:53 PM

yeah, i agree. this is the biggest garage in Boston and Boston is the second most expensive city to park in in the entire country! yes, the garage is disgusting and yes, removing it would be beneficial to the surrounding area, but how is it possible? the developer would have to be seriously innovative on this one to keep parking on the site while building a new complex.

Joe_Schmoe

09-26-2006, 08:27 AM

statler

09-26-2006, 08:43 AM

Maybe we on this board could scrape together the $200 mil to buy it, tear it down, and build our dream project here. I've got $15.25 I can contribute. But on second thought, I don't think we would be able to agree on what to do even if we got the remaining $999,984.75.

I'm all in favor just putting ablarc in charge of the whole thing. Anyone oppose?

justin

09-26-2006, 03:56 PM

I'm cool with it, so long as he doesn't hire Leon Krier.

justin

budman3

09-26-2006, 05:54 PM

JPC

09-28-2006, 06:06 PM

With all this talk about 1000 ft. towers circulating around, I hope that this area is now under consideration as well.

bosma

09-28-2006, 06:31 PM

If the garage is torn down hopefully the new development will improve traffic and pedestrian flow in the 2 adjacent intersections

pharmerdave

01-24-2007, 01:01 PM

Developer purchases Congress St. garage
By Thomas C. Palmer Jr., Globe Staff | January 24, 2007
Developer Ted Raymond has agreed to buy the sprawling One Congress Street parking garage from its New York owner, according to a real estate executive involved in the pending sale.
Through a spokesman, Raymond declined to comment, citing a confidentiality agreement with the property's seller, Randy Kohana. But Rob Griffin, president of brokerage firm Cushman & Wakefield of Massachusetts Inc., which marketed the building, said Raymond is buying One Congress Street along with some partners.
Kohana confirmed there is a signed contract for the 2,310-car garage, which has two floors of office space plus retail area, but declined to comment further because of the confidentiality agreement.
No price has been disclosed, but an executive briefed on the deal, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to speak, said it is about $240 million.
The stark concrete building, which straddles the street, is considered a likely site for another Boston office tower. It went on the market in September.
Kohana's RAK Group bought the property, formerly known as Government Center Garage, with a partner in 2000 for $118.5 million.
The building was constructed by the city in the late 1960s as part of a major urban renewal in Boston that rid downtown of colorful, but seedy, Scollay Square. Mayor Thomas M. Menino recently proposed reversing some of that 1960s change by moving City Hall out of a nearby concrete structure of a similar style as the garage to a waterfront building .
Alex Krieger, chairman of Chan Krieger Sieniewicz, recalled being involved in planning for a renovated City Hall Plaza in the late 1990s, and said replacing the garage was considered even then.
"Few would come forward to protest the demolition of the building," he said. "There is a major development opportunity there. You could permit several million square feet of space."
A livelier and more pedestrian-friendly Haymarket Square could take the place of the east end of the garage, Krieger said.
Raymond is one of the developers designated to help rebuild the nearby Bulfinch Triangle, an area destroyed in the 1950s during construction of the elevated Central Artery. He is selling Turner Hill in Ipswich, which he bought in 1997 and tried to redevelop into a golf-course community.

Ron Newman

01-24-2007, 01:03 PM

Bravo.

The city should require that whatever is built here NOT use air rights over Congress Street (or any other street).

statler

01-24-2007, 01:18 PM

...by moving City Hall out of a nearby concrete structure of a similar style as the garage to a waterfront building.

Christ, I know 'Brutalist architecture' isn't exactly a household term, but the linguists hoops he just jumped through to avoid using it were painful. Since when does the Globe write at a third grade level?

IMAngry

03-01-2007, 11:38 AM

One Congress St., a nine-story parking garage with two floors of office space on top and shops below, was sold for $243 million to Raymond Property Co. and the annuity plan National Electrical Benefit Fund.

They bought the property from RAK Group of New York and Stockbridge Real Estate Funds Inc., according to the real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield of Massachusetts Inc., which represented the seller.

The building, a 40-year-old, formerly city-owned structure with 275,000 square feet of leasable office space, sits over the MBTA's Haymarket Station at the mouth of Congress Street, and is considered a prime site for redevelopment, possibly an office tower.

Thomas C. Palmer Jr., The Boston Globe

pelhamhall

02-26-2008, 01:26 PM

Anybody know anything about this project or is it dead? I saw the angry midget at the Globe crapped this article out back in December (not long after his angry "Russia Wharf: Alien on the park" smear article)

http://www.boston.com/news/traffic/bigdig/articles/2007/12/19/greenway_madness/

Anybody know what's going on with One Congress?

JimboJones

06-09-2008, 02:57 PM

Boston?s ?Berlin Wall? Could Face Wrecking Ball (http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/issues/5_341/breakingnews/199979-1.html)
By Thomas Grillo, Banker & Tradesman

The Government Center Garage could be replaced with the city?s latest mixed-use project overlooking the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway.

A controversial icon of Boston?s urban renewal of the 1960s could face the wrecking ball.

The owners of the Government Center Garage, previously mum on plans for the site?s future, said Monday they want to replace the concrete structure with a mix of hotel, office and retail space as well as condominiums.

Erasing the city?s largest parking lot would reconnect the North End and the Bulfinch Triangle neighborhoods with the downtown, Stephen G. Kasnet, chief executive officer of the Raymond Property Co., the building?s owners, told Banker & Tradesman.

?That building is like the Berlin Wall and we want it demolished to create a destination that fits into the fabric of the city,? Kasnet said.

Last year, Bulfinch Congress Holdings, a subsidiary of the Boston-based developer, paid $132.8 million for the 11-story facility adjacent to the Haymarket MBTA station. It includes 2,310 parking spaces, 275,000 square feet of office space and several retailers.

Kasnet said the timing could be right to demolish the building because the facility?s largest office tenant will end its lease in 2010.

?We have lots of ideas, but nothing is set in concrete,? he said. ?The question is what proportions of office, retail, hotel and residential makes the most sense. But if we cannot reach consensus on what is appropriate for the site, we could live happily with a new tenant in that building and reexamine the idea in 10 years.?

The developer has scheduled a community meeting June 18 for residents to share ideas on how the four-acre site should be redeveloped. The session will be held on the 10th floor of the garage at 6 p.m.

underground

06-09-2008, 03:35 PM

Prepair yourself for a controversal opinion: I don't totally hate the Congress St. Garage. First, I'd rather that all parking be centralized in one huge location than scattered across the city in a thousand surface lots. Second, it at least has ground floor retail, which is more than you can say about a lot of buildings in that area (the Court House, State Services, etc.). And third, it is hardly a "Berlin Wall" between the North End and the Triangle. Take a look at a map!

Ron Newman

06-09-2008, 03:50 PM

Berlin Wall: hyperbole, but yes it is. It totally blocks the view between the Haymarket area and the adjoining Bulfinch Triangle. It creates a dark tunnel on Congress Street. If it didn't do these things, I wouldn't object that much to it.

aquaman

06-09-2008, 03:54 PM

I always wondered how the heck that thing ever got approved. Such an eyesore.

Beton Brut

06-09-2008, 04:28 PM

The western-most part of this site is ideal for something very tall. I can't imagine the FAA throwing a flag. Beacon Hill might not be too enthused, but the shadows won't fall on the most densely populated part of the Hill.

Let's hope the developers are prepared to be bold.

Ron Newman

06-09-2008, 04:39 PM

This is nowhere near Beacon Hill.

Beton Brut

06-09-2008, 04:42 PM

^ Closest residential neighborhood that will object (i.e. hire lawyers) to an 800-1000' building.

JSic

06-09-2008, 04:59 PM

Good news! Tear this crap down!

JimboJones

06-09-2008, 06:54 PM

Ha ha. Get it up before Bulfinch Triangle goes residential.

It would be great if they could build something grand - yes, it blocks the view from North Station to the Financial District, but so what?

Perhaps the architect will be inspired by the old Haymarket Square that existed there prior to the construction of the garage.

I'd even let the owners close off the underpass, if they are creative enough.

Maybe we can get a new Haymarket station, as part of it?

Twenty stories seems about right ... no?

I think I'll attend and pass on my ideas.

caravaggiste

06-09-2008, 06:58 PM

^ Closest residential neighborhood that will object (i.e. hire lawyers) to an 800-1000' building.

Tell me again what it is that they have to lose, other than an unobstructed view of.....the stars? which clearly are hardly EVER visible!

BarbaricManchurian

06-09-2008, 07:05 PM

NIMBYs are NIMBYs, don't expect them to bitch less if they don't actually have a real reason.

caravaggiste

06-09-2008, 07:19 PM

NIMBYs are NIMBYs, don't expect them to bitch less if they don't actually have a real reason.

Maybe someone should leak a story about a phantom highway project to the media with verified development documents so their efforts can be completely re-routed. Like I always say: A prison, a highway, halfway house, airport FINE but not a god damn skyscraper in the downtown area of a major U.S. city!

caravaggiste

06-09-2008, 07:28 PM

but on another note, im extremely happy that this parcel is finally making its way to the chopping block for further development of the area. Walking home the other night, i looked to my left from north margin street and seeing the avenir so grand in scale compared to the flat terrain between the north end and west end was such an excitement. I can't wait for the whole area to fill in. Can we get something original in design though? Something MIND SHATTERING & BACK BREAKING!

BarbaricManchurian

06-09-2008, 08:11 PM

Maybe someone should leak a story about a phantom highway project to the media with verified development documents so their efforts can be completely re-routed. Like I always say: A prison, a highway, halfway house, airport FINE but not a god damn skyscraper in the downtown area of a major U.S. city!

I sure hope so. But you know, they can bitch about multiple projects at once. Just look at Shirley Kressel, she's never met a project she likes.

Suffolk 83

06-09-2008, 08:44 PM

Not a fan of this garage either, it does create a wall and walking under it sucks and makes everything seem dreary. But that's alot of parking spots, not really a fan of losing all of em.

pelhamhall

06-09-2008, 09:35 PM

This is directly on two T lines. 60 stories would be fine for this site. It's a landmark heart-of-the-city site. In my opinion, a far better site for a thousand footer than wedged onto crowded Federal Street.

I wish I could attend that community meeting but I'll be out of town. I hope the pro-development/progress voices are heard!

kennedy

06-09-2008, 09:52 PM

Is it possible for this to remain as parking, or maybe half-parking? This goes against all my morals, I mean, I think we should all live in the city, bike and walk everywhere we need to go, and use ZipCars if we must, but the city desperately needs parking. Is it possible to develop a space as a good parking garage? There's one on Newbury St. that is nice, across from Patagonia and Rugby...I think I'll start a thread on the Design a New Boston piece.

But I am for a redevelopment of the facade from the Greenway...it is an abomination to the area. And, I'm not for totally filling in the Greenway, it leaves open space to stand back and appreciate and architecture and development. It creates a stage for a bunch of new facades. And it leaves breathing room and light to flow into a part of the city that was previously covered in darkness due to the Central Artery.

castevens

06-09-2008, 10:33 PM

It's nowhere near Beacon Hill.
This is nowhere near Beacon Hill.

I just read this thread front to back, and I wanted to point out that you said that almost same thing twice: almost 2 years apart from each other

Good for a chuckle

Ron Newman

06-09-2008, 10:58 PM

LOL

The problem with this building isn't that it's a parking garage, but that it obstructs Congress Street. If you could remove the 'overpass' and the part of the building that is east of Congress Street, I wouldn't too much mind keeping the rest of it.

vanshnookenraggen

06-09-2008, 11:47 PM

Is it possible for this to remain as parking, or maybe half-parking? This goes against all my morals, I mean, I think we should all live in the city, bike and walk everywhere we need to go, and use ZipCars if we must, but the city desperately needs parking. Is it possible to develop a space as a good parking garage? There's one on Newbury St. that is nice, across from Patagonia and Rugby...I think I'll start a thread on the Design a New Boston piece.

I'm sure any new buildings will have underground garages. What percent of parking they will make up for the loss of this garage is something no one can guess.

How many parking spots are in this thing anyway?

caravaggiste

06-09-2008, 11:58 PM

2,310

Beton Brut

06-10-2008, 07:08 AM

GW2500

06-10-2008, 07:29 AM

Don't like how it said they could happily wait 10 years with a new tennant.

Suffolk 83

06-10-2008, 08:26 AM

Cojapo

06-10-2008, 08:50 AM

Not to sure how big the foot print is, but if it is mixed use, it would be nice to see a few towers go up here. The western part of the site is perfect for a 800 footer. I think 1,000 footer, just like at the Winthrop site, is to much. I would much rather see something engaging at ground level, with a tower that stands out, but not too bold. It would be cool if the started with a shorter tower closer to the greenway, then get taller as they move away.

pelhamhall

06-10-2008, 09:18 AM

Take a look at the garage footprint from satellite view - it is HUGE. It's got to be a few acres at least. This is where the Prudential Center 2.0 should go. There is immediate, on-site access to two T lines and a major bus hub. The tunnel entrances to the highway network is directly at its front door, with the airport and everything else just a tunnel ride away. Plus, North Station is just up Canal street two blocks, and the Blue line in Government Center is just across the brick plaza. Is there a more accessible location in Boston to all modes of transportation? Maybe the South Station project, but that'd be it.

I'd like to hear the activists argument against major, major development here. This can be the center of the city - the exclamation point to all of Downtown.

So all this rationalization for sustainable development, and all the logical urban planning techniques that we are preaching, and all the promise that this site holds comes down to one fundamental question: Has Raymond paid off the right politicians yet?

vanshnookenraggen

06-10-2008, 09:25 AM

If we need to replicate this capacity, assume 40% in the new developments. For the rest, look no further than North Station, over the tracks. It'll work for Garden game parking, and could be engineered to allow for future air-rights development.

Actually this is too good of an idea. This needs to get out there.

As for site location, how about the new city hall goes here, right at the apex of the Bulfinch Triangle (which has been blunted many times over the years.) Talk about iconic.

statler

06-10-2008, 09:35 AM

How about a few 5-10 story buildings made with brick panel facades, blue glass, and an oversized overhang around the roof. Maybe some nice shrubs and grass around the perimeter.

Hopefully CBT can design something like that.

vanshnookenraggen

06-10-2008, 09:43 AM

I know you are being sarcastic but that would be an improvement.

statler

06-10-2008, 09:50 AM

Better than a parking lo... garage.

Chris

06-10-2008, 10:08 AM

One of the bigger issues is how they are going to get the eastern parcel to interact with the Haymarket bus terminal-area there, which could use a overhaul anyways.

Pierce

06-10-2008, 12:39 PM

There is room to displace at least 30-40 of these parking spaces in the "retail" segment of the building next door, over the Haymarket orange line station.....

type001

06-10-2008, 01:27 PM

atlantaden

06-10-2008, 01:35 PM

type001

06-10-2008, 02:02 PM

Then we're probably going to see 3 5-10 story buildings with grass and shrubs surrounding. Nearby residents will claim that anything more would be in danger of "reconnecting" the neighborhoods.

Beton Brut

06-10-2008, 02:28 PM

Build big.

Build smart.

Build in context.

The site is large enough to do all three.

Suggestions:

Re-imagine Haymarket as a focal point: think Columbus Circle, but on a Boston scale (20-25 stories, residential & restaurants, and a glassy public market/transit hub, fronting the Greenway).

Reestablish Congress Street's street-wall with bars, clubs, and retail.

Go large (800-1000') and bold (Stephen Holl, Zaha Hadid, Ken Yeang) with a tower where the spiral drum and elevators of the garage currently stand -- 15 story hotel podium, and 50-60 floors of offices above.

statler

06-10-2008, 02:48 PM

^^ And don't forget the unicorn hitching posts!

Beton Brut

06-10-2008, 03:10 PM

I'm no fan of Trump, but perhaps he'd be able to do something here. My worry is that it would be more brash than bold.

commuter guy

06-10-2008, 03:23 PM

Is it possible for this to remain as parking, or maybe half-parking? This goes against all my morals, I mean, I think we should all live in the city, bike and walk everywhere we need to go, and use ZipCars if we must, but the city desperately needs parking.

I think Boston has enough parking, maybe not enough cheap parking, but there is always availability in garages. My office is very near govt. center. Work often takes me to the suburbs in the morning and I end up driving into Boston and parking for the afternoon. I always find parking in garages. For example, the parcel 7 garage next to the Haymarket vendors is never full during business hours.

vanshnookenraggen

06-10-2008, 03:23 PM

You all realize that anything that big will have the people of the North End up in arms, right? 25 stories? Not with a 5 story building across the Greenway. 10 at most, though further in I'm sure you could build them taller.

Bringing back the circle would be nice (I remember there was a proposal to do that in one of the original Greenway designs) but the traffic ramps there will make that mighty difficult.

Ron Newman

06-10-2008, 05:02 PM

I won't say that this is nowhere near the North End, but ... it's not in the North End.

Ron Newman

06-10-2008, 05:05 PM

I don't think anyone on this forum would argue against your vision. But the purpose of getting rid of the garage is to open up the view towards the triangle and even to North Station. So this talk of building ANYTHING here (especially towers) sort of defeats the purpose, no?

Opening up the view corridor requires only removing the part of the garage that overhangs Congress Street, and ensuring that the air rights above Congress Street are then made permanently off-limits to any new building. With that restriction, any new building(s) here would be a great improvement.

(While I'm on this subject -- the city should never again sell or lease air rights over an ordinary surface street. Air rights developments are fine for expressways and railroads, but they are deadly for streets and neighborhoods.)

jass

06-10-2008, 05:38 PM

I completely disagree. I think the fact that the building is over the road is one if its best features, and there should be more of them like this.

kz1000ps

06-10-2008, 06:30 PM

While I wouldn't want a lot of them, I don't find the garage to be that detrimental to the pedestrian experience of Congress Street. Losing the view corridor is unforgiveable, but otherwise I don't have much to complain about.

Back on the topic of how to arrange the site, the eastern half of the property -- where the bus station is -- is by far the smaller of the two plots, which would make a good spot for a hotel or residential tower; for this exercise I'll go with the hotel. It would need a big base for conference facilities, so let's say you put retail on the first floor or two, occupying the same sliver of land that the current ground floor does, have conference rooms cantilevering out over the bus stop on floors three through five, and put a 20-story tower on top of that, making for a building no more than 300 feet tall.

Then on the west side, put up a large office building of around 50 stories on the southern portion, where it's furthest away from the Triangle and North End, and in the west-northwest corner put up a residential tower, 30-40 stories tall. Both towers would sit on a retail podium of 3-5 stories.

It should look something like this. As seen, the office building would have 36k sq ft floorplates, and at 45 stories would yield 1.6m sq ft of rentable area. The hotel, at 20 stories, would contain around 625 rooms.

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/904/sdafgdj8.jpg

Beton Brut

06-10-2008, 06:48 PM

What kz said.

Someone get Richard Rodgers on the phone.

aquaman

06-11-2008, 02:56 PM

Don't forget -- this parcel is across the street from the JFK building. Anything the federal government does not like will never get built (see City Hall Plaza).

commuter guy

06-11-2008, 03:32 PM

^^ And don't forget the unicorn hitching posts!

Anything is possible even if its seems unlikely now. Take the unicorn hitching posts for example:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080611/ap_on_fe_st/italy_unicorn

tmac9wr

06-11-2008, 03:59 PM

Everytime I look at this area on Live Search Maps, I nearly projectile vomit all over my living room. I hate seeing the giant parking garage (which I admit, kind of looks cool and like a spaceship from the Greenway) next to that 4 story government low-rise right in the middle of downtown. What chance, if any, is there that we could see development on that 4 story government building?

KZ, your vision of the project is the best and most plausible that I have seen so far...hopefully the parcel that is closer to downtown will be built a bit larger....assuming this site is re-developed at all.

pelhamhall

06-11-2008, 04:30 PM

I just walked from the Financial District to Charlestown - I am positively giddy about this development. The garage is such a horror, walking under it, the whole expanse of dead brick plaza and concrete walls... can't wait for it to be gone.

And I never even realized until I arrived in Charlestown what a hole in the skyline it will fill! Although I think the site is big enough for three or four towers, I was able to fake two towers (working in the vaunted design program of Excel)

This is sort of what a 600 and 1000 foot tower might do to the skyline:

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn302/pelhamhall/1000feet-1.jpg

pelhamhall

06-11-2008, 04:51 PM

I agree with the developer - the "berlin wall" analogy is true.

East Berlin approaching Checkpoint Charlie:
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn302/pelhamhall/17newchardontriangleportrait2.jpg

Nervously walking through the darkened gates as the guards shoot uncomfortable glares:
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn302/pelhamhall/29UnderGarage.jpg

Freedom! The prosperity of the West beckons you to come and purchase Levis:
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn302/pelhamhall/32ViewCongress.jpg

MR. MENINO, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!

Ron Newman

06-11-2008, 05:03 PM

Removing this would be in line with removing various other elevated edges in Boston over the past few decades: the Charlestown El (Orange Line), the Washington Street El (Orange Line), the Canal-Causeway-Lowell Street El (Green Line), the pedestrian bridges in Charles and Leverett circles, the railroad viaduct through Roxbury and Jamaica Plain, the highway ramps above Charlestown's City Square, and of course the Central Artery.

(And I hope that McGrath Highway in Somerville someday soon joins this list.)

Beton Brut

06-11-2008, 05:43 PM

Don't forget -- this parcel is across the street from the JFK building. Anything the federal government does not like will never get built (see City Hall Plaza).

What happens on this site should set the tone for the rest of Congress Street. The Fed's need to be put in check on this one...

atlantaden

06-11-2008, 06:00 PM

I don't understand the reasoning behind the Fed's resistance to building anything tall near their buildings. The Federal Reserve Bank here in Atlanta is to be surrounded, actually towered over, on three sides by high rise residential/hotel/commercial (two are under construction). What's their problem in Boston? Menino needs to tell the Feds to kiss off.

castevens

06-11-2008, 06:40 PM

MR. MENINO, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!

That entire post made me laugh out loud. Thanks!

(on a side note: I don't think the word Menino has as much of an effect as Gorbachev)

palindrome

06-11-2008, 06:57 PM

That entire post made me laugh out loud. Thanks!

(on a side note: I don't think the word Menino has as much of an effect as Gorbachev)

quoted for truth!!

I nearly spit out my drink at that line.

Padre Mike

06-11-2008, 08:36 PM

I would be happy to see this monstrosity go (though I miss the days when I could park there for $4.00 a day!). Along with it I hope they take away that hopeless piece of junk they call a sculpture. During the Big Dig they removed it (to protect it??). Afterwards, they paved a rough circle around it with cobble stones to keep off the skateboarders and then they surrounded it with jersey barriers! I wish someone could tell me what the rusting hulk represents, why it maintains such a prominent location and the point of all the protection for it.

Beton Brut

06-11-2008, 09:04 PM

Along with it I hope they take away that hopeless piece of junk they call a sculpture. During the Big Dig they removed it (to protect it??). Afterwards, they paved a rough circle around it with cobble stones to keep off the skateboarders...

I split my head open on that friggin' thing when I was in high school - skateboarding.

commuter guy

06-11-2008, 09:06 PM

the railroad viaduct through Roxbury and Jamaica Plain

Ron, just curious is this viaduct you refer to the same as the the old elevated orange line to Forest Hills?

Ron Newman

06-11-2008, 09:38 PM

No, I'm referring to a former viaduct in the current Orange Line and Amtrak Northeast Corridor railroad right-of-way, from around Ruggles Street to Forest Hills. This went away during the early 1980s, when the railroad was rebuilt in a cut (covered in places).

AdamBC

06-11-2008, 09:49 PM

jass

06-11-2008, 10:32 PM

Ron Newman

06-11-2008, 10:50 PM

Where is this supposed sculpture? Even though I frequently get off the Green Line at Haymarket and pass through the busway there, I can't picture it at all.

Beton Brut

06-11-2008, 11:07 PM

North side, near the turn that puts you into the tunnels (Tip & Callahan).

It used to be on the opposite side of Congress, close to the elevator tower.

underground

06-12-2008, 09:41 AM

After the garage is torn down and an EPSN Sports Zone is built, if I hear anyone complain about how the city is losing its "grittieness" I swear to god...

unterbau

06-12-2008, 11:32 AM

I was wondering about that just this weekend. I was looking at it, and wondering why "art" was surrounded by jersey barriers.

I think they're protecting it from the terrorists.

kennedy

06-12-2008, 08:07 PM

That would be one huge ass ESPN Zone. Oh, and I'd rather have the ESPN Zone in the Seaport. This is a better place for local sports bars, retail, and a small hotel perhaps. I would not, however, put a skyscraper here-it would wreck the scale of things. Maybe 10-15 stories. But either way, this is probably one of the more valuable pieces of real estate available in the city right now.

pelhamhall

06-13-2008, 08:31 AM

I think that with the Bulfinch Triangle filling in with mega-block landscrapers, this is the perfect spot to put an exclamation point with something bold and tall that says "welcome to Downtown"

I'd stick the tall building back near the police/BSC building and step the other 2-3 towers down. A smallish (10-20 story) hotel could occupy the eastern block on the other side of newly opened Congress Street.

Once Uncle Ted leaves us, we can begin to have serious conversations about moving the Feds out of the JFK building, and even demolishing the low-rise portion. Uncle Ted has been famously against altering the JFK structure in any way at all because in addition to being a socialist, he's also apparently an urban planner.

chumbolly

06-13-2008, 09:11 AM

Once Uncle Ted dies, we can begin to have serious conversations about moving the Feds out of the JFK building, and even demolishing the low-rise portion. Uncle Ted has been famously against altering the JFK structure in any way at all because in addition to being a drunk, a lout and a socialist, he's also apparently an urban planner.

Classy.

mdd

06-13-2008, 09:19 AM

I really don?t think this is the right place for a huge tower. This is a prime location for beginning to weave residential from the North end back up to Beacon Hill There is a great opportunity to create a street life on Sudbury Street that begins to structure a relationship from Cambridge Street to the new Bullfinch Triangle to Union Street where all those bars and restaurants are located next to the holocaust memorial.

pelhamhall

06-13-2008, 09:21 AM

I wasn't talking about his current "situation" just the fact that he's 76 and given his well-documented lifestyle, it's safe to say he isn't going to be around for much more than another ten years or so.

But yeah, my last post was a heat-of-the-moment kind of thing and I'm sure reflects poorly on me. Ted's done a lot of great things for Boston.

JimboJones

06-13-2008, 09:47 AM

And, my friend, what do we have to look forward to after you die?

tobyjug

06-13-2008, 10:12 AM

Think positive, Jimbo. A real estate listing on a very attractive house!

pelhamhall

06-13-2008, 01:35 PM

I'm sorry - I make no friends with my hatred of Ted Kennedy, I know that and I let it slip out some times. But as somebody who has lost somebody to drunk driving just the sight of him makes my blood boil. It's personal. That's all I'll say about that.

Now, back on subject, here are some pics of the "art" at the New Chardon street entrance to the Congress Street Tunnel

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn302/pelhamhall/IMG_0711.jpg

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn302/pelhamhall/IMG_0712.jpg

The spaceship itself:

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn302/pelhamhall/IMG_0719.jpg

Ron Newman

06-13-2008, 01:56 PM

That's a sculpture? I thought it was something left over from the Big Dig that hadn't been carted away.

mdd

06-13-2008, 01:58 PM

That "art" needs to be loaded onto the spaceship and both, blasted off into infinity.

pelhamhall

06-13-2008, 01:59 PM

I was trying to understand why there are jersey barriers around it and I think I figured it out - to oncoming traffic the slope of the thing is almost like a ramp. If a car went out of control of got into an accident there going about 20-30 mph, and it hit that "sculpture" the car would literally be launched into the air.

My other guess is that the owners did that so that the artwork would be even uglier than it is so that they can tear it down without people caring. They can remove the graffiti on it and they choose not to.

mdd

06-13-2008, 02:01 PM

statler

06-13-2008, 02:03 PM

You people just don't understand art.

pelhamhall

06-13-2008, 02:07 PM

I understand it - it represents the ugliness in my life. It accomplishes this artistically by being both ugly and in my life.

unterbau

06-13-2008, 02:11 PM

No wonder it's so hard securing funding for public art in Boston.

pelhamhall

06-13-2008, 02:14 PM

On a related note - who else misses the lollipop sculpture at 100 Summer Street? Damn you Equity Office!!

statler

06-13-2008, 02:24 PM

This city needs a lot more kinetic sculpture.

Hopefully the Lollipop was saved and is safely in storage somewhere.

Ron Newman

06-13-2008, 02:24 PM

Where did Equity move it to, and why?

statler

06-13-2008, 02:25 PM

^^ So they could put up that boring corporate glass canopy that is there now.

pelhamhall

06-13-2008, 02:34 PM

100 Summer Street was the former headquarters of Blue Cross - when they moved to the Landmark Center, Equity purchased the nearly vacant building and instituted a repositioning campaign to market it for multi-tenancy.

I remember the Equity folks showing us the presentation and talking about how the lollipop sculpture "had to go" because it was ugly and 1970s. Personally, I hated to see it go, but it is their property, they own it, and they should be able to decorate it how they see fit.

I found it on Google search, it's in Roxbury near Shawmut Avenue now:
http://www.daleyblog.com/weblog/images/pops.jpg

statler

06-13-2008, 02:38 PM

^^ Good news.

Too bad the sculpture didn't go with their 'branding' campaign. Downtown got a little less interesting when they removed it.

At least they didn't trash it.

chumbolly

06-13-2008, 03:01 PM

I hadn't noticed that sculpture for years, and I just realized I use to skateboard on it (as someone else mentioned doing above). It's awesome for skateboarding--they should move it to the planned skate park under the 93 ramps. I think there it would actually work as art.

And Pelhamhall, I can appreciate your sensitivities regarding the Senator. On the other hand, I have a close relative who is struggling with the same awful disease he has, so I've got my own sensitivities. Moving on.

pelhamhall

06-13-2008, 03:04 PM

Agreed - in fact, I would think "The Lollipop Building" could have been a very strong branding campaign and the sculpture could have been a focal point. 100 Summer Street? Bla, bla, bla. Although commercial real estate has really only jumped on the bandwagon with branding over the past ten years or so - can't really blame Equity for not being at the forefront of a trend that hadn't really started yet.

I've mentioned before that there are two projects (not in New England) that I am working on and really getting excited over how architecture and branding come together to brand environments. When it's done right, it's really cool. When it's done badly, everyone rolls their eyes and wants to kill the developer. It's hitting the big time in the Miami and NYC markets, and Boston is dangling a toe in the water - not quite ready to jump in, but testing the waters.

tobyjug

06-13-2008, 03:04 PM

I miss the "high tack" grandeur of the Lollipop.

pelhamhall

06-18-2008, 10:55 AM

So is anybody going to this Gov Center Garage redevelopment community meeting tonight? I'll be out of town, wish I could make it. Would love to hear any updates.

statler

06-18-2008, 11:53 AM

Bankers & Tradesman - June 16, 2008
Owners Want to Demolish ?Berlin Wall? of Boston

By Thomas Grillo
Reporter

A controversial icon of Boston?s 1960s urban renewal could face the wrecking ball.

Owners of the Government Center Garage want to replace the concrete eyesore with One Congress Street, a mix of hotel, office, condominiums and retail. Erasing the city?s largest parking lot would reconnect the North End and the Bulfinch Triangle neighborhoods with the downtown.

?That building is like the Berlin Wall and we want it demolished to create a destination that fits into the fabric of the city,? said Stephen G. Kasnet, chief executive officer of the Raymond Property Co. ?But you won?t find a place with better public transportation infrastructure anywhere in Boston.?

Last year, Bulfinch Congress Holdings, a subsidiary of the Boston-based developer, paid $243 million for the 11-story facility adjacent to the Haymarket MBTA station. The building previously sold for $118.5 million in 2000. It includes 2,310 parking spaces, 275,000 square feet of office space and several retailers.

Kasnet said the timing could be right to bulldoze the building because the facility?s largest office tenant will end its lease in 2010. Located adjacent to the Haymarket MBTA station, the site offers transit connections to the commuter rail, and the Green and Orange lines

?We have lots of ideas, but nothing is set in concrete,? he said. ?The question is what proportions of office, retail, hotel and residential makes the most sense. But if we cannot reach consensus on what is appropriate for the site, we could live happily with a new tenant in that building and reexamine the idea in 10 years.?

For years, North End and West End residents have complained that the garage has blocked light and pedestrian access to and from the downtown.

Jane Forristall, a member of the West End Council, a group formed by nearby condominium building associations, said she applauds the developer?s wish to raze the facility.

?People will be very glad to see it go,? she said.

Robert O?Brien, president of the Downtown North Association, a group of businesses, condominium associations and community organizations, said his members are thrilled to learn the building will come down.

?Everyone wants to see the garage go and something better put in its place,? he said.

If approved, One Congress Street would be the latest development to be built on land cleared by demolition of the Southeast Expressway to make way for the Big Dig. More than 1 million square feet of office, residential, retail and hotel are under construction or in the planning stages for the area overlooking the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway.

Ron Newman

06-18-2008, 12:12 PM

?We have lots of ideas, but nothing is set in concrete,?

I'm glad to hear that. Brick, stone, wood, anything but concrete for the replacement, please!

statler

06-18-2008, 12:16 PM

^^Now you've gone and hurt Beton's feelings!

caravaggiste

06-18-2008, 01:24 PM

Id like to see something modern that engages the pedestrian on the greenway. This is a gateway into the North End. This is also a gateway into the West End and Downtown areas. Something bland with trees and sidewalks isn't going to cut it. It's time someone takes a bold step into a new vision for Boston. Especially in this area. Light shows, markets, nooks, crannies, cafes, ANYTHING except for TREES. Facade facing the greenway and Avenir should be turned into something VERY engaging. Something that makes people want to come to the area, not just for the food and old architecture but for the BOLD new idea that can come about. I'm not very happy crossing from Haymarket back into the North End everyday. I'm so bored..........

Beton Brut

06-18-2008, 01:25 PM

I won't miss this dog at all. I'd love to see what Zaha Hadid (Mistress of Concrete) would do here, but Richard Rodgers discarded proposal for the TransBay project (http://www.rsh-p.com/render.aspx?siteID=1&navIDs=1,4,23,1394&showImages=detail&imageID=2509) would look excellent. I don't see much concrete...

pelhamhall

06-18-2008, 02:54 PM

Seriously! It's in the heart of the city, directly on all the infrastructure/transit you could imagine and it's several blocks away from where anybody lives or any "neighborhood"

The site is huge - there's breathing room here for something dramatic. I hope tonight's meeting isn't dominated by the same small cartel of anti-growth yahoos that oppose everything in this city. Conversely, I hope the developers are prepared to be bold and don't opt for some Fan Pier style, mid-rise yaaaawn.

tobyjug

06-18-2008, 04:56 PM

Run Congress St. through Hotel Atraction like a cart path through a sequoia.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/Hotel_Atraction.jpg

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/Wawona_Tree.jpg

Waldorf

06-18-2008, 07:42 PM

Hate to admit it, but I kinda like the old dog, in a sentimental sort of way. Its submissive hulking stature pays respect to the quaint little neighborhood it replaced. But as President Reagan once said "...tear down that wall!"

Beton Brut

06-18-2008, 08:16 PM

Anyone else go to this?

briv

06-18-2008, 09:12 PM

I was meaning to go to this but it completely slipped my mind. How did it go?

Beton Brut

06-18-2008, 09:35 PM

There were about 70 people (I asked the security guard for a number). I came in a bit late, because I'm all the way out in Brookline Village.

In short, the garage owners seem to get it -- they suggested a lot of things that are consistant with the informed positions and bright ideas posted right here. I told them they have a better site than Steve Belkin and they smiled.

As part of the redevelopment, there's an interest in absorbing the Police Station and other smaller buildings on the westernmost end of the site into the project scope -- that's where the tower(s) would go. Interestingly, you can only go down about 30' before you hit bedrock, so an underground garage even half of this scale would be impossible.

The City wants to keep them to 150' on the Greenway (this is a mistake, should be at least 250'). They reinforced that this is an historic opportunity to remake the entire area, and what happens on this site will influence whatever may happen at North Station and City Hall Plaza. We may even get a "real" architect on the project.

Some well-meaning but uninformed folks (mostly golf-widows) from the North End and Beacon Hill and the West End voiced the predictable concerns about height and traffic and shadows. I didn't see our pal Shirley there.

Nothing's been decided, or more likely, the owners aren't ready to tip their hand. If the City coughs up the Police Station and other properties on the western side of the garage, it changes (and improves) the game.

There'll be more of these meetings, and more of us should go. I'll buy a round at the Green Dragon.

briv

06-18-2008, 09:45 PM

Thanks a lot Brut. I'll keep my eyes peeled for the next meeting.

Beton Brut

06-18-2008, 09:59 PM

Thanks pelhamhall -- you shamed me into attending.

I hope tonight's meeting isn't dominated by the same small cartel of anti-growth yahoos that oppose everything in this city.

pelhamhall

06-19-2008, 08:25 AM

I really wish I could have gone, I tried to re-schedule prior commitments but couldn't.

The developer has got Flagship Wharf built in Charlestown - something you could argue is huge and out of scale with the historic Navy Yard (you could, I wouldn't) and they also got a tower built on Copley Square - Trinity Place - so they have some experience going for height and density in sensitive areas and succeeding.

Chan Krieger is the master planner for the site, so we're in good hands.

underground

06-19-2008, 08:31 AM

It would be great to see the Police move back to the building they were temporarily housed in (is it called the Tunnel Authority Building?).

pelhamhall

06-19-2008, 08:44 AM

I wonder if the city will ask the developer's for the same kind of deal the developers of 125 High Street got, where they were allowed to tear down the fire station, but had to rebuilt it within their project. Now you have a fire station in prime Class-A tower space, fronting the so-called Greenway. So why not a police station tucked away in some corner of this new complex? I'm guessing if there is a hotel/residential aspect to this complex nobody would want to share it with police sirens, but could it be put somewhere that is shielded from residents?

Beton Brut

06-19-2008, 10:36 AM

Sure it could be done. It was discussed last night, along with incorporating a public school into the podium of the tower(s), much like the talked-about Gehry project in NYC (http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=54006&postcount=470).

briv

06-20-2008, 09:47 AM

Who would fill a public school? You could probably count the kids under 20 in the whole N. End or CRP on one hand. You do see a decent number of toddlers on Beacon Hill, but once they turn 4 or 5 it's off to the affluent environs.

Maybe they should consider a doggy daycare instead.

Pierce

06-20-2008, 10:37 AM

Who would fill a public school? You could probably count the kids under 20 in the whole N. End or CRP on one hand.

not once the pool opens. I don't know if those kids truck in for the day from elsewhere, but there is tons of them, and they all know each other. And I'm fairly certain many of them live in the neighborhood.

underground

06-20-2008, 12:24 PM

Being on the Green and Orange lines would make it easier to get to than the big school complex in W Roxbury.

commuter guy

06-20-2008, 03:06 PM

Regarding schools in the area:

The North End already has a K-8 school, the Eliot School. Its primarly attended by children from far outside the N. End. A bit less than 1/3 of the approx. 175 kids in the school are "walk zone" students from the local neighborhood. If student assignment procedures were altered maybe local enrollment would increase? I'm not sure.

In Beacon Hill, over the years, some have voiced support for a public school. There used to be one on Joy Street, but it was closed in the 1980's and it now houses tenants who are low income and have HIV/AIDS. I'm guessing most of families with school age children in Beacon Hill would prefer the public exam schools for middle and high school or private schools and they probably have the financial resources for the latter option. The community tried to convince Boston Public Schools to buy a building on Brimmer street in the flats for a public school a few years back but Boston Public said the neighborhood demographics couldn't justify it. The building is now a private school - Park Street School. That would have been the best location as it is accessible to families in Beacon Hill and Back Bay.

JimboJones

06-20-2008, 05:32 PM

"I DECIDE WHERE THERE'S GOING TO BE SCHOOLS!" said our illustrious Mayor. He has said "no" on two occasions: the Brimmer St school and at Seaport Square.

PaulC

06-20-2008, 06:14 PM

The parents in the Back Bay and Beacon Hill were willing to buy the school for the city,and the Seaport developer is willing to pay for it himself. Look for the Seaport School to happen.

Many people move out of the city when their kid get to be school age and they don't get the school they want. I think you would see a big change Beacon Hill and Back Bay had their own school and busing ends.

ps we don't want to turn this into a busing thread

whighlander

06-23-2008, 06:45 AM

Maybe this is the place for the "Grand Public Market Structure

A great Glass tent opening onto the Greenway surmounted by a very tall thin tower mixing residential, hotel and office space

with provisions for both permanent and transient vendors as well as a place to shelter the Greenway pedestrians from inclement or excessively hot weather and perhaps temporary exhibits as well

Westy

vanshnookenraggen

06-23-2008, 08:30 AM

I think that a grand public market would be better suited just south of this, expanding the actuall Haymarket famers market.

awood91

06-24-2008, 10:00 PM

hey guys, could someone post this please? its a new article on how the public meeting went

awood91

06-24-2008, 10:01 PM

http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/pub/5_343/commercial/200059-1.html

haha opps

statler

06-25-2008, 04:10 AM

B&T -June 23, 2008
Garage Owners Seek Citizens? Opinions on Replacement First
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter

Owners of a downtown parking garage they want demolished are first asking residents what they want to see in its place.

Last week, a team from the Raymond Property Co. met with more than four dozen residents of the North End, Beacon Hill and the West End to get their take on replacing the Government Center Garage. The Boston-based company paid $243 million for the 11-story facility adjacent to the Haymarket MBTA Station, and is considering replacing its 2,310 parking spaces with a mix of hotel, office, condominiums and retail.

?We?re here to listen to you,? said Ted Raymond, the firm?s chairman, told the crowd. ?I hope you will tell us your opinion about what you?d like to see here. There are no curve balls. We really want to be straight up with everyone about what we?re trying to do. If we develop this property, we want to make it the best project in the city with your help.?

The two-hour session that took place in an office above the parking garage signals a growing trend among big developers: find out what the neighborhood wants before asking for city approval. The concept could end contentious public hearings that often result in a turnout of angry neighbors who oppose a project?s height, density and use.

?We encourage developers to have meetings before they file with us,? said Heather Campisano, the Boston Redevelopment Authority?s deputy director for development review. ?It gives people an opportunity to comment before anything is officially filed with us. Residents really appreciate it, especially a project of this scale, size and location.?

Raymond is not the only builder listening to neighborhoods before a project is filed.

John Rosenthal, whose proposed $450 million One Kenmore development near Fenway Park is in the planning stages, held several meetings and reduced the project in response to neighbors? concerns about height.

John B. Hynes III, seeking approval for Seaport Square, a 6.5 million-square-foot mixed-use development in South Boston, held a series of public sessions where he heard repeated calls to build housing.

But the idea of meeting the public with a clean slate, as Raymond has done, is new and appeared to take some residents by surprise at last week?s meeting. Louise Thomas, a member of the West End Civic Assoication, said, ?I?m sure you have some kind of plan in mind.?

But Stephen G. Kasnet, Raymond?s chief executive officer, insisted that nothing has been decided, and the company is genuinely seeking feedback from the neighborhoods. ?We have lots of ideas,? he said. ?We paid a substantial amount of money for the property, so whatever we do will have to get a financial return and if not, we will keep this as a parking garage for awhile.?

Ironically, none of the residents offered up any ideas on what Raymond should build. Jane Forrestall, a member of the West End Council, said she was not surprised at the lack of sugges-tions.

?It will be so nice to get rid of the garage, but we haven?t had much time to consider what ought to go there instead,? she said.

Mayor Thomas M. Menino said he was briefed on several iterations of the project that included two or three towers at the site.

?I?d like to see a new building because the garage is a barrier between Government Center and the North End,? Menino said. ?But the question is, what height is appropriate for that location? What do you do with the 2,000 cars that depend on the garage for parking while construction is under way? I?m not going to put my stamp of approval on any project that fails to deal with the parking issue because the loss of spaces would be a detriment to businesses in our city.?

AdamBC

06-25-2008, 09:01 PM

So NIMBYs are willing to fight every building to the death, but when given the opportunity to plan from the beginning are dumbstruck and have nothing to say?

Ginjitsuman

06-26-2008, 01:15 PM

So NIMBYs are willing to fight every building to the death, but when given the opportunity to plan from the beginning are dumbstruck and have nothing to say?

It would appear as so, why is it whenever I think of what a NIMBY would appear like I think of some stout soccer mom driving through the city in a minivan enraged at all of the developement and just saying NO! to everything.
Anyone ever meet a NIMBY face to face at one of these meetings?

And also to remain on topic, growing up I liked the dense feel the garage gave off that felt similiar to the elevated green line. It felt abit dingy but I loved the feeling of being almost completely surrounded by the city. As much as I'd like to see this area filled in with towers and street life, I'll miss that "deadzone" that looms over the street. Other than Chinatown, I can't think of too many areas of Boston that have held on to their original grit.

commuter guy

06-26-2008, 01:32 PM

And also to remain on topic, growing up I liked the dense feel the garage gave off that felt similiar to the elevated green line. It felt abit dingy but I loved the feeling of being almost completely surrounded by the city. As much as I'd like to see this area filled in with towers and street life, I'll miss that "deadzone" that looms over the street. Other than Chinatown, I can't think of too many areas of Boston that have held on to their original grit.

I know what you mean, but this garage does not enhance the feel of the area. I agree the elevated greenline made Causeway Street feel and look more urban and interesting compared to today, but it was surrounded at the time by buildings on both sides of the street, including the Boston Garden which had covered passageways along the Causeway sidewalk.

Here, when your under the garage on Congress Street, you face mostly blank walls and the surrounding space seems to just flow into open voids left over after urban renewal. It doesn't really have a sense of place. The overhang over the bus station shows a bit more use and vitality, but all in all I won't miss a thing if this garage is replaced.

Lrfox

06-26-2008, 04:51 PM

Last week, a team from the Raymond Property Co. met with more than four dozen residents of the North End, Beacon Hill and the West End to get their take on replacing the Government Center Garage.

I understand that this is a step to try to avoid the arguments that will happen down the road from local NIMBYs, but given the centralized location of the garage, shouldn't they be polling more than just residents of those three neighborhoods? I'm from out of town, so I won't pretend to know what's best for the city, but I would hope that the plan for this location would be to have a regional effect/ draw.

There are (many) areas of the city that should be primarily influenced by the people living in the immediate vicinity, but this doesn't seem to be one of them. It's in an area that's frequented by as many or more people from not only other towns, but other states and even countries. If ever there were an area to think well beyond a neighborhood scale, this seems to be it.

p.s. I mean "scale" in terms of the scope of the project, not the physical size of the building(s) and its relation to the surroundings. The garage is out of scale physically and as a result is out of touch with its surroundings. A new out of scale building would be just as bad as the old one. I just meant that this is a project that should be influenced by more than just three neighborhoods.

Ron Newman

06-26-2008, 05:32 PM

One group of stakeholders that's important, but not getting much attention right now: people who wait for buses at the Haymarket busway. Any redevelopment of this area has to improve conditions for them, or at least not make them worse. The buses go all the way to Marblehead, so we're not just talking about poor people here.

A number of other T buses stop near Haymarket but don't use the current busway. I'd like to see bus operations rationalized in some way.

kz1000ps

06-27-2008, 12:18 AM

Some general shots:

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/8509/img2288ev8.jpg

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/259/img2293iv5.jpg

What stands directly west. The building in the middle is Center House: "A day treatment program designed to prevent or shorten the hospitalization of people with severe and persistent mental illness"

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/1904/img2294ud1.jpg

an Nstar substation

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/1917/img2295mq8.jpg

and the police station:

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/3382/img2296qt4.jpg

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/7189/img2298sr0.jpg

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/2992/img2305xq9.jpg

Now, it's time to use your imagination -- fill in the blanks!

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/4613/img2272on6.jpg

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/2752/img2286ws9.jpg

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/8814/img2325lj9.jpg

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/6374/img2299cd4.jpg

http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/8282/img2321je6.jpg

tmac9wr

06-27-2008, 11:38 AM

Those pics do a great job of letting you see just how massive this thing really is. The earlier Berlin Wall comparison is totally justified. Hopefully they can inject a good amount of people and jobs into that massive lot.

pelhamhall

07-02-2008, 04:05 PM

A lot of good press on this lately on this project - also check out these cool pictures of the garage before its 1980s (?) addition of the office space:

http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/kallmann/kallmann2.html

Does anyone know the history of when/why/how the office use was added?

The Government Center Garage reminds me of Safdie's Boston Museum Project:

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

Lurker

07-02-2008, 05:38 PM

The garage was found to be structurally unsound. To pay for retrofit the office space was added above. EPA division 1 headquarters was there for years before entering into the process of moving into the Boston Federal Building & Post Office aka. the McCormick Federal Building in Post Office Square. The EPA gets a restored Art Deco Fortress with a LEED overhaul, of what was a nearly abandoned federal building. We get a chance to tear down an ugly garage. Win Win

tobyjug

07-02-2008, 08:26 PM

^^^ Fortress. I like that. Pining for a statue of "Iron Feliks" out front, tovarich?

Lurker

07-02-2008, 10:23 PM

Heh,

I rather like the existing monument in Boston Office Square proper and I doubt US Government would have grant a 'heroic' figure statue of a rather sinister and insidious individual in a prominent public display.

Given the rather bitter rivalry between the GRU and KGB, I can't really say Dzerzhinsky Square was my favorite place.

tobyjug

07-02-2008, 11:44 PM

Ah. I understand. But we do have our Mr. Hoover. And Dulles Airport.
Lurker is a good handle...but not Black Bat?
In any event, good riddance to this garage. Off to the dustbin of history.

PaulC

07-16-2008, 06:33 PM

I'm not against a little blackmail sometimes:

http://www.beaconhilltimes.com/
Firm has gig plans for the Government Center Garage by Dan Salerno

A development firm is pushing a bold vision to demolish the Government Center Garage, building in its place an ambitious mixed use development that would combine restaurants, hotels, and shopping with residential units.
In a second public meeting held with members of the Boston Redevelopment Authority, representatives from the Raymond Company presented details of its proposal to the public, including an outline of how parking concerns would be addressed.
?This is a unique opportunity,? said Ted Raymond of the Raymond Company and Bullfinch Congress Holdings.

According to Raymond, the company wants to get started ?quickly,? and will look to have all their approvals in place by the time the lease for the current tenants occupying the top floor offices expires in January 2010. If the approvals are not in place by that point, said Raymond, the project would be delayed indefinitely as the company would then look to find another tenant who would likely require a long term lease.

A big part of the appeal of the demolition, according to Raymond, would be destroying a structure that currently acts as a ?wall? between Bullfinch Triangle, the North End, Faneuil Hall, and Beacon Hill, which all converge on the site. Getting rid of the garage would help to join neighbors in much the same way as the removal of the central artery, said Raymond.
Of course, destroying the garage means destroying hundreds of parking spaces, and what to do about the loss of those spaces was one of the main topics of concern at last week?s meeting. According to Raymond CEO Steve Kasnet, the development would soften the loss of the spaces during construction by keeping some of the spaces open while the project was in the process of being built. The completed project, however, would still likely have fewer spaces than the current garage.
The developers said they are considering several different possibilities for parking on the site, and that community input would be a crucial part of the decision making process. Kasnet pointed out that the excellent public transportation access made fewer spaces palatable, especially given the fact that the current garage often does not operate at anywhere close to capacity.
Preserving a Boston-like ?character? is also key, according to Raymond. Rather than a huge high-rise or a single massive structure, the development will have an urban, neighborhood feel. The development, it is hoped, would be extremely pedestrian friendly.
A third meeting will be held in August to discuss more specific issues related to parceling on the site.

Charlie_mta

07-16-2008, 08:03 PM

Wow, this proposed devlopment sounds like a good one.

As for the loss of parking, City Hall Plaza could be converted into a giant parking lot, with no appreciable aesthetic loss. LOL.

pelhamhall

07-16-2008, 08:25 PM

I've been given strict orders by a former colleague of mine to speak no ill of this project - but truthfully, I can't find anything to complain about, this is a real slam dunk for the city. The developers have put out a web site on this project, I've emailed my colleague for the URL and have yet to hear back - does anybody know it? It's not the garage parking web site, he said it's one just on the redevelopment process.

ngb_anim8

07-17-2008, 09:03 AM

While I'm disappointed that there probably won't be a high-rise on this site, I think the developers were smart. Suggesting an urban neighborhood fee should help with the approval process and public perception. A lot of potential to get some well-crafted mid-rises. As noted in another thread - having a beautiful building is as important(or more) as having a tall one.

Ron Newman

07-17-2008, 09:29 AM

I don't see why having a tall building is important at all. What's important is rebuilding a connection between the Bulfinch Triangle, Haymarket, and the Blackstone Block.

KentXie

07-17-2008, 10:41 AM

I'm just hoping for a well designed building that will look futuristic and stuff. Yeah it's vague but it will make Boston more interesting looking.

pelhamhall

07-17-2008, 11:42 AM

Just got the email from my former colleague, Raymond's web site on this project is at www.demolishthegarage.com - no renderings or anything, just the PR campaign laid out in simple terms - nice site.

I guess the days of typed-up 8.5x11 hand-outs at community meetings are over!

Mike

07-17-2008, 05:13 PM

thanks for that link ... there's some interesting stuff in there.

?We want to end up with a project that looks like three city blocks,? said Raymond, adding that they wanted a intimate streetscape. ?We want it to look like Boston. It might end up looking like fifteen buildings.? Rebecca Mattson, Chief Operating Officer, said, ?We want to avoid Seaport?a single block, a single building?it is so sterile looking.? ?We have no plans to build 100-foot towers said Alex Krieger, of the urban design firm of Chan Kreiger Sienwicz, which was hired to develop the master plan. Krieger is leading the planning process. ?The lowest building will be adjacent to the Greenway, and will get progressively taller as you move toward the Bulfinch Triangle.?

The developer is considering adding another 1.6 acres to the site by including the abutting New Sudbury Street sites where the Area A police station, an NStar transformer, and a social service building are located,
according to Raymond. ?The police station will remain in the area of redevelopment,? said Mattson.

http://www.demolishthegarage.com/pdf/news/North_End_News_2008_06_30.pdf

statler

07-17-2008, 08:07 PM

Too bad its not economically feasible to actually build fifteen buildings rather than three buildings that try to look like fifteen.

ablarc

07-17-2008, 09:14 PM

^ Oh, it's economically feasible alright --just not optimally lucrative. If zoning controlled footprint as it controls height, it would automatically become optimally lucrative as well.

Developers build whatever they're allowed to build. What do you expect?

Beton Brut

07-17-2008, 09:20 PM

Developers build whatever they're allowed to build.

And publicly congratulate themselves for "sticking to the script" even if it guarantees a bad result.

itchy

07-20-2008, 09:22 PM

If zoning controlled footprint as it controls height, it would automatically become optimally lucrative as well.

Is there any place in Boston where zoning does control footprint? Do other US cities have this? (I imagine European cities like Berlin or Rome must.) Has there ever been talk about this in Boston or elsewhere? Could it ever happen?

That's a lot of the same question. I think controlling footprint would be great -- then we'd have less State Transportation Buildings and more contemporary versions of the South End. I just doubt (but am hopeful) that there's any push for this in Boston today. People would call it "anti-capitalist" or something, though they have no problem with height restrictions. And yes, that is hypocritical -- and neither of them is necessarily "anti-capitalist" in the least.

ablarc

07-20-2008, 09:41 PM

Is there any place in Boston where zoning does control footprint? Do other US cities have this?
Single-family and other zoning controls footprint everywhere in Suburbia by means of setbacks. If you have a 50' x 150' lot with 5' side setbacks, 40' at the rear and 20' in front, your buildable footprint is 40' x 90'.

As is the case with all things suburban, however, this does not resemble the urban condition and has no effect on scale.

In cities, you could start by forbidding the development of more than two adjacent properties as a single parcel. This would have the effect of slowing the assembly of large lots and seriously out-of-scale buildings such as the one Druker is proposing in place of Shreve's and several other parcels. It would also encourage sliver buildings, which are rarely out of scale. There's a sliver building on Beacon Street facing the Common, that no one thinks is out of scale, and there are a couple on Commonwealth Avenue in the tenderloin of Back Bay.

New York has oodles of them --some over forty stories tall.

tobyjug

07-20-2008, 09:53 PM

There's a sliver building on Beacon Street facing the Common, that no one thinks is out of scale.

Perhaps it is apocraphal, but I have heard that the building to which you refer caused such a stir when built that building height, hitherto restricted only by elevator technology, became subject to city zoning for the first time.

I like that assemblage restriction idea. Clever.

ablarc

07-20-2008, 10:09 PM

Perhaps it is apocraphal, but I have heard that the building to which you refer caused such a stir when built that building height, hitherto restricted only by elevator technology, became subject to city zoning for the first time.
Sounds like retro-history to me.

Russians used to be good at that.

itchy

07-20-2008, 10:13 PM

They're getting good at it again: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2163481.ece

Beton Brut

07-20-2008, 10:22 PM

I don't see why having a tall building is important at all.

It's not important, but it is sensible, given the proximity to no fewer than five public transportation options, and it does not interfere with any flightpath at Logan.

What's important is rebuilding a connection between the Bulfinch Triangle, Haymarket, and the Blackstone Block.

Not just important -- critical.

Mike

07-23-2008, 04:52 AM

Next Meeting:
Topic: Front (East) Parcel Planning
July 23, 2008 6:00-7:30pm
The public is welcome. Please enter at the One Congress Street entrance at the corner of New Chardon and Merrimac/Congress Streets, and remember to bring photo ID for building security.

http://www.demolishthegarage.com/meetings.htm

pelhamhall

07-23-2008, 10:50 AM

Did you guys notice that an "office space for lease" banner has gone up on the garage? They are going to market the office space on the upper floors of the existing garage throughout the planning process to act as a hammer hanging over the head of the planners/public - very smart tactic. If they lease the space on the upper floors, the garage stays for another 10-year lease term.

The leasing banner is a very visible tactic.

Beton Brut

07-23-2008, 11:40 AM

Unfortunately, I can't make this tonight. Can anyone get to it?

Boston Needs A ShakeShack

07-23-2008, 11:42 AM

Unfortunately, I can't make this tonight. Can anyone get to it?

I have to go to a Back Bay Police Advisory meeting instead. bleh...eek, scary homeless!

tobyjug

07-24-2008, 05:46 PM

Sounds like retro-history to me.

Russians used to be good at that.

Govno zabarchi!

itchy

07-25-2008, 12:04 AM

^^ Govno sobachee (dog shit)? (говно собачее)

pelhamhall

07-27-2008, 01:26 PM

Check out the project's web site - I have so far missed every single meeting on this project, but they post the PPT shows. The most recent one shows renderings and models for the front parcel (the bus station parcel). Very much worth checking out!!!

I love what they're doing - and how they're doing it - their PR agency has them presenting bad options, and then the one that they want. It's a very powerful PR strategy. At the end of this process, the neighbors are going to want exactly what the developer wants and everyone will laud the "collaborative neighborhood process"! The busybody "activists" will think they actually had some input - brilliant! Steve Bailey, angry little former Globe communist, has seen the plans that the developer wanted all along - from over a year ago. How much do you want to bet that the activists end up with this same exact plan? Does Bailey still have copies of that plan? Would he leak them to the Globe or others? I bet he would.

vanshnookenraggen

07-27-2008, 02:58 PM

Link?

AdamBC

07-27-2008, 03:26 PM

Link?

I think it is this one:

http://www.demolishthegarage.com/pdf/presentations/pres_2008_07_23.pdf

briv

07-27-2008, 03:35 PM

The pdf goes into detail on each individual scheme. It seems like scheme 11 is the one they're leaning towards.

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

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y99/briv1/scheme_11_overview.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y99/briv1/scheme_11_canal.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y99/briv1/scheme_11_congress.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y99/briv1/scheme_11_new_chardon.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y99/briv1/scheme_11_greenway_existing.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y99/briv1/scheme_11_greenway.jpg

AdamBC

07-27-2008, 03:47 PM

Not bad, but definitely 'generic office park' on 3 sides and 'Bostonian' on the side facing what's left of the old garage.

Arborway

07-27-2008, 03:57 PM

Generic Office Park Aesthetic? Check!

Blank Walls Of Colored Glass Facing Pedestrians? Check!

tocoto

07-27-2008, 04:46 PM

I like the garage better. A least its big and powerful - like a city. The proposals are frail, short and uninspired - nothing new there. I'd rather see it left alone until a new era dawns for architecture and urban planning in Boston.

Suffolk 83

07-27-2008, 05:32 PM

wow leave the garage. hugely dissappointing. I don't get where they're making money... I guess the offices facing the Greenway are class A...

pelhamhall

07-27-2008, 06:15 PM

This is just the little front parcel. The idea, as they state in their materials is that the tall buildings would step back from the greenway. THis is just the "front' of the garage area - not a replacement for the whole garage.

Chris

07-27-2008, 06:15 PM

hugely disappointing is an understatement.

bosdevelopment

07-27-2008, 06:34 PM

scheme 4 is somewhat preferable, but not by much.. Seems like the whole thing is a scheme alright...

blade_bltz

07-27-2008, 06:52 PM

I like how the PDF claims that scheme 11 has all Pros and no Cons. What about its repugnant appearance?

vanshnookenraggen

07-27-2008, 08:39 PM

Lame as hell.

Beton Brut

07-27-2008, 10:20 PM

None of this excites me. Keep trying...

Pierce

07-27-2008, 10:46 PM

None of this excites me. Keep trying...

Can we let someone besides Krieger, Elkus/Manfredi or CBT try? This town needs an Irwin Miller, so we could throw some money at OfficeDA or Utile and see what they come up with.

lexicon506

07-28-2008, 12:08 AM

I'm holding out hope that these renderings are just placeholders used to better visualize the massing of the site. If you look at Krieger's website, none of his projects are as horribly bland and uninspiring as this one...so I think/hope/pray that the real design is yet to come.

Also, all articles mention Krieger's firm only as the master planners. Does that mean we could be seeing different architects working on the individual buildings?

Charlie_mta

07-28-2008, 02:32 AM

Why are they keeping part of the existing garage? I was hoping the whole damned thing would get wiped out.

ablarc

07-28-2008, 06:08 AM

None of this excites me.
Eleven schemes ... and every one a clunker.

Keep trying...
No use. If you've got no talent, a lifetime isn't enough.

These guys are hacks ... even if (or perhaps because) they teach at Harvard.

type001

07-28-2008, 07:40 AM

As bad as the "designs" are, none of this accomplishes anything. None of the renderings, albeit placeholders, reconnects any of the neighborhoods the way I had hoped. Why remove any of the garage at all? It serves a purpose.

statler

07-28-2008, 08:02 AM

Lrfox

07-28-2008, 09:00 AM

Why are they keeping part of the existing garage? I was hoping the whole damned thing would get wiped out.

I was wondering if they were too. Part of me thinks the piece of the garage in the renderings is a placeholder to show where the rendering for that parcel is in relation to where the garage is/was; while I'm also worried that they'd actually consider saving some of it.

In any case, the renderings are uninspired. I would hope for more, but unfortunately, it's just the kind of crap that NIMBYs and neighborhood groups could get behind. I do like that they're developing each parcel individually. Perhaps, crappy architecture aside, the completed project can look like separate mini-projects. I don't like the mass-developed seaport-style projects that are blocks of bland architecture. Then again, different bland architecture is still bland architecture.

I'm going to wait to see the rest of the project before reserving complete judgement. There's nowhere to go but up???? (fingers crossed)

Boston Needs A ShakeShack

07-28-2008, 09:05 AM

I thought the idea was to build a little "neighborhood" with different kinds of smaller buildings? This is not really what I pictured when they described it.

pelhamhall

07-28-2008, 09:12 AM

Haha! You're putting me on the spot here! I told you I couldn't speak ill of this project! I called my colleague who has only ancillary involvement with the project and got some more information:

1) These are just for place-holder purposes only. A design competition is planned for all the individual buildings. Chan Krieger is the Master Planner only.

2) These designs are for the front parcel only. The ENTIRE garage will be torn down, and the next public meetings will lay out the plans for the main portion of the garage site. This will be the "controversial" aspect of the project because this is where 600-800 foot towers have been rumored.

3) This was done so that people can focus only on this block, and let the developers know what they want to see on this one block. The pedestrian access from North Station to downtown is the focus here - thus the covered arcade and wide walkway.

4) These developers did Trinity Place and Flagship Wharf - uninspiring architecture, but "safe" - I'd expect more safe and uninspiring architecture given their portfolio. This isn't a national developer, these are old-school locals who have been beaten down by the Kressel's and the Vivian Li's. They know how to produce the type of faceless slop that activists like that will approve of.

5) It's a common PR tactic of any city's master planning process to show the community traditional, red brick, etc - this calms the crazies, and that's all that needs to be done at this point of the process. Once whatever massing/layout is approved, then they can announce actual designs which are typically less "safe".

With this knowledge (note that the source is NOT somebody who is directly involved with the development, design, or architecture of the project) then yes, I'd say the project is still a slam dunk. Ridding ourselves of the garage and putting in its place smaller blocks with four-six buildings is absolutely a slam dunk to me.

I always, always say that the devil is in the details. I need to see the details, and that won't happen for at least a year. I completely approve of dividing that block into two smaller buildings with a pedestrian promenade through the middle. If we can get rid of the garage and replace it with a bunch of small foot prints, then I'd be happy.

Of course the architecture won't win any awards, this is Boston and this whole BRA pre-submission planning process is a horrible joke and waste of resources. The developer should be allowed to submit what they are planning, not have to jump through these hoops to pretend they are listening to the community. I don't fault the developer at all, I fault the over-planning at the BRA for this exercise in futility.

This block is the smallest, most minor part of the redevelopment. I want to see the mega-towers that they are setting the table to unveil.

Ron Newman

07-28-2008, 09:26 AM

Replacing the garage with a collection of small, boring background buildings would still be a major step forward for the city.

ablarc

07-28-2008, 09:35 AM

Replacing the garage with a collection of small, boring background buildings would still be a major step forward for the city.
Just so they're small enough --and I mean in footprint, not height. When it comes to height ... let 'er rip! If the footprints are modest, the project will reflect the scale of Beacon Hill and the North End --regardless of height.

And I agree, Ron ... boring is perfectly OK. Most North End buildings are boring, and so --come to think of it-- are the ones on the Cambridge Street side of Beacon Hill.

So bring on the boring, small-footprint wave of the future (and don't forget to put stores on the ground floor!).

sidewalks

07-28-2008, 09:50 AM

Off topic, but is anyone else surprised that the groundfloor retail space which faces the greenway in the garage above haymarket station remains vacant? What's up with that?

Pierce

07-28-2008, 09:57 AM

So bring on the boring, small-footprint wave of the future (and don't forget to put stores on the ground floor!).

Great, welcome to Celebration, Massachusetts....

I couldn't disagree more. The edges along that part of the greenway/artery/whatever want to jump. When I go through the North End Park I find a vibrant space, the water, the form of the overhead, with the berm on the opposite blocking out cars and almost setting the base for a view to set on. The custom house tower, the Union Oyster House sign, even the ugly orange line/garage/empty retail building--though ugly and one of my least favorite--even admittedly jumps in. Pan right and you've got the sign on the garden, the zakim bridge (which will remain visible to a degree after the rest of the triangle is developed), even the remnant (and apparently still quite profitable) billboards on the north end side. The "boring" north end side will be completely different in ten years, re-developed piecemeal to face the park, and eat up the views now priviliged to exposed party walls and tenement kitchen windows.

I think the garage parcel needs something lively, something that speaks to the reconfiguration of this space, not some staid contextual 5 story buildings from downtown Newburyport. Blah.

pelhamhall

07-28-2008, 10:07 AM

Seems like it was bad judgment to just release the front parcel ideas without showing off the gigantic buildings behind it. I guess once they show off some 800 footers, nobody will even give this parcel any thought at all.

Personally, I like the idea of cutting this parcel into two smaller blocks vs the larger mega block idea.

pelhamhall

07-28-2008, 10:09 AM

Off topic, but is anyone else surprised that the groundfloor retail space which faces the greenway in the garage above haymarket station remains vacant? What's up with that?

Not surprised at all - we, the taxpayers, own that garage. So of course it's horribly mismanaged. Who cares? The government's the landlord. The Massachusetts government exists to make money to support itself to spend money. If a developer owned that garage, would all that retail be empty?

ablarc

07-28-2008, 10:14 AM

Pierce, you need to invest in a subtlety detector; I don't think we disagree at all.

Beton Brut

07-28-2008, 11:26 AM

I think what we've seen so far are simply "massing models" informed by "guiding principals." Whether it's good or not is subjective (I think it's rubbish).

As has been noted since time-immemorial on this board, the public process in Boston generally has a deleterious effect on design. If some of us attend these meetings and address the issues, using facts, observations from failures in Boston, and an informed, progressive stance on what is possible (and appropriate) for this site, we stand to get a better result.

We've affected change here (http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=57735&postcount=431). Why not on this site, or the Bayside Expo Center, or Seaport Square.

Suffolk 83

07-28-2008, 11:30 AM

I applaud your efforts... but its much easier to get something killed than get something built it seems.

Beton Brut

07-28-2008, 11:37 AM

commuter guy

07-28-2008, 12:28 PM

Off topic, but is anyone else surprised that the groundfloor retail space which faces the greenway in the garage above haymarket station remains vacant? What's up with that?

Owned by the mass turnpike authority. I recently read that they are finally seeking tenant(s) for the first floor space in order to bring is some $$$.

pelhamhall

07-28-2008, 12:32 PM

It's so hard to stay informed and attend all these meetings. I have the Bayside Expo Site and the whole Columbia Point Master Plan going on in my backyard. I am attending these meetings, informing neighbors, etc... and frankly, just these two processes (Columbia Point and Bayside) alone take up a lot of time. I thought when I retired I have a lot of time on my hand but the suck of "consulting time" has me right back in the middle of the typical workload. This is why these meetings are so well attended by busy-bodies without jobs (and common sense).

Hopefully, in the near future, these meetings can be abolished and everyone can view presentations online and just comment online - without there ever being a meeting. Questions can be answered and posted online. This will involve a far greater slice of the population than the jobless, hysterical crazies.

That being said, writing a letter in support of any project is easy to do and can be e-mailed to the BRA. Short and simple, they only take 15 minutes. "I support htis project because..." followed by three bullet points and a "thank you".

Most of these meetings are useless anyway - the developer pretends to listen, nods politely and ignores everything. There's often free cookies and soda though, so they've got that going for them.

tmac9wr

07-28-2008, 12:34 PM

I feel like this area deserves something great (and I'm sure I'm not alone on this). This isn't a new area like SBW, this is a well established area which is being opened up by the Big Dig. This project has the ability to become a new focal point of the city. It's location is at the center of the greenway, North End, Financial District, Fanueil Hall, the West End and the Garden. It's surrounded by every amentity you could want. Sports, work, food, a beautiful neighborhood, and a large park system...all while right next to the water.

In my opinion, boring is not okay (and ablarc, I'm sure you want nothing but the best for this area, I'm just disagreeing with your earlier statement). I feel like this low-rise parcel should really push the envelope...Calatrava WTC Transit Center-type of architecture. Something that when you come to the Greenway you just say "WOW", and marvel at a building that is cutting edge and was created by an architect/developer that wasn't afraid to spread their wings. I'm sick of the run-of-the-mill buildings, I'm sick of missed opportunities, and I'm sick of saying "well this is Boston, I guess this is the best we could have hoped for". We shouldn't have developers that are scared to death of the NIMBYs, we need a developer with balls...it pisses me off when I hear: "these are old-school locals who have been beaten down by the Kressel's and the Vivian Li's. They know how to produce the type of faceless slop that activists like that will approve of." This is supposed to be the great greenway, the revitalization and reconnection of the city, and I hate to see it filled in by piss-poor buildings better fit for some piece of shit suburban office park.

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but this parcel is too important to be filled by ANY of those buildings on that PDF. This city shouldn't be worried about pushing down developments to the point where they are squat boxes, it should be pushing for the best designs possible. NIMBYs often argue, "This is Boston, this isn't Atlanta, Houston, blah blah blah"...and they're right, this is Boston, so we shouldn't settle for pre-cast pieces of shit. We deserve better.

commuter guy

07-28-2008, 12:50 PM

4) These developers did Trinity Place and Flagship Wharf - uninspiring architecture, but "safe" - I'd expect more safe and uninspiring architecture given their portfolio.

This makes me a bit uneasy given the design of Trinity Place. Clumsy and bland come to mind when thinking of Trinity Place. The greatest failure of Trinity Place is the inability of its ground floor to successfully interact with the surrounding environment. In particular, the corner of the building nearest Copley Square is poorly designed. The corner of that building fails to engage and interact with the sidewalk in such an important location facing Copley Square. In this regard, Trinity Place was a step backward compared to the prior building on this site, which was a simple triangular shaped building with a straightforward arrangement of commercial storefronts meeting the sidewalk. I've always thought this was a lost opportunity, especially with the unique pie shaped lot.

Hopefully more thoughtful designs happen at the Congress St. Garage site.

Suffolk 83

07-28-2008, 02:11 PM

^^ Good point. There are lots of bright, articulate people who post here. More still read and don't post. If a percentage of informed people go to public meetings and speak out, applying the ideas from here to discussions about the built environment in their own communities, things will change.

Speak before, or complain afterwards. Only one choice offers a shot a real change, progress, evolution.

I don't pay Boston city taxes and I'm not a developer, so I feel I lack credibility to attend these meetings. I believe others feel so too. At least NIMBY's have an excuse to be there.

pelhamhall

07-28-2008, 02:53 PM

I think the gigantic megatowers that will soar above this low rise parcel should be the focus of this whole development and the small low-rise parcel can be "contextual"

So if the Garage front parcel is just squatty and hanging out like a normal building, that's fine if a 800-1000 tower behind it is making the statement.

The travesty would be a faceless, blocky, squat building (like the ones we've seen) on the front parcel, and then a facelss, blocky tall building behind it.

This is a crazy way of doing things - why would you present the plan for 101 Huntington at the Prudential Center, or for the apartment blocks at the Prudential Center, and then at a later date show people the plan for the Prudential Tower? The towers are the main event here... why tear apart this plan until we see what they're thinking on the big lots?

In other words, I want to see the whole site before I pick apart this small part of it. I can't figure out why the developers are doing this other than to butter up the public into accepting the huge towers.

Beton Brut

07-28-2008, 03:16 PM

I don't pay Boston city taxes and I'm not a developer, so I feel I lack credibility to attend these meetings.

Understood. This shouldn't deter you from attending planning or other community meetings wherever you live. You're a smart guy -- speak up.

Our taxes entitle us to a voice as well as a vote. And by the look of things, the folks we've voted for are more interested in doing the things to keep themselves in office than doing what's right and sensible.

Vocal minorities can beat silent majorities (and/or apathetic masses).

Chris

07-28-2008, 03:44 PM

This makes me a bit uneasy given the design of Trinity Place. Clumsy and bland come to mind when thinking of Trinity Place. The greatest failure of Trinity Place is the inability of its ground floor to successfully interact with the surrounding environment. In particular, the corner of the building nearest Copley Square is poorly designed. The corner of that building fails to engage and interact with the sidewalk in such an important location facing Copley Square.

And with scheme 11, they are intentionally doing the same thing: disregarding the interaction with the sidewalks, designing the buildings to face inwards to the galleria, and "encouraging" pedestrians to go through the galleria rather than walk on the sidewalks (since when did sidewalks become not-good enough for pedestrians?).

Beton Brut

07-28-2008, 04:07 PM

(since when did sidewalks become not-good enough for pedestrians?).

Probably since they started using this term (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desire_lines) as a catch-all in urban design programs.

ablarc -- thoughts?

tobyjug

07-28-2008, 04:10 PM

Understood. This shouldn't deter you from attending planning or other community meetings wherever you live. You're a smart guy -- speak up.

One thing I really like about this board is the interaction beween age groups. (Not that I'm saying B.B. is real old and Suff is real young.)

I learn alot from you younger guys, and admire your passion. I hope a jaded tip now and then from old Toby is useful to you as well.

Enough sentimentalism.

Why is it that these proposals all seem to be the proverbial "square peg in the round hole", or "one size fits all" or pick your own damn aphorism. Is there some standard catalog of this architectural junk? Or is it that the designers are testicularly challenged? Or is it simply that bad design is often less expensive than good design?

Sorry for the rant. This proposal is cookie cutter.

Beton Brut

07-28-2008, 04:20 PM

If you believe there's an actual formula to good design, then you probably also think that Antonio Stradivari (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Stradivari) just got a good batch of wood.

tobyjug

07-28-2008, 04:28 PM

Good wood in the service of inspiration.

P.S. Looks more like there is a formula for bad design!

ablarc

07-28-2008, 09:19 PM

I feel like this area deserves something great (and I'm sure I'm not alone on this).
You?ve got company.

In my opinion, boring is not okay (and ablarc, I'm sure you want nothing but the best for this area, I'm just disagreeing with your earlier statement).
My notion was that you didn?t even have to stipulate ?interesting? (how would you do that, anyway?) if you allowed the conditions that would give it to you semi-automatically. If, for example, developers weren?t so terrified of NIMBYs, you could count on them to build as tall as was feasible financially. If the lots were small that would result in at least some tall, slender sliver buildings of pleasing proportion (therefore not boring) like this:

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0010.jpg

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0020.jpg

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0030.jpg

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0040.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0050.jpg

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0070.jpg

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0080.jpg

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0090.jpg

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0100.jpg

I'm sick of the run-of-the-mill buildings, I'm sick of missed opportunities, and I'm sick of saying "well this is Boston, I guess this is the best we could have hoped for". We shouldn't have developers that are scared to death of the NIMBYs ? This city shouldn't be worried about pushing down developments to the point where they are [b]squat boxes[b] ? We deserve better.
Just having varied buildings ?including lofty towers-- on small lots could accomplish much of that all by itself.

Think how small the Custom House footprint is.

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/miniscrapers/0060.jpg

You might think the outcome was interesting without even gyrations or pyrotechnics in the building form.

Then again, you might not.

Some folks hunger after complexity of form.

tmac9wr

07-28-2008, 09:47 PM

You?ve got company.

My notion was that you didn?t even have to stipulate ?interesting? (how would you do that, anyway?) if you allowed the conditions that would give it to you semi-automatically. If, for example, developers weren?t so terrified of NIMBYs, you could count on them to build as tall as was feasible financially. If the lots were small that would result in at least some tall, slender sliver buildings of pleasing proportion (therefore not boring) like this:

Just having varied buildings ?including lofty towers-- on small lots could accomplish much of that all by itself.

Think how small the Custom House footprint is.

You might think the outcome was interesting without even gyrations or pyrotechnics in the building form.

Then again, you might not.

Some folks hunger after complexity of form.

After looking back at my post, I realize I was being a little nutty...I was on a lunchbreak from work and saw another crappy plan, and decided to let er rip.

I totally agree with you that simple things like making taller buildings on a small footprint would improve the aesthetics of so many projects (another great example is One Madison Park in New York City). I probably came off like a crazy idiot before, I just get my hopes up when there's a parcel of land like this one.

Toby was talking about the interaction between younger and older forumers, and I believe as a relatively younger forumer at 23 years old (is that young compared to you other guys? I have no clue how old anyone is), I may be a little naive and too hopeful for some of these projects. I keep hoping to get projects that would rival the new beautiful projects of New York City or London...the longer I've been following Boston development (5 years now), the more my hope lowers but I'm still young enough to have that one feeble glimmer of hope for successful new development in Boston. It's hard to look at the beautiful old buildings in Boston, and then see the new "Luxury" developments that are layered in precast concrete. If you'll excuse me, I need to go have a few more drinks.