Hurley Building Redevelopment | 19 Staniford St | West End

Also, bear in mind that the entire idea of selling and redeveloping the SSC was a late-stage Baker Administration project. The Healey Administration may just kill it, the same as the Baker Administration killed the Transportation Building sale and MassDOT relocation that Deval Patrick floated in his last months in office.

This is kind of a tradition.
I'm certainly familiar with those examples, but don't recall whether either of those others got as far as an RFP proposal winner being announced. Can they honestly pull the rug out from someone whom was announced as the winner, as in this case?
 
I'm certainly familiar with those examples, but don't recall whether either of those others got as far as an RFP proposal winner being announced. Can they honestly pull the rug out from someone whom was announced as the winner, as in this case?

Until they actually sign the ground lease or purchase agreement, absolutely they can. Winning an RFP has no legal weight. Depending on the RFP, they don't even have to award to the winner...
 
Until they actually sign the ground lease or purchase agreement, absolutely they can. Winning an RFP has no legal weight. Depending on the RFP, they don't even have to award to the winner...
Well, if the State pulls something like that often, then they should expect either/both very low quality proposals (i.e., low sunk cost invested) in response to future RFPs or lawsuits aiming to recoup investments toward RFPs that were essentially fraudulent. Come to think of it, it's no wonder we get shite for design proposals in response to these...
 
Last edited:
I haven’t these yet so I’m not sure how valuable





 
Until they actually sign the ground lease or purchase agreement, absolutely they can. Winning an RFP has no legal weight. Depending on the RFP, they don't even have to award to the winner...

Having been awarded a contract to develop the site, the various firms that comprise the Leggat team have been spending good money on designs, studies, investigations etc. So I think they would have recourse to recouping that spending from the state if their developer designation is now cancelled. for something other than a material breach. An example of a material breach could be Leggat's failure to complete design by date x.
--------------------
From the RFP, the re-developed property will be subject to a ground lease from the Commonwealth. After the property is re-developed, the Commonwealth intends to lease 350,000 gsf of space for its own use. The RFP also mandates that there be no loss of current on-site parking paces once the property is re-developed. Leggat has an option of providing parking spaces off-site for any spaces that are lost because of the redevelopment. Any off-site spaces must be near the Massachusetts State House.
 
Having been awarded a contract to develop the site, the various firms that comprise the Leggat team have been spending good money on designs, studies, investigations etc. So I think they would have recourse to recouping that spending from the state if their developer designation is now cancelled. for something other than a material breach. An example of a material breach could be Leggat's failure to complete design by date x.
--------------------
From the RFP, the re-developed property will be subject to a ground lease from the Commonwealth. After the property is re-developed, the Commonwealth intends to lease 350,000 gsf of space for its own use. The RFP also mandates that there be no loss of current on-site parking paces once the property is re-developed. Leggat has an option of providing parking spaces off-site for any spaces that are lost because of the redevelopment. Any off-site spaces must be near the Massachusetts State House.
The question is whether they actually have been issued a contract or not. Just winning an RFP is not signing a contract.
 
The question is whether they actually have been issued a contract or not. Just winning an RFP is not signing a contract.
I think it is a safe presumption that there is a contract. The timetable suggests that construction would begin by the end of CY 2025, to allow for a 2028 occupancy of the redeveloped building.

The state has said that it will take up to two years to empty the Hurley building, with most(?) displaced employees presumably occupying other commercial (leased) space. Those moving out in 2024 would be displaced for about five years. I cannot fathom the Commonwealth incurring moving and lease costs for the displaced employees without a contract in place between Leggat and the Commonwealth.
 
For reference:

nbbj-is-transforming-bostons-iconic-hurley-building-into-a-mixed-use-development_1.jpg


nbbj-is-transforming-bostons-iconic-hurley-building-into-a-mixed-use-development_2.jpg




nbbj-is-transforming-bostons-iconic-hurley-building-into-a-mixed-use-development_3.jpg
If it were between the two, this version is somewhat better--it looks the worst from the "drone view", but the while height fetishists might be upset that the towers are shorter, the visual impression from within the courtyard (and presumably from the street as well) is less bulky and obstructive than the original renders posted a couple pages back. It's still a Frankenstein that pays nearly zero respect to the original, yet... those tall columns on the courtyard view do suggest some connection. The major concern with this is that it appears it obliterates the rotunda in the courtyard... I would hope that this would not be allowed to pass.
 
I would hope the fetishists would appreciate that the towers are taller than the buildings immediately around them without eclipsing the area. When the entire foot's not possible, be content with the open toe shoe. This looks like a positive over what's in place.
 
Pragmatic and realistic, but… dare to dream, van, dare to dream.

Well, my dream (as someone who has had people with mental illness in my family) is that the Lindemann residents actually get access to care to help them mitigate their illness. Simply encouraging them to congregate outside (not saying that's a bad thing, but it isn't the ANSWER is it?) is not going to help these people in the long run. I'm a lifelong Progressive, but even I can see the fundamental issue with many patronizing progressive politicians is the "Keep 'em down on the farm" mentality, instead of a "help them to ascend" philosophy. Vertex coming out with this new painkiller drug (praying it gets approved) that is non-addictive and would replace Oxy is a good development to HELPING, instead of maintaining. We need more CHANGE policies than the "let 'em maintain", cause that ain't helping those in need.
 
Last edited:
Well, my dream (as someone who has had people with mental illness in my family) is that the Lindemann residents actually get access to care to help them mitigate their illness. Simply encouraging them to congregate outside (not saying that's a bad thing, but it isn't the ANSWER is it?) is not going to help these people in the long run. I'm a lifelong Progressive, but even I can see the fundamental issue with many patronizing progressive politicians is the "Keep 'em down on the farm" mentality, instead of a "help them to ascend" philosophy. Vertex coming out with this new painkiller drug (praying it gets approved) that is non-addictive and would replace Oxy is a good development to HELPING, instead of maintaining. We need more CHANGE policies then the "let 'em maintain", cause that ain't helping those in need.
Not sure if you read what I posted but the lindemann has several dozen people who live there. They are getting care. The rotunda is the front yard for residents. I would be careful with saying “encouraging them to congregate there”—many of the residences have programs in the day and there’s a mental health clubhouse on Bowker St around the corner for occupational rehab and additional activities and skills building. Is all of this underfunded? You bet. But I’d say if you’re worried about “the farm” mentality, that’s only gonna increase when well to do people have to share outdoor space with people with serious mental illness, who were here first. And then you’ll see a push for moving all these services way out to some far flung suburban location nobody can get to, but that keeps the people out of the hair of all the well heeled bourgeois—and all under the auspices of precisely the opposite claims, stuff like “out in rural environment there will be more space for dedicated services” and stuff like that. That’s why, btw, I don’t like the whole rebuild the bridge plan to Long Island. Underneath all of the “asylum” ideas of having nice remote places for the mentally ill and addicted to go for treatment, there’s also a “let’s bus them as far away from normal society as possible” mentality underneath it all that is insidious as it’s the very opposite of the supposed justification of caring and concern being espoused.
 
Healey administration is resetting the process and sending this back out for developer proposals:

 
Healey administration is resetting the process and sending this back out for developer proposals:


".......On Wednesday, state officials announced a new redevelopment effort for the Charles F. Hurley and Erich Lindemann buildings, which sprawl across a massive block between Cambridge and Merrimac streets, with an eye to addressing the “urgent need for housing......”

YES!!!!!!!!

With the possible pivot away from the stupid proposed lab landscraper idea in front of the State Street HQ - this adds onto the huge opportunity between the Garden and Government Center to improve and make that area more 24/7 dynamic. PLEASE may our leaders finally get some sort of optimistic vision instead of just saying no, or bunting to 5 over ones.

There are acres there with T stations all around (with possible Blue-Red Connector project and MGH expansion) - - huge opportunity.

Now let's see Jerome Powell start the long slow turnaround on interest rates perhaps in September, and Boston might just be able to pull off some truly progressive urban dynamics.
 
Last edited:
I actually appreciate the "mutual" decision to rebid rather have Leggat McCall and the state spend years going back and forth getting nothing done.

That said, I don't see it as a "pivot." It's really just a second attempt that now includes the Lindemann and slightly updated language to fit the modern development environment. Apart from requirements for "updated residential services" for displaced Lindemann residents, most of the state's language is hopes and wishes. Nothing concrete. An "eye to addressing the urgent need for housing" is not a requirement. Same goes for the language about "historic preservation." It's what they'd like to see happen, but it doesn't appear that they're requiring any of that (at least not based on the press release).
 
Last edited:
I actually appreciate the "mutual" decision to rebid rather have Leggat McCall and the state spend years going back and forth getting nothing done.

That said, I don't see it as a "pivot." It's really just a second attempt that now includes the Lindemann and slightly updated language to fit the modern development environment. Apart from requirements for "updated residential services" for displaced Lindemann residents, most of the state's language is hopes and wishes. Nothing concrete. An "eye to addressing the urgent need for housing" is not a requirement. Same goes for the language about "historic preservation." It's what they'd like to see happen, but it doesn't appear that they're requiring any of that (at least not based on the press release).

I don't think it is a declaration of requirement at all. It's more of an understanding of the scenario we are heading being favorable ("an eye towards") for large scale residential over these many acres:

1) the historic shift to WFH decimating the level of need for new office buildings
2) the huge glut of lab capacity in Boston
3) the supply-demand factors for residential in Boston
4) empty nest Baby Boomers retiring and living longer/better quality retirements who want to ditch lawncare, homecare, cars, etc for easy access to restaurants, theatres, museums, medical
5) the Federal reserve tectonic shift about to occur in either September or December (my semi-confident money is on September) on interest rates

There are too many signals that the "puck is heading in that direction".
 
So the whole ugly thing is going to go not just half of it? This is very exciting!
 
So the whole ugly thing is going to go not just half of it? This is very exciting!
Nope:
The Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance will oversee the bidding process and said it will emphasize historic preservation in the new round of bids.
 

Back
Top