Stuart Street

kennedy said:
In summary, you are a tool.
Click to expand...

Oh my Gods! It looks like you didn't get past high school either. Here I'll show it to you.

armpitsOFmight said:
Look, besides the Greenway, Downtown is pretty much a developed area. That TransNational Tower should be placed somewhere on Stuart Street to fill in the spine.
Click to expand...

Hey man, I'll tell you what; I'll help pay for you to take classes at Roxbury Community College.
 
'That TransNational Tower should be placed somewhere on Stuart Street to fill in the spinr, because Downtown is pretty much developed.'

From my lackadaisical high school education, I can deduce that your warrant here is that the empty space, specifically the Spine, requires filling in.

So the question stands: why?
 
It's not that filling in the Back Bay skyline is a bad idea, it's that you think building a few super-tall skyscrapers will be the answer to all of Boston's problems. It's an incredibly vain and idiotic plan of action proposed for wrong headed and immature reasons. (Although to be fair the reason we have the Pru and the JHT are for vanity, so maybe your ideas aren't without precedent.)

Besides that, there just isn't any economic reason to build that kind of space yet. It will be much more economical to fill up the South Boston Waterfront first.

If you really wanted to do something dramatic and worthwhile for the skyline, how about covering over the Pike with affordable housing and mixed use towers? That of course would require a competent mayor so I guess we will just have to live with what we have (recession style!)
 
kennedy said:
So the question stands: why?
Click to expand...

IN ALL THE NAMES THAT ARE HOLY, YOU DARE TO ASK ME THIS QUESTION YET AGAIN!!! Once again, I already answered this and you even pointed it out on page two of this thread, but apparently you STILL weren't paying attention. Here it is...

armpitsOFmight said:
It would be nice to connect the Back Bay and Downtown skylines.
Click to expand...

Seriously man, are you related to GW?
 
Last edited:
You've given us two "reasons" WHY. Here's number one:

Downtown is pretty much a developed area.
Click to expand...

So you've started a thread to argue the inevitable? IF downtown (and the Back Bay) are built out, well then DUH they're going to build up the Midtown area. Thanks for this stunning bit of envisioning.

And here's "reason" number two:

It would be nice to connect the Back Bay and Downtown skylines.
Click to expand...

That sentence tells me all you care about is the aesthetic side of the issue. Compelling...... If you think that logic is worth half a cent, then I'd say you're a fool.

Then again, you seem to get your kicks from getting rises outta people here with your obvious and condescending "I know Boston better than you tools" attitude. I hope you enjoy the great pride it gives you, but just know that you're a twat assclown. Goodbye.
 
Iam once again AGREEING with Mr PItt and the way he outfox you. You DO it because IT IS THERE to be done!!! And this is the point. EXCEPT. NOT near Mr. Ned for the many reasons he says about the GAS. SO. To the cut chaise: If you connect the dots it WILL be dainter than not connecting them dots. And so
 
This guy is pure brilliance.

"If you connect the dots it WILL be dainter than not connecting them dots."

Just...exceptional.
 
Iam once again AGREEING with Mr PItt and the way he outfox you. You DO it because IT IS THERE to be done!!! And this is the point. EXCEPT. NOT near Mr. Ned for the many reasons he says about the GAS. SO. To the cut chaise: If you connect the dots it WILL be dainter than not connecting them dots. And so
__________________
Click to expand...
Say what? I'm confused.
 
bostonbred is definitely a lot smarter than his grammar would let on.
 
armpitsOFmight said:
Look, besides the Greenway, Downtown is pretty much a developed area. That TransNational Tower should be placed somewhere on Stuart Street. Also, I want it to be a giant box just so all of you architecture nut-balls can go home and cry to your momma.
Click to expand...

Awesome attitude man. I'm not totally against the idea of filling this area in with towers (or any building that would be beneficial to the neighborhood for that matter)...but why do you have to act like such a douchebag?
 
Why would you resurrect this thread if you have nothing positive to contribute?
 
I suppose I didn't realize how old it was.

But still, what's with the constant bitter attitude?
 
pelhamhall said:
The whole state transportation block could be removed and replaced with a 700 footer - casting inglorious shadows all over the Boston Heroin Common.
Click to expand...

One or two of the senior officials I got a chance to speak to at the State Transportation Building said they think one day the STB will be taken over by Emerson College. Interestingly enough I had looked up that building and it said one Wilder Co. manages the building.

On a next note aren't buildings in Boston not allowed to cast any shadows on the Boston Commons?
 
Digital_Islandboy said:
One or two of the senior officials I got a chance to speak to at the State Transportation Building said they think one day the STB will be taken over by Emerson College.
Click to expand...

This wouldn't surprise me. I recall hearing that Emerson has already assimilated some space in the STB. Some of the adjacent performance spaces extend into the structure. I'm not exactly sure where, but you definitely cannot pass between them without going down to the lobby of each building, outside, then into the other.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Tufte Center was future-proofed with the possibility of an Emerson STB takeover in mind. The interior layout is such that the lobbies in each floor extend to the southern wall that abuts the STB. You can already pass from the Walker to the Tufte on select floors, and I think they'd love to take that even further.

However, I don't see the State vacating the STB anytime soon.
 
Emerson grows in Theater District
School?s move to cost city $100G in property taxes

By Thomas Grillo
The Boston Herald
Monday, April 19, 2010

Emerson College is expanding its campus in the Theater District.

The performing arts school has purchased 1-3 Boylston Place from Boston entertainment guru Patrick Lyons for $6.5 million. The alley that leads to the state transportation building is home to a restaurant, a nightclub and office space.

Jacqueline Liebergott, the school?s president, declined to comment on the college?s latest acquisition. Spokesman Andrew Tiedemann said Emerson has no immediate plans for the buildings. He acknowledged they could be the site of dormitories, classrooms or faculty offices.

For now, the Sweetwater Cafe and Estate can stay put. Emerson said they negotiated a two-year lease with the tenants while the school determines what to do with the properties.

The city will lose out on more than $100,000 in real estate taxes, because schools are not taxed. The sale comes as the city is establishing a formalized payment in lieu of taxes, or PILOT, program to ensure that nonprofits pay something in exchange for city services.

Under the proposal that would be phased in over five years, nonprofits would contribute 25 percent of their properties? tax assessment for city services. Nonprofits would get a credit for community benefits that could reduce the payment.

Emerson contributes less than $140,000 to the city for its properties, but could ultimately owe an estimated $600,000 if PILOT is approved by the Menino administration.
Click to expand...

http://bostonherald.com/business/real_estate/view.bg?articleid=1248262&position=1
 
Arborway said:
This wouldn't surprise me. I recall hearing that Emerson has already assimilated some space in the STB.
Click to expand...

Yes, on the second floor where BNN the (Boston television) channel used to be.

Arborway said:
Some of the adjacent performance spaces extend into the structure. I'm not exactly sure where, but you definitely cannot pass between them without going down to the lobby of each building, outside, then into the other.
Click to expand...

I suspect, but can't confirm that there might be a connector next to California Pizza Kitchen. I always meant to look down there but I always saw the security guards coming out of there so I dared not opening the door and looking. There's a big No entry sign on the door so what was I going to say? "Ohh sorry, I thought there was a bathroom in here." lol

Arborway said:
It wouldn't surprise me if the Tufte Center was future-proofed with the possibility of an Emerson STB takeover in mind. The interior layout is such that the lobbies in each floor extend to the southern wall that abuts the STB. You can already pass from the Walker to the Tufte on select floors, and I think they'd love to take that even further.
Click to expand...

I suspect that could be possible too.

Arborway said:
However, I don't see the State vacating the STB anytime soon.
Click to expand...

I tried to pick sense of this.

http://www.wilderco.com/city-place2.htm

The upstairs part of the building is 10 Park Plaza and according to that source I listed the downstairs part is "8 Park Plaza." But that building is called the State Transportation Building. Yet, Wilder says they are the building managers. This all seemed very strange to me. I mean if the state owned the building, then wouldn't that mean Wilder is an intermediary that only shares the profits from renting out the building to the shops? I would have thought the state should know how to be a landlord on it's own and just let the shop/businesses bid on the vacant space directly. I could never get to bottom of that. To my mind, either Wilder appears to own the building, and thusly collects rent from the state or else *someone* may be getting a little bit of a sweetheart from someone on Beacon Hill to manage a state building that may not need a 'middle management' all that much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top