Fenway Infill and Small Developments

From the Jan. 28 2011 Courant:

The Boston Courant said:
Puma Has Building But Not Permits

by Ashlee Fairey
Courant News Writer

The 24 shipping containers of Puma City have sat empty and incomplete on Van Ness Street for months, lacking the permits and licenses needed to open.

Though the store had hoped to open this past summer, it is missing a building permit, an entertainment license and a liquor license, according to government spokespeople.

"They do have a long-form application on file for the installation of the Puma City containers," said Lisa Timberlake, a spokesperson for the Inspectional Services (ISD). "However, it has not been issued yet."

After reviewing the August 5 application, an ISD plans examiner asked Puma to resubmit with more detailed drawings. They have not yet been received, Timberlake said.

The business was issued a permit on July 13 for site preparations, but a second permit is needed for installation, according to the document.

Because the building pennit is not in place, the entertainment license process has not begun, according to the mayor's office.

Puma was also not issued a liquor license, according to the Boston Licensing Board. Staff said that during a hearing on the matter. Commissioner Michael Connolly approved the application, but Commissioner Suzanne Iannella rejected it.

Because the position of board chainnan was left vacant by Daniel Pokaski's retirement this past summer, there is no third-voice to ensure a majority vote. The board is waiting for the position to be filled to decide on Puma's application, staff said.

Neither Connolly nor Iannella returned requests for comment.

"I don't believe the plans are finalized for the new location," Puma North America spokesperson Katie Sheptyck said in an interview last week.

She did not return requests for comment on the status of the building permit or licenses.

Puma City first opened in Boston two smumers ago at Pan Pier. The temporary strncture, made up of 24 shipping containers, remained open for three weeks and featured a shoe store and bar, and hosted events complete with a DJ.
Click to expand...
 
After reviewing the August 5 application, an ISD plans examiner asked Puma to resubmit with more detailed drawings. They have not yet been received, Timberlake said.
Click to expand...

Has the the design changed substantially since the last time it was approved & built in the city?

If it is the same building how can the plan be approved one year and not detailed enough the next?

I know, I know...
 
I went into it when it was at Fan Pier, and it was pretty cool by the way. I also walked by it yesterday, I'm pretty sure its set up the exact same way.
 
Utility hookups are the only thing I can think of that would be different here from there.
 
GW2500 said:
I went into it when it was at Fan Pier, and it was pretty cool by the way. I also walked by it yesterday, I'm pretty sure its set up the exact same way.
Click to expand...

I attended the architects' panel and wine/cheese reception at Puma City. It was so cool.

The setup appears to be the same as the way they had it on Fan Pier. I don't understand why they want more detailed drawings. Nothing is different.
 
By the time they get the permits, the lot owner will be kicking them out to start construction on the apartments.
 
The only news these days is bad news. From this week's Courant:

The Boston Courant said:
Puma Abandons Van Ness St. Plan

by Ashley Fairey
Courant News Writer

Puma City will not open in the Fenway, despite the half-built structure that has been sitting on Van Ness Street for months.

The store was widely expected to open last summer, but the project stalled, lacking necessary approvals from the city's Inspeetional Services Department (ISD).

Puma has not formally announced its decision to pull the project, but the cancellation is confirmed in a letter filed with the Boston Licensing Board and addressed to The Lyons Group, from whom Puma intended to purchase a liquor license.

"Unfortunately, the structure which was approved for use during the Volvo Ocean Race on Fan Pier last year would require substantial renovations for approved use in Fenway' Thomas Coen, assistant general counsel for Puma, wrote in a March 28 letter. "Puma has elected to forgo such renovations and ceased seeking city approval for the structure. We are currently examining other uses for Puma City outside of Boston."

Puma City, a temporary, multilevel retail store, bar and event space created from 24 shipping containers, was installed in 2009 at Fan Pier during the Volvo Ocean Race and remained open for three weeks. The store for the Fenway location, however, needed separate permits and approvals.

"Puma was in the process of obtaining all approvals for their venture; no final reviews or permits were issued. It is sufficient to say ISD was working with the Puma Group in obtaining code compliance," ISD spokesperson Lisa Timberlake wrote in an e-mail.

Though ISD declined to elaborate, a source familiar with the Puma City project said the issue hinged on handicap accessibility. Despite the monetary investment Puma has already made in the store, the company decided the required renovations would not be financially worthwhile.

Puma did not return requests for comment.

Puma has hired Turner Construction to remove the inchoate Puma City structure, according to Timberlake, and a source says the containers will be gone within a month.

Puma had leased the Van Ness Street site from developers Samuels & Associates.

"Our goal with the Puma City site was to provide an interesting option to the neighborhood and think creatively about how to enliven underutilized space," said Samuels spokesperson Diana Pisciotta.

"While we are disappointed that it didn't work out, we will continue to look for other tenants who can benefit the local community."
Click to expand...
 
No! Why can't this city ever realize when they have a good thing, they need to let it happen? I'm beginning to appreciate building codes and zoning less and less.
 
To be fair, Puma City had no elevator (as it was not a permanent installation). Given the floorplan, the structure would have to be seriously reconfigured to add an elevator. Given the ADA, as inconvenient/unfortunate as it may be, one would be required for a permanent install in Boston. You can't simply ignore the ADA no matter how much you may want to. It's there for a reason.
 
So why not make this a really long term 'temporary' installation?

I'd like to see it brought back for the yacht race village that's going to be at Fan Pier this summer, but it's probably much too late to make such plans. (Not Volvo this time -- Extreme Sailing Series)
 
Extreme Sailing does have very strong ties to the organization of the Volvo Ocean Race, so it is a possibility. Smaller boats, shorter distances, more action - arguably more fun for fans because it's so much more accessible to watch.
 
datadyne007 said:
To be fair, Puma City had no elevator (as it was not a permanent installation). Given the floorplan, the structure would have to be seriously reconfigured to add an elevator. Given the ADA, as inconvenient/unfortunate as it may be, one would be required for a permanent install in Boston. You can't simply ignore the ADA no matter how much you may want to. It's there for a reason.
Click to expand...

Is it generic blame on "ADA" as much as Mass's adoption of IBC? My understanding is that it now applies across the board, no exceptions, in the Commonwealth.
 
bbfen said:
Is it generic blame on "ADA" as much as Mass's adoption of IBC? My understanding is that it now applies across the board, no exceptions, in the Commonwealth.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you can't just excuse something from the ADA or IBC/ICC because it's cool.
 
This was not going to be a permanent structure, but a temporary installation, just as it was during the Volvo event. Puma City was deemed exempt from ADA requirements in 2009 and could have been so here as well. The ADA, by the way, not only makes no distinction between several-weeks-temporary and several-months-temporary, but, to the best of my knowledge, it makes no distinction between temporary and permanent. The city appears to have made an arbitrary decision here and now they're pointing at the ADA as if their hands were tied. I call bullshit.
 
I would assume that since it is a retail and dining facility and not part of an expo, that it would be reasonably subjected to the ADA, just as any other business that would open in the Fenway.

How long was Puma interested in having it here? I was under the impression that this was going to be another actual Puma location in Boston.
 
The irony of a running store needing to be ADA-compliant is not lost on me.
 
I thought it was intended to be a placeholder until a real developer came along for that property.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top