Shreve, Crump & Low Redevelopment | 334-364 Boylston Street | Back Bay

Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

We have to be careful, this building may add to the Manhattanization of Boston.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

And you never know where it will cast shadows.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I can't believe this is the building Druker intends to build. I also find it hard to imagine this is a Pelli design. A part of me is hoping this is all a mash-up by the Globe and Herald.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

This is a tower of turd.

What a disaster this little Burlington Coat Factory of an outhouse is. Doesn't Framingham need its DataCalTron headquarters back?

And the way the reader feels Druker's eyes glaze over when he talks about "the highest rents in Boston"... The highest rents -- at what price? The price of cheapening the city just a bit more, of making one of the city's most central, historic points into a bland monolithic wall that people will be dying to tear down 10-20 years after it goes up, regretting that, yes, they've once again shat on their poor, dear Boston.

Just as POS developers like Solow, Macklowe and Zuckerman cheapen New York with ubiquitous 35-foot glassasters, so does Druker destroy Boston with city-strangling landscrapers like this junk, his "award-winning" (from whom? the prestigious "Boston Business Journal"?) Heritage on the Green, and the other floaters he leaves around town.

Can we get a fatwa on this terrorist?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Itchy, share your anger. I've emailed everybody I can find an address for. Do it. All of us should. This is BRA mismanagement.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I've also tried getting something done here, but Ron "Most Expensive Rents in Boston" Druker must be really well-connected to Mayor Mumbles' porcine pinky finger.

After hearing a piece on WBUR about State House reps who were promoting preservation as a way to restore economies, creative professions and tourism, I contacted a few of the people on different economic development, heritage and tourism committees in the State House. No word back.

I wrote (and got many friends to write) the BRA. No response.

The Neighbors Association of the Back Bay, which has its priorities so "straightened out" in opposing a high-rise in the middle of the Pru, says they regret what's going on here but that it's legal. My sense is that they're Luddites with either sinister motives or really bad taste and judgment.

The half-dozen Globe reporters and desks I contacted didn't budge. Neither did the Herald or the Metro. BostonNOW did; unfortunately they printed the wrong e-mail address for the BRA.

Robert Campbell is off praising some museum to Philip Johnson in New Canaan. God forbid he actively write about the city he's supposed to cover.

So much for governmental transparency, enfranchisement and civic interest. As is always the case, you can't rely on others; I'll start my own campaign to drum up public interest if need be... Hopefully the people who are charged with the public trust will first start looking out for that public and its city, though.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

ablarc said:
Dog walker, huh? For all those folks who bring their dogs with them to work?
Click to expand...

Hehe, no kidding! I didn't actually think that people who don't think twice about price even cared for animals (or other humans for that matter).

Druker sounds like a horny misguided little lad who wanders into the girl's locker room with his pants down and asks "Well, what do you think?" I am guessing that he has been lucky in the past, because he obviously doesn't get economics. I love how he is so open about it to. Paraphrase: "When the time comes, I am going to find out what the highest rent in Boston is (say $X) and charge $(X + 1) for it." I love his response about how $100/sf would be "nice". (Let's not tell him that Bain pays over $200 for the top of 111 Huntington). Druker didn't realize that unless you're a hegde fund managing Harvard's money in this town, it's a very volatile business. They WILL think twice about price.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

kz1000ps said:
Druker said he's already received calls from interested tenants, but he won't start marketing the building for lease for at least another year.

Asked if his tenants would pay $100 per square foot, Druker replied, "I hope so."

"I have no idea whether that's a realistic expectation or not," he said. "The only thing I can say is our rents will be the highest in the city."

Link
Click to expand...

Yeah, that belies, shall we say, a certain lack of savvy.

This rat-bastard is building on spec without a single tenant lined up as a recession appears to be getting underway and a huge glut of office space looms ahead. Hello, 2 years of a hole in the ground in place of a row of beautiful and not-so-beautiful historic structures.

And it's not as if that part of the Back Bay is an office area. It's not particularly well-served by transportation, it's far from other businesses -- I would hardly call his "outpost" on the edge of the Public Garden the sort of space anyone wants or needs.

Two words: dumb ass.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

There are other office buildings nearby -- Park Square building, New England Life (now called 'Newbry'), the old Hancock building. Public transport to the area is fine.

I don't want to see it built either, but let's not use faulty arguments against it.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

When I was at the Park Square Building, alot of folks took the Green Line to Arlington St. station, or walked a few blocks from Back Bay Station. Parking in the area isn't bad, with Motor Mart, various surface lots and the Common Garage. Most of my co-workers would gladly ditch our space at 101 Arch St and go back there.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Here is a street view, somewhat dark due to my limits in copying an image from a pdf file. I couldn't brighten it using my standard imaging software. Doesn't look any more impressive in brighter light.

This is from the PNF.
scl_street.gif


The PNF for 350 Boylston can be found here:
http://www.cityofboston.gov/bra/Dev...ylston Street/PNF/350 Boylston Street_PNF.pdf

There are discussions of the architectural history of the buildings-to-be-demolished, plus an explanation for why the Arlington Building facade cannot be saved.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

2.3 Determination of Alternative Considered / Project History
The renovation and reuse of all the existing structures, renovation and reuse of only the Arlington Building, and retention of only the Arlington Building fa?ade were also considered. All of these alternatives yielded buildings with significantly less floor area and parking than the as-of-right proposal, which in combination with greater construction costs incurred to work with and around existing buildings and foundations, make these reuse schemes economically infeasible. Technical complications due to the existing buildings? bearing and fire wall locations and differing floor levels will not allow for large unencumbered floor plates necessary for a feasible contemporary office building in any of the options that reused the existing buildings. Reuse of existing facades would be extremely difficult and costly due to the inability to use temporary external support of the fa?ade because this weight can not be placed on the existing MBTA Green line tunnel, utilities, and steam main located below the sidewalks on Boylston and Arlington streets.

The Proponent also believes that possible alternatives that would retain only the fa?ades of one of the existing buildings lack the appropriate architectural integrity that this important location deserves and requires. Furthermore, retaining only fa?ade portions of one of the existing buildings would likely require dismantling and reconstruction; activities that would have prohibitive costs associated with them, and that are generally not considered acceptable means of preservation.

Further, extensive research was completed concerning the historical and architectural significance of the existing buildings on the Project site, particularly the Arlington Building.

The research demonstrated that the Arlington Building is not eligible for designation as a Boston Landmark. The Boston Landmark Commission, on the recommendation of its staff, concurred in this determination by declining in 2006 to accept a landmark petition for further study of the Arlington Building.

{...}
3.4 Historic and Archaeological Resources
3.4.1 Buildings on the Project Site
The Project site contains four existing buildings, 324-334 Boylston Street (the Arlington Building), 336-342 Boylston Street, 344-350 Boylston Street, and 352-360 Boylston Street.

The Project site is located within the boundaries of the Back Bay Historic District, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The National Register nomination for the Back Bay Historic District does not specifically call out any of the four buildings on the Project site as possessing exceptional architectural or historical significance. The nomination indicates that generally ?the district contains along Boylston and Newbury Streets a ignificant collection of early 20th century commercial buildings which reflect a variety of architectural modes.? The nomination specifically mentions only the Berkeley Building (a Boston Landmark) at 416-426 Boylston Street, Boylston Chambers at 739 Boylston Street, 885-889 Boylston Street, 651-655 Boylston Street, and 400-402 Boylston Street as architecturally prominent buildings within this section of the historic district; no reference is made to the Arlington Building, 336-342 Boylston Street, 344-350 Boylston Street, or 352-360 Boylston Street.

The following provides more detailed information on each of the four buildings which currently occupy the Project site.

3.4.1.1 Arlington Building, 324 - 334 Boylston Street
Constructed in 1904, the five-story Arlington Building was constructed according to designs by Boston architect William Gibbons Rantoul (1867-1945). Rantoul, a Harvard-trained architect operated a practice at 8 Beacon Street from 1897 to 1942. Rantoul is known primarily for his residential commissions on Boston?s North Shore. A Salem resident, Rantoul designed numerous single family dwellings, a golf clubhouse, and country estates in Beverly, Ipswich, Newburyport, Salem, and Topsfield. His other Boston projects include the 1901 Fur Merchant?s Warehouse at 717-719 Atlantic Avenue (located within the National Register-listed Leather District) and the 1905 Emily Mandell House at
247 Commonwealth Avenue.

William Gibbons Rantoul?s Beaux Arts Style design for the Arlington Building employs a two-story base which gives rise to three upper stories topped by a copper cornice. Three vertical window bays on the Boylston Street elevation and seven vertical window bays on the Arlington Street elevation terminate at the top floor in broad segmental arches. The brick building is ornamented with granite and limestone elements.

In the 1910s, commercial tenants included the Bryant & Stratton Commercial School, a business school which occupied the building until 1950 before relocating to Newbury Street. In 1930, the Arlington Building?s first floor storefronts were remodeled in the Art Deco Style by Boston architect William T. Aldrich (1880-1966) for the new home of the Shreve, Crump & Low ompany. The Boston jewelry store established in Downtown Crossing in 1796, occupied the first two floors of the building until 2005, before relocating
to its current location at 440 Boylston Street.

Since its initial 1904 construction, numerous alterations have occurred to the Arlington Building. At the time of the building?s construction, Arlington Street terminated at Boylston Street. The extension of Arlington Street through the block transformed the Arlington Building into a prominent corner block and required the addition of an entirely new Arlington Street fa?ade where reviously only a party wall existed. Today, a comparison of the Boylston Street and Arlington Street facades indicates subtle differences in detailing around the windows and cornice which reflect the differing construction dates.

The 1930 remodeling by Aldrich in the Art Deco Style is limited on the exterior to infilling the original storefronts with ornamented limestone panels and the creation of bronze and glass storefronts (portions of which have been replaced or altered).

In 1984, when the Arlington Building was initially surveyed by Boston Landmarks Commission staff the building was ranked as a ?Group III? building out of the following five group ranking system used by the BLC for the purposes of consideration for designation as a Boston Landmark: Group I (?Highest Significance?), Group II (?Major Significance?), Group III (?Significant?), Group IV (?Notable?), and Group V (?Minor?). Only buildings with a ranking of I, II, or III are considered eligible by the BLC for Landmark designation.
There are a large number of buildings in Group III, therefore, those Group III buildings which may meet criteria for designation as Boston Landmarks are subcategorized as ?Group III, Further Study?.

In response to written requests that the BLC reevaluate the 1984 ratings for all the buildings on the south side of Boylston Street between Arlington Street and Berkeley Street, including the four existing buildings on the Project site, the BLC voted to upgrade the rating of the Arlington Building from a rating of ?III? to a rating of ?III F.S.? (Further Study) in April 2006.

Subsequent to the upgrading of the building to a rating of ?III F.S.? a petition was filed with the BLC to designate the Arlington Building a Boston Landmark.
At an October 2006 hearing, the BLC voted not to accept the landmark petition to further study the Arlington Building for designation as a Boston Landmark. The BLC decision was based on historical research presented by the Proponent which demonstrated that the Arlington Building did not meet the criteria for designation as a Boston Landmark.

3.4.1.2 336 ? 342 Boylston Street.
The narrow, four-story commercial block at 336-342 Boylston Street was constructed by 1898 with George Abbot listed as architect. Floors two and three of the storefront feature large, three-part plate glass windows; the fourth floor contains five round arched window openings separated by columns with Corinthian capitals. At the upper levels, the simple pier and spandrel building is ornamented with Renaissance Revival Style terra cotta details in the form of egg and dart molding, floral swags, putti, and cartouches.

Throughout the 20th century the building housed stores at the ground floor and offices on the upper floors. In the late 1920s, a restaurant occupied the ground floor. The storefront has been extensively altered through repeated remodeling, thereby diminishing the building?s overall architectural integrity. A 1919 photograph depicts the original storefront as having a recessed centered entry with large, flanking plate glass display windows, none of which is extant.

When surveyed in 1984, the building at 336?342 Boylston was ranked a Group IV (?Notable?) building. In response to the written requests mentioned above that the BLC reevaluate the 1984 ratings for all the buildings on the south side of Boylston Street between Arlington Street and Berkeley Street, the BLC voted not to change the ?IV? rating of the building. The decision not to change the rating of the building was based on a BLC staff recommendation.

3.4.1.3 344 - 350 Boylston Street
This four-story commercial building was completed in 1897 as two separate buildings. The architect was Warren A. Rodman. The pier and spandrel building is nine bays in width.
Cast metal piers at floors three and four exhibit a simplified pilaster motif. The building is capped by a Classical Style cornice.
Similar to its neighbors, this building housed first floor commercial uses and upper floor office tenants throughout the 20th century; the New England Trust Company maintained offices in the building from the early 1930s into the mid-1940s.

When surveyed in 1984, the building at 344?350 Boylston was ranked a Group IV (?Notable?) building. In response to the written requests mentioned above that the BLC reevaluate the 1984 ratings for all the buildings on the south side of Boylston Street between Arlington Street and Berkeley Street, the BLC voted not to change the ?IV? rating of the building. The decision not to change the rating of the building was based on a BLC staff recommendation.

3.4.1.4 352 - 360 Boylston Street
The building was constructed in 1906 according to designs by the Boston architectural firm of Parker & Thomas. The two-story commercial building has a limestone veneer facade with a strong horizontal emphasis created by cornices above the storefronts and second story windows. At the second story, the horizontality is further emphasized by a window band of ten single large sash divided by narrow piers employing a rope motif. At the ground level, the outer two storefronts have been drastically altered; the central storefront retains a highly ornamented cast metal arched entry with flanking display windows, all with gold-highlighted bas relief designs, with marble veneer base. The arched entry is recessed and ornamented with a fanlight and grille transom.

The architects, John Harleston Parker (1873-1930) and Douglas H. Thomas, Jr. (1872-1915), were in partnership from 1901 to 1907 and with Arthur Wallace Rice (1869-1938) from 1908 to 1936. Parker & Thomas had a diverse practice in Boston and Baltimore which included the design of banks, hotels, educational facilities, office buildings, private residences, and a group of exposition buildings. They were responsible for many of Boston?s early 20th century buildings, including the Tennis and Racquet Club at 929 Boylston Street, Fenway Studios (a Boston Landmark) on Ipswich Street, the R.H. Stearns Department Store on Tremont Street, the John Hancock Building, and the United Shoe Machinery Building (also a Boston Landmark).

Throughout the 20th century, the building was occupied by ground floor commercial tenants (including Schrafft?s Restaurant in the 1940s) and office uses on the second floor.

The Women?s Educational and Industrial Union occupied the building from 1975 to 2005.
When surveyed in 1984, the building was ranked a Group IV (?Notable?) building. In response to the written requests mentioned above that the BLC reevaluate the 1984 ratings for all the buildings on the south side of Boylston Street between Arlington Street and Berkeley Street, the BLC voted not to change the ?IV? rating of the building. The decision not to change the rating of the building was based on a BLC staff recommendation.
Click to expand...
.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

3.4.3 Impacts to Historic Resources
As discussed in the above Urban Design section, the new building will continue the Arlington and Boylston Streets/Back Bay building massing and height relating to the existing buildings across Arlington Street and west of the Project site along Boylston as well as across Providence Street. The new building will utilize a base, consistent with older, existing commercial buildings in the Back Bay. Projecting bays, inspired by the rowhouses of the Back Bay, will articulate and lend scale to the upper floors along the Boylston and Arlington street facades.

As mentioned above, in response to written requests the BLC reevaluated the 1984 ratings for all the buildings on the south side of Boylston Street between Arlington Street and Berkeley Street, including the four buildings on the Project site, in April 2006. Of the four buildings on the Project site only the Arlington Building?s rating was upgraded from a ?III? to a ?III F.S.? (Further Study). However, based on further historical research and documentation, the BLC ultimately voted in 2006 not to accept a landmark petition to further study the Arlington Building for designation as a Boston Landmark.

The National Register nomination for the Back Bay Historic District does not specifically call out any of the four buildings on the Project site as possessing exceptional architectural or historical significance. The nomination specifically mentions only the Berkeley Building (a Boston Landmark) at 416-426 Boylston Street, Boylston Chambers at 739 Boylston Street, 885-889 Boylston Street, 651-655 Boylston Street, and 400-402 Boylston Street as architecturally prominent buildings within this section of the historic district; no reference is
made to the Arlington Building, 336-342 Boylston Street, 344-350 Boylston Street, or 352- 360 Boylston Street.

As discussed in Section 4.0, the Proponent has met with the staff of the Boston Landmarks Commission (BLC) to review and discuss the Project. At the appropriate time, an Article 85 (Demolition Delay) application will be filed for the demolition of the four existing buildings on the Project site. The Proponent is committed to working with the BLC to advance the Project design in a manner that is respectful to the historic resources within the Project?s vicinity.
Click to expand...
.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I did not realize that the fourth building was not the historic home of the WEIU. Where were they located before 1975?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

ablarc said:
And you never know where it will cast shadows.
Click to expand...

Well, we do now:

3.2.2 Shadow
The site is located in a densely built urban area and the proposed Project will generally be surrounded by and adjacent to structures of similar height and massing.

Further, the Project will be adjacent to The Public Garden. Shadows will be in compliance with the provisions of The Public Garden Shadow Act. Under St. 1992 c. 384, ?An Act Protecting the Boston Public Harden,? ?new shadow? (as defined in the Act) may not be cast on The Public Garden, with the exception of the perimeter sidewalks and except during the first hour after sunrise or before 7 o?clock in the morning, whichever is later, or the last hour before sunset.

Although the Project may result in shadows, the major portion of the shadows are subsumed within the shadows of existing buildings and all shadows will be in compliance with The Public Garden Shadow Act.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

It appears that the Back Bay Historic District (a National Register designation) has a different boundary than the Back Bay Architectural District (a local and state designation). This site is within the Historic District but not the Architectural District. This is why it doesn't require the extensive review that occurred when the Copy Cop building was demolished and replaced by the Apple Store, and why the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay has little input.

There would be a stronger case against demolition if the Arlington Building had not been extensively altered, or if Shreve Crump & Low had occupied it from the beginning. Smilarly, the WEIU building seems less historically significant if that organization only occupied it starting in 1975.

I still hate to see these two buildings demolished.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

As cited by Statler from the "Project Notification Form":

"At an October 2006 hearing, the BLC voted not to accept the landmark petition to further study the Arlington Building for designation as a Boston Landmark. The BLC decision was based on historical research presented by the Proponent which demonstrated that the Arlington Building did not meet the criteria for designation as a Boston Landmark."

Isn't this a classic case of the fox guarding the hen house! The BLC makes it decision based upon the historical research presented by the Proponent (Druker). Geeeez talk about having an incentive to put your own spin on the merit of preserving a building that you propose to demolish and replace.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

commuter guy said:
^^ Awful, just awful - the view in this rendering reminds me of a slightly more gussied up version of the Darth Vader building at Boylston and Exeter.
Click to expand...

Hello downtown Indianapolis!
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

The Proponent has a right to present historical research to support his position. However, I hope this was not the only research the BLC used in coming to their decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top