Hurley Building Redevelopment | 19 Staniford St | West End

[Mike]

She sure hasn't articulated a big picture vision has she? All I see are small gimmicks so far. But I'll withhold full judgement until interest rates decrease to a more encouraging level for development.

But she did create the position "Nightlife Czar" : https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/04...s-is-mission-make-boston-vibrant-after-hours/

Walsh had one too iirc, it changed nothing lol

 

[Life Coach Mike]

As long as those god-awful bulging buildings are eliminated forever from the Hurley proposals.

 

[type001]

I’m just hear again to say tear them down now. For the minority of people clamoring about the architectural worth (which I understand and respect), go take your pictures now. The city is suffering as long as the landscraper sits there giving me the finger everyday I walk by it.

 

[bigpicture7]

I’m just hear again to say tear them down now. For the minority of people clamoring about the architectural worth (which I understand and respect), go take your pictures now. The city is suffering as long as the landscraper sits there giving me the finger everyday I walk by it.

I'm with you very much re: the presently wasted value of this parcel / landscraper giving us the finger /etc.

But just genuinely curious: would you oppose a facadectomy with skyscrapers sprouting out of the present footprint of this thing?

 

[Justbuildit]

My take is that it's a huge lot with tons of development potential. Why constrain what can be done with anything leftover? While urban renewal is bad, renewing the renewal is sweet comeuppance. Level the whole damn block and start anew.

 

[Longfellow]

I'm with you very much re: the presently wasted value of this parcel / landscraper giving us the finger /etc.

But just genuinely curious: would you oppose a facadectomy with skyscrapers sprouting out of the present footprint of this thing?

Logically yes this would be OK as long as it could be activated street level wise.

However I think there is a ton of value to be had in destroying the temples and monuments of urban renewalists. If they say, "well, what we did was bad, but at least we got these sick buildings out of it!" you haven't really made up for anything. Either it was worth destroying the city for or it wasn't. So let's take the chance to affirmatively say, it was bad. It's not the 60s, it's not the 80s... it's 2024. We have a lot more data now on what's Good and what's Bad.

 

[HenryAlan]

I'm with you very much re: the presently wasted value of this parcel / landscraper giving us the finger /etc.

But just genuinely curious: would you oppose a facadectomy with skyscrapers sprouting out of the present footprint of this thing?

I am a fan of these buildings in the abstract, but think they completely destroy the urban fabric in that location. A facadectomy is fine, so long as it makes the existing facade significantly more porous. The big issue to me is the way the buildings block natural pedestrian routes, forcing people to walk significantly out of their way. Fix that, and save the rest if possible, but there needs to be much better pedestrian (and bike) passage through the mega block.

 

[atlantaden]

On Oct 30th, 2019, the day this thread began, I posted,

Hopefully, this sucker will be bulldozed out of existence

I stand by my statement today!

 

[type001]

I'm with you very much re: the presently wasted value of this parcel / landscraper giving us the finger /etc.

But just genuinely curious: would you oppose a facadectomy with skyscrapers sprouting out of the present footprint of this thing?

Great question. I want to answer “No, with a long BUT”, but also any sort of compromise that leaves any of the outside facade standing is most likely going to look like some Frankenstein-y mismatch. Demolition seems like the safest bet.

EDIT: Then again, if they can do some sort of treatment a la the Middlesex Courthouse, that could work. My only gripe with the building as is is it’s location. If it existed in even the Longwood area, I would want it to be preserved

 

[dhawkins]

I think the state should shuffle some properties and re-purpose the entire Hurley and Lindemann as a new home for Suffolk Superior court house and Supreme Judicial Court that are currently located behind Center Plaza. Move the folks in the Lindemann to the Carney Hospital that Steward is closing in Dorchester (take it by eminent domain and force Steward to pay for the move!); renovate Hurley and Lindermann into a court house and the two buildings on Beacon Hill can be sold to a developer. A Beacon Hill property either land leased or sold would be a jackpot for the State! The tower court building could be the next middlesex court house tower type renovation!! Another bonus is the Hurley and Linermann shares the block with another Suffolk court house so they can share resources/ staff. And the signature brutalist architecture could be preserved to a certain extent and would be a perfect fit for the ominous government court building.

 

[stefal]

Final Draft Project Proposal and Draft Design Guidelines posted for DCAMM Acceptance:
https://www.mass.gov/info-details/lindemann-hurley-redevelopment?mc_cid=16141efa2b&mc_eid=b38f518a36

Project Proposal:

The Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (“DCAMM”) proposes offering the entire Site for redevelopment by a private developer for a mixed-use, residential development (the “Project”). DMH intends to continue to operate its residential treatment programs onsite, and the selected developer will be required to build new space onsite (or in very close proximity) to accommodate these programs as part of their development. DMH’s central office functions will move elsewhere within the state’s portfolio of office space prior to execution of this Project. Historic preservation and adaptive reuse will be key considerations in the Site’s redevelopment. DCAMM has engaged with preservation experts, advocates, and other stakeholders to better understand these requirements. Even within this framework, however, there is an opportunity to add significant density to the Site. It is DCAMM’s expectation that this development potential can be harnessed to help address the Commonwealth’s pressing need for additional housing units, and that any real estate value that a developer can create through this transaction can be used to offset DMH’s occupancy costs on the redeveloped Site.

Design Guidelines:

URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLE 1: PROVIDE HIGH QUALITY, LANDSCAPED, ACCESSIBLE OPEN SPACES CENTRAL COURTYARD AND CORNER PUBLIC PLAZAS AND SAFE, PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY SIDEWALKS.
URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLE 2: ACTIVATE GROUND FLOORS SO THAT PLAZAS AND SIDEWALKS ARE ENGAGING, PROMOTE COMMUNITY LIFE, AND ENRICH THE SENSE OF PLACE.
URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLE 3: REDUCE THE ‘SUPERBLOCK’ EFFECT.
URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLE 4: MODERNIZE HOW PEOPLE GET TO THE SITE; FOCUS ON TRANSIT-ORIENTED DESIGN.

BUILDING DESIGN PRINCIPLE 1: PRIORITIZE ADAPTIVE REUSE, REHABILITATION, & PRESERVATION.
BUILDING DESIGN PRINCIPLE 2: DEVELOP AN INNOVATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY NEW COMPOSITION OF MASSING AT VARIOUS SCALES.
BUILDING DESIGN PRINCIPLE 3: CREATE A SIGNATURE NEW RENOVATION & ADDITION(S) TO COMPLEMENT THE EXISTING HURLEY/ LINDEMANN/ COURTHOUSE BLOCK.

Whether this means they'll be able to better enforce a... better... design than iteration 1 remains to be seen, but some promising guidelines nonetheless.

 

[type001]

Tear the entire thing down please.

 

[stick n move]

Tear the entire thing down please.

This is the only way. This building is massive, it takes up too much land in a downtown with minimal land to not blow it up and start over. The location is also a bridge between beacon hill and the bulfinch triangle, as well as the building itself being yet another obstacle that walls off the west end from the rest of downtown. Breaking this superblock up in to multiple smaller blocks with some new small streets, ground floor retail, and quality materials is really the only way to go here. Tacking on some glass boxes to a ww2 flak tower in the middle of downtown is not going to fix any of the core issues, and well just get stuck with a monstrosity for another 50 years. They gotta get this right.

Even if they literally just demolished the building, laid down a small street grid, and sold off all the lots to different developers it would come out perfectly fine. That would be a far superior option to trying to adaptively reuse this prison complex.

 

[Smuttynose]

This is the only way. This building is massive, it takes up too much land in a downtown with minimal land to not blow it up and start over. The location is also a bridge between beacon hill and the bulfinch triangle, as well as the building itself being yet another obstacle that walls off the west end from the rest of downtown. Breaking this superblock up in to multiple smaller blocks with some new small streets, ground floor retail, and quality materials is really the only way to go here. Tacking on some glass boxes to a ww2 flak tower in the middle of downtown is not going to fix any of the core issues, and well just get stuck with a monstrosity for another 50 years. They gotta get this right.

Even if they literally just demolished the building, laid down a small street grid, and sold off all the lots to different developers it would come out perfectly fine. That would be a far superior option to trying to adaptively reuse this prison complex.

Agreed. This complex might have some interesting architectural features, but it was never practical, it was never maintained. It aged very poorly. Not to mention that we tore up several blocks of historic building stock to construct it. It’s time to move on.

 

[Charlie_mta]

It can be preserved through documentation. Before treating it down, the city can do an extensive photo and video set. Hell, they can even do a complete 3D lydar type survey of it to preserve a perfect 3D model. But please, get rid of this 60s urban renewal monstrosity.

 

[stick n move]

It can be preserved through documentation. Before treating it down, the city can do an extensive photo and video set. Hell, they can even do a complete 3D lydar type survey of it to preserve a perfect 3D model. But please, get rid of this 60s urban renewal monstrosity.

Great idea!

 

[itchy]

Historic preservation and adaptive reuse will be key considerations in the Site’s redevelopment. .

Why? Why?! WHY?!!?!

This is utterly moronic. What on earth is worth preserving in this abortion of a building?

Where was this requirement when Druker was tearing down actually historic structures (not urban renewal mega-pustules) across the street from the Arlington Street Church?

 

[curcuas]

Why? Why?! WHY?!!?!

This is utterly moronic. What on earth is worth preserving in this abortion of a building?

Where was this requirement when Druker was tearing down actually historic structures (not urban renewal mega-pustules) across the street from the Arlington Street Church?

The sociology of (academic) architecture.