1400 Boylston Street | Star Market & Gulf | Fenway

stick n move said:
I will say though that the new facadee is definitely an upgrade from before at least. The rainbow was fugly as hell imo. The new facade seems to be brown brick, much better than whatever the hell this was.

FUmusZJXoAA3Ea3


FUmutWOWYAEku3D


https://www.bldup.com/posts/plans-filed-for-500k-sf-office-block-in-fenway
Click to expand...
I disagree. The uniform color only emphasizes this landscraper's landscraperness. I find it totally gross.

The former scheme was almost certainly a half-assed riff on Renzo Piano's Central St. Giles in London. I didn't love it, but I thought it was about a thousand times better than this latest design.

Central Saint Giles:

disegni_progetto_CIL_137_04.jpg


central-saint-giles.jpg


central-saint-giles_2.jpg
 
^^^---- I worked for WPP / GroupM for a decade, and during the mid 2010s Mindshare was HQ'd at 1 St. Giles (the orange building on the right in all the pics above) . I spent about 3 months combined over the years working out of that complex and it's really nice.
 
Beantropolis said:
I disagree. The uniform color only emphasizes this landscraper's landscraperness. I find it totally gross.

The former scheme was almost certainly a half-assed riff on Renzo Piano's Central St. Giles in London. I didn't love it, but I thought it was about a thousand times better than this latest design.

Central Saint Giles:

View attachment 42868

View attachment 42869

View attachment 42870
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it's the half-assed part. That is interesting because it goes all-out for it.

Also, I would welcome Central Saint Giles in, say, Kendall Square, but not Fenway. This building needs to line up with the WS Development masonry aesthetic of the Fenway Corners project, not to mention the neighborhood of rowhouses it abuts.

HenryAlan said:
I don't much care for the first view, viewed from the Riverway. The render looks incredibly fat next to the slender Pierce building. It should compliment the other side of the intersection, to appear like a gateway to the next part of the city. It fails miserably at this function.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the Landmark Center on the other side already kind of ruin that concept?
 
grand_junction said:
I know it's been mentioned before, but it's crazy they're sticking with over 400 parking spaces here. Traffic in the fenway is already absolutely nuts, and double so during games--encouraging more driving there will make it even worse. I'm sure it's a concession to residents worrying about losing more street parking, but it'll just serve to worsen an already bad problem in a neighborhood perfectly set up to be more walkable and bikeable than it currently is.
Click to expand...
Agree, but is it really a concession to residents? The residents in this part of town are overwhelmingly young, transient, and renting - exactly the demographic that typically doesn’t demand parking. Seems more likely that they think the lab space will demand higher rents if it comes with parking.
 
Blackbird said:
…will it not be?
Click to expand...

No idea, just thought it was interesting. I didn't dig deep enough in the DPIR to find out.

But if BPL had signed off on it, they would have labeled it "BPL Fenway Branch" and not "Civic Building", no?
 
HenryAlan said:
I don't much care for the first view, viewed from the Riverway. The render looks incredibly fat next to the slender Pierce building. It should compliment the other side of the intersection, to appear like a gateway to the next part of the city. It fails miserably at this function.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it’s disappointing that they didn’t go for something more iconic here (not necessarily something taller, just something that announces itself). This intersection has already surpassed Kenmore as the most important square* in the Fenway. It crushes Kenmore in terms of pedestrian activity, commercial space, and residential density. It needs something more interesting than this.

*Side note: this square needs a name. I’m herewith proposing Muddyside Square, and am just going to start calling it that on my own.
 
Equilibria said:
No idea, just thought it was interesting. I didn't dig deep enough in the DPIR to find out.

But if BPL had signed off on it, they would have labeled it "BPL Fenway Branch" and not "Civic Building", no?
Click to expand...

This came up in a Fenway Corners (mitigation?) meeting a few months ago. I seem to recall that BPL committed to supporting a new branch in the Fenway—irrespective if it was in FSG project, Scape’s Charlesgate project, or Samuels’ project here. I think BPL made the verbal commit, but now have to get it into the budget for whatever fiscal year this would be ready for.

I remember at the time it reminded me of the three Spider-Mans pointing at each other meme: you first, no, you first, no, you first. Not surprised Samuels would hedge the language a bit, lest they later be on the hook for ongoing operating costs.

edit: fat thumb typo
 
BronsonShore said:
Yeah, it’s disappointing that they didn’t go for something more iconic here (not necessarily something taller, just something that announces itself). This intersection has already surpassed Kenmore as the most important square* in the Fenway. It crushes Kenmore in terms of pedestrian activity, commercial space, and residential density. It needs something more interesting than this.

*Side note: this square needs a name. I’m herewith proposing Muddyside Square, and am just going to start calling it that on my own.
Click to expand...

What about landmark square? Most squares in Boston just took a store name or local “landmark” and added square to it. The landmark here is.. landmark center, maybe its destiny.
 
Equilibria said:
Doesn't the Landmark Center on the other side already kind of ruin that concept?
Click to expand...

Interesting question, and my answer is maybe, sort of? The Landmark Center was there first, so I don't see it as disturbing what was built around it -- we can't blame it for not pairing well with something built across the street, 80 years later. We can very much fault new construction for not matching the existing streetscape. That said, perhaps a view from further back, showing the Pierce as a pinnacle between two lower, hulking behemoths, would assuage my concerns a bit.
 
stick n move said:
What about landmark square? Most squares in Boston just took a store name or local “landmark” and added square to it. The landmark here is.. landmark center, maybe its destiny.
Click to expand...
That's not bad, but I think maybe Fenway Square works better. The neighborhood is already described as Fenway/Kenmore. It makes sense for that to be defined as an area between Kenmore Square and a newly christened Fenway Square. It also works with the eponymous D-Line station being right there.
 
I believe there is a name listed on some signs outside for the square here....They're the unobtrusive "XYZ square" signs so easily missed.
 
The glass sections are really not working at breaking up the massing, neither was making each block a different color. This building is taking up what essentially amounts to 3 different lots, maybe they shouldn't have combined them. It would look much better if it only took up the star market building footprint.

Also the gas station lot is being completely wasted by having the building set back so far and the little gazebo. There is a street wall right next door that they should be aligning to. Also this area is surrounded by parks on 3 sides, the green space here is a waste imo. Theres also that little Ramler park right next door. If the open dresser drawers looking part were pushed back a bit they could get 95% of the same building and would have room for a residential tower on the gas station lot.
 
btw the gas station parcel isn’t being built upon because the soil is hopelessly poisoned and they don’t want to spend the money on remediation so they’re just leaving it as poisoned public space
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top