315 on A | 315 A Street | Fort Point

Re: A st Highrise

sidewalks said:
This is BS...Tony Goldman is the owner of Goldman Properties. He is a phenomenal developer. He is responsible for much of the restoration and revitalization of South Beach and SOHO. It may well be that Goldman Sachs is an investor, but Goldman Properties is a seperate and distinct entity.
Click to expand...

Hi--to clarify, Goldman Properties IS run by Tony Goldman, an independent real estate developer with no affiliation to Goldman Sachs. Archon Group, however, is an affiliate of Goldman Sachs. See: http://www.archongroup.com/about.htm
 
Re: A st Highrise

Sicilian...are you familiar with Goldman's work in NYC and Miami? For my money Tony Goldman is one of the best developers in the country. Berkeley deserves praise for what it has done, but they're not in the same league.
 
Re: A st Highrise

I'm familiar with Goldmans work. My understanding is that Goldman has a very small stake in the Archon portfolio (maybe less than 10%?), plus he owns some properties outright (A Street Deli). Archon's website (http://www.archongroup.com/commercial/transact-detail.asp?id=1) which has been updated, made clear that the company's objective was to secure approvals from the BRA for variances, and then flip the upzoned projects undeveloped. Many of their current and former buildings have remained empty for years. This is how things have played out on significant properties, notably 316 and 320 Summer Street. Those projects were approved with significant variances from zoning to include rooftop and infill construction, over the course of a year -- as a residential condo. Without developing the approved project, Archon flipped the buildings and development rights to Lincoln, who then filed a project change back to office space. Those buildings remain vacant as well.
 
Re: A st Highrise

Looks like a little of the LES is coming to Boston.

2777050306_e4ddfaefe6_b.jpg
 
Re: A st Highrise

Sicilian said:
BTW, there are no parks existing or under construction within a 1/2 to 3/4 mile from this site, with the exception of a 60 x 100 postage stamp at Wormwood Street. Context and history are important in this discussion.
Click to expand...

I want to choose my words nicely, but the above sentence is a huge, massive, gigantic, big, fat lie.

In much, much less than one mile you can walk to:

- South Boston Maritime park - D Street
- Eastport Park - D Street next to WTC East
- Westport Park - WTC Blvd, on top of the Seaport Hotel podium space
- Fan Pier park
- Federal Courthouse plaza park
- Harborwalk park from New Northern Ave to Children's Museum
- Harborwalk park from Summer to Gillette plant
- The so-called "Greenway" parks downtown
- The aforementioned Wormwood park

There is a huge over-abundance of parks in this area. What it needs is more residential.

That being said, this is the first time I feel that a building truly is "out of scope with it's neighborhood" - this building is just... wrong. Doesn't go here.

This funky district needs a funky building, not a pre-cast, off-the-rack stumpette that is twice the height of the entire neighborhood.
 
Re: A st Highrise

JohnAKeith said:
Zoning allows for heights of 180 feet; the new building as proposed is 240 feet.
Click to expand...
Just to clarify (if I remember correctly), the property originally purchased by Archon from the Boston Wharf Co. was, as-of-right, zoned for 80-100 feet, not 180 feet. In 2006, the 100-Acre Plan increased the zoning on that parcel to 180' along with the Agreement with the large property owners for the open space contribution mentioned earlier in this thread. The additional variance over 180' is allowable under 100 Acres under special conditions -- maybe a payment to BRA coffers or something in the league of the unknowable.
 
Re: A st Highrise

The 100 acre plans for Fort Point show a pedestrian bridge extending over the channel. Where's that going? What's the working plan right now for the other side of Fort Point?
 
Re: A st Highrise

^pelhamhall

Name a park that is walking distance 1/2 mile from the site, not including the one I mentioned at Wormwood that is 60' x 100'. And don't draw a straight line over the tops of buildings. Do your measurement walking from the site to any park and measure how far it is.

There is no urban neighborhood in Boston where residents, kids and dog owners are expected to walk 3/4 mile to play in the closest park. Most of the parks you mentioned are 1 mile from the site. The "Harborwalk park from Summer to Gillette plant" is 12' wide, with an exception at the Binford Street pump house (approximately 1/2 mile from the site).

With respect, before you use words like "Big fat lie" do the measurements on a map and POST YOUR FACTS.
 
Re: A st Highrise

^Shepard

I vaguely remember a drawing with a pedestrian bridge -- there actually used to be one at Mt. Washington Street, demolished early last century. That is just an ornamental idea, not being seriously considered as far as I know.

The other side of the Channel is USPS property. USPS has been lobbying to move the entire facility possibly to the Reserve Channel (where UPS and the gym are, near BCEC). Once USPS succeeds in finding a new location, they will sell the Dorchester St. facility for development. They have presented a complete commercial development plan for the Fort Point site. But given the rate of movement at USPS, that entire process probably puts the possibility of a redevelopment into the next decade at best.
 
Re: A st Highrise

Sicilian said:
^pelhamhall

Name a park that is walking distance 1/2 mile from the site...

POST YOUR FACTS.
Click to expand...

There are three:
- Maritime Park (D Street)
- Eastport Park (WTC)
- Fan Pier Park (under construction)

There are four if you count the adjoining park in front of the Federal Courthouse. If you expand your search to a ten-minute walk, which would be a much more reasonable parameter, there are nearly a dozen parks.

This area is littered with parks. Far too many parks. Combined with the parking lots, parks are truly nothing but dead, windswept, open space.

The very last thing this dead area needs is more dead space. This area needs more dynamic, living, breathing area. Not more dead space.
 
Re: A st Highrise

It is worth pointing out that if you live in the South End you have much fewer options for parks. It's "city living" after all. But there will always be those who want Waltham-by-the-sea... sigh.
 
Re: A st Highrise

^pelham

And since my post has been claimed to be a "huge, massive, gigantic, big, fat lie" it would make sense for you to indicate all the parks available at the heart of Fort Point's growing residential community. How about at Fort Point Place (Wormwood) or to the three condos on Channel Center Street (15, 25 and 35 Channel Center). Should those kids walk a mile to the Childrens Museum Park?

I don't mind a discussion, but words like "lie" are fairly strong for a Senior Member to use on a newcomer, no?
 
Re: A st Highrise

^pelhamhall

Do the measurements. How about you start from the small park at Wormwood, since that is roughly the center of the residential neighborhood.

And name me a location in the South End (a neighborhood far less dense than projected for Fort Point's future) that requires a 1/2 mile walk to the nearest recreational park. I'll take a look.
 
Re: A st Highrise

The problem with the South End is that a lot of the parks (Union Park, Montgomery Park, the Berkeley Gardens, Worcester Sq, etc.) are quasi private. They're not open to the general public.
 
Re: A st Highrise

Here's an easy solution. Put a small playground, no larger than the footprint of a small house. That's all you need.
 
Re: A st Highrise

That will work just fine right today.

But it won't serve 2500 residential units expected to develop south of Summer Street over the next half-century.

I get the point being made on this board reviewing other threads - pack each area with dense construction, nix additional greenspace to meet the projected buildout, and when and if the residential units don't sell convert them to office space.

So much for a vibrant 24/7 district.
 
Re: A st Highrise

I know the argument about no parks in the area started with no parks exist or are in construction, but I would also add the Seaport (Hill) Square park that is planned closer to this location than any of the mentioned parks minus the existing Wormwood one. Of course I have always envisioned the Gillette parking lots as containing a good amount of open/green space, particularly along the channel. I see the potential along the channel as being one of the truly fitting places for "luxury" housing in the city. Only at the channel side mind you. All affordable beyond that....

You guys are always showing the wonderful row houses (whatever they are called in Paris) the U shaped buildings with courtyards. I see a line of them along the channel possibly 2 rows with a boulevard from Necco towards Gillette, with a public waterside park like a smaller esplanade. Of course I've looked at the 100 acre plan and it doesn't fit my utopian idea, but it's not bad (the 100 acre plan not mine).

Bottom line there needs to be some open space. This project is not arguing against it. It has agreed to it. But, as slow as this area is going to develop, it will be years (decades?) before there is usable new open space associated with this massive master planned development. I think the biggest thing would be to provide neighborhood access to some open lounging space along the channel. The harborwalk is already there, so expand another 40 feet from there and make it green with shade trees. Line thechannel with nice willows and what not.

Since they insist on calling it the 100 acre plan or whatever instead of the 88 or so it really is. I demand a Winnie the Pooh mural be included.
 
Re: A st Highrise

Sicilian said:
I get the point being made on this board reviewing other threads - pack each area with dense construction, nix additional greenspace to meet the projected buildout, and when and if the residential units don't sell convert them to office space.

So much for a vibrant 24/7 district.
Click to expand...


I'd say your aim is bad because the point is about 180 degrees from what you just said.

The overiding majority on this board does not want big squat building, park, 6 lane boulevard, squat building with parking lot, boulevard, park, wal-mart anchored mall with flashy chain restaurants, separated 6 lane boulevard squat building..... etc. It has been done elsewhere and failed miserably.

I also thought the point of the Fort Point district rehab was to somewhat maintain it's "art scene" flavor. Starving artists are also found to be quite childless.

I, also seem to remember proposals for roof top open space in this area, which sounded like a great idea. Anyone remember the roof deck with the big picture wall for movies. I see that type of open space as being part of a vibrant neighborhood and encourages interaction with your neighbors for vitality. Possibly a better way of going about it too based on the area. Wide Summer street full of traffic, haul roads, access roads, highway interchanges. Internalize the open space to being green roofs and 8th floor bistros with outdoor patos and decks along Summer street, Melcher, the new developments in Gillette.

Man I'm just spouting a bunch of ridiculous right now, can tell it's Friday at the end of a long week. And, I should be writing this in the design a better Boston forum and or telling it to my psychiatrist.... enough.
 
Re: A st Highrise

^SeamusMcFly

First off, I'm in agreement with the early phased development of a useful park at the water's edge. If I remember correctly, the proposed development on USPS and Gillette lots is upwards of 7-9 million sf -- far more dense than the Parisian row houses shown in other threads.

As for Seaport Square's proposed park, it's not as accessible as it seems from the heart of Fort Point because of the Haul Road / South Boston bypass and the conrail track along the convention center's edge. From Wormwood and A Street, for example, I think Seaport Square would be arrived at only by walking to Summer Street, over bridge to cross the bypass road and back down. It is possible (and has been suggested over the years) that a pedestrian overpass be built from Wormwood smokestack over the Conrail track to the Convention Center, allowing conventioneers easier access to Fort Point retail, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top