City Hall Discussion - Redevelopment - Preservation - Relocation

[LeTaureau]

"It's a rare opportunity for a city nearly 400 years old to be able to extend its downtown by 1,000 acres..."

It most certainly is! It's too bad we've largely squandered this amazing opportunity. Before a single shovel went into the ground, the city, property owners, Big Dig highway engineers, the T, architects and urban planners should have gotten together and worked out a compelling, and comprehensive plan for this neighborhood. The fact that this did not happen is truly heartbreaking.

The Seaport couldve been a twenty-first century Back Bay -- a real showcase of modern Boston -- rather than Kendal Square By The Sea. Menino's grand plans are just too little, too late. He shouldve proposed this 10-15 years ago as a central, integrated feature of a far more reaching plan for the Seaport.

Bingo!

IMO, as it currently stands, the South Boston waterfront is destined to be a huge failure, and not serve as an extension of downtown as Menino has touted. Where is the human aspect of the neighborhood? Where is the charm? I realize that a lot has yet to come, and that maybe it is a bit early to draw such conclusions, but so far I've been very disappointed. This is what I believe the neighborhood lacks:

1. A vision. The South Boston waterfront was basically a tabula rasa ten years ago - a piece of low hanging fruit ripe for plucking. With a creative vision and plan, it could have been a terrific neighborhood. The creation of the Back Bay had a vision - reclamation of land, tree lined central boulevard and street grid, and most importantly a set of building requirements that helped shape the neighborhood. This set of building requirements (height, scale, bow fronts, windows, etc) may seem constrictive, but it led to the wonderful Back Bay architectural vernacular that we all love.

2. Human Scale. I welcome tall buildings in cities as they increase density, increase critical mass and create interesting skylines. But for me, its what happens when buildings meet streets that really defines a city. The building heights are fine, its just there are too many mega blocks, and too many breaks in the streetwall. A more intimate street grid with varied architecture would have been better.

3. A destination. We're half way there with the ICA, and I'm glad that it moved to Fan Pier. The BCEC brings a lot of out-of-towners to the area, but its likely that their hotels are downtown, where the action is. The BCEC is also enormous, and not a friendly structure to any neighborhood. In this regard, I think that the idea to move City Hall to the waterfront is a good one. If Menino can put his money where is mouth his, than I support his idea. I only worry about the fate of the current city hall. If the city decides to sell it and its surroundings, the building should be preserved and renovated for another use.

 

[tocoto]

What has stopped the seaport from becoming anything for years are finances and regulations. Everyone has a different view of urban design and tries to control it through regulations (zoning , tidelands, FAA, architects, historians, NIMBYS, Highways, etc.). All of the rules combined with changing rules and uncertainty make the developers reluctant to build since the financing can't be pinned down. In a way, all of the interested parties are their own worst enemies.

The mayor expresses a vision and it's shot down immediately. Too bad since the mayor is probably the only one with the power to cut through all the bickering and BS (the Gov seems inclined in this direction too). IMO the waring factions should support him, and work together through compromise to optimize the projects. It's a long shot but at least you have a strong mayor to spearhead the development instead on a bunch of disorganized special interest groups fighting it out to the death with little or nothing ever happening.

 

[IMAngry]

Kisses toward the mayor?

I don't think the mayor deserves our praise.

 

[PaulC]

amenities

If the developers of Pier 4 and the McCourt blocks are held to the same standards in regards to amenities as Fan Pier then his will be a vibrant area.

You can't have the scale of Back Bay and still have the density the city needs here. I'm not saying every thing is as good as it should be but this is the perfect place for a lot of residences and office space. How many cities have this kind of growing room? If you look at what will be happening in the wharf district next door you'll see one of the next great urban environments in Boston.

 

[tocoto]

IMO the master plan for the seaport, grand and exhaustively produced as it may be, is not economically feasible for the developers who must put up their money to make it a reality. Otherwise the area would be developed by now. Development money is going to other cities where things can get built faster and cheaper. Idealists and academics can plan until the end of time, but plans are nothing but ideas and some ink on paper. Not a bad thing per se, but not always good either, and certainly not a habitable building.

For evidence of uncertainty for developers look no further than Northpoint, now in limbo. While planned for years, and finally started, it was brought to its knees by a few disgruntled citizens though the SJC, another x factor with virtually uncontestable power over virtually everything in the state. Talk about legislating from the bench, that court is composed of judges who think they are emperors.

 

[IMAngry]

True that ...

Talk about legislating from the bench, that court is composed of judges who think they are emperors.

Dude, I remind my husband of that, every day.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Talk about legislating from the bench, that court is composed of judges who think they are emperors.

They are only activist judges when they rule against what you want.

 

[PaulC]

no one expects a fast development

IMO the master plan for the seaport, grand and exhaustively produced as it may be, is not economically feasible for the developers who must put up their money to make it a reality. Otherwise the area would be developed by now. Development money is going to other cities where things can get built faster and cheaper. Idealists and academics can plan until the end of time, but plans are nothing but ideas and some ink on paper. Not a bad thing per se, but not always good either, and certainly not a habitable building. .

The city and the planners are talking about a 40 year build out. I would bet on 20 years for all but the most difficult parcels.

Also there is no such thing as 'activist judges'. This a phase invented by Karl Rove to manipulate the ignorant masses. When ever I hear this phase I am reminded of all the Chinese Red Brigade holding Mao's little green book and reciting the quotes in at giant rallies.

 

[singbat]

Re: no one expects a fast development

Also there is no such thing as 'activist judges'. This a phase invented by Karl Rove to manipulate the ignorant masses. When ever I hear this phase I am reminded of all the Chinese Red Brigade holding Mao's little green book and reciting the quotes in at giant rallies.

the book is red -- i bought a copy on the street in hangzhou (boston's mainland china sister city) as a lark. not a good read.

basically second you on the judges. don't like the interpretation? change the laws.

 

[palindrome]

The judicial branch is the most powerful of the three.

 

[TallIsGood]

Clearly there is a thing as an activist judge. One who finds an interpretation that fits the result that the judge is looking for. Activist judges have been around since the beginning of the republic (starting with the famous Marbury v. Madison case in the late 1700s).

 

[statler]

Measure would delay new City Hall
Flaherty proposing up to a year of study

By Matt Viser, Globe Staff | March 14, 2007

A measure to be taken up by the City Council today seeks to delay Mayor Thomas M. Menino's proposal to sell City Hall and build a new one on the South Boston Waterfront while the wisdom of such a move is studied for up to a year.

The measure, filed by Councilor at Large Michael F. Flaherty, is the first major political challenge to the mayor's vision of razing the city's much maligned seat of government with the goal of building an architectural gem near the harbor's edge. The plan, announced in December, has been seen as an attempt by the mayor to put a stamp on the waterfront and on his four terms as mayor.

But Flaherty said that businesses along the waterfront are opposed to the move, because it would bring additional traffic and would not fit with the character of the neighborhood. A waterfront City Hall would pose a significant inconvenience for many Boston residents, Flaherty said, and the city's own master plan for the district does not accommodate what the mayor proposes.

"This isn't a slam dunk," said Flaherty, who lives in South Boston and has mayoral aspirations. "I'm worried that moving City Hall could serve as a distraction to the critical issues we face as a city, namely the affordable housing crisis, skyrocketing property taxes, and gang and gun violence."

Menino's spokeswoman said yesterday that he is committed to the project.

"The mayor continues to look for new and creative ways of making our city more efficient and sustainable," said the spokeswoman, Dot Joyce. "Creating a new public building and civic space on the [South Boston] waterfront is part of his overall goal of moving Boston forward. There will be a significant public process as we continue to move forward with our plans in building both in Roxbury and on the waterfront."

The mayor has proposed that the new City Hall be constructed on Drydock 4, site of the Bank of America Pavilion, as a complement to the new Institute of Contemporary Art. The 14-acre property would include a cultural center that could be used year round for concerts and civic events. A new city services center in Roxbury's Dudley Square would provide a place for residents to get some city business done without going to City Hall, according to the mayor's plan.

Though the council has little power to prevent Menino from going ahead with a sale of the current City Hall or constructing a new one, Flaherty's move signals a potentially messy public fight, with echoes of the late councilor James M. Kelly's prolonged battle over waterfront development in the same neighborhood. Flaherty's proposal calls for an in-depth study of the mayor's plan by an outside consulting firm that would take about a year to complete. He also wants to form a task force that would study other possible locations for a new City Hall.

Several members of the City Council have voiced skepticism of the mayor's plan. Councilor at Large Felix Arroyo recently announced plans to put together a team of specialists to review proposals for remodeling the present building.

Ed Toomey, provost of the Boston Architectural College, will chair the committee, and the best selections would be exhibited at City Hall and presented later this year to the mayor and the Boston Redevelopment Authority.

"We're not talking about moving a pup tent across the city," said Councilor John Tobin, who says a new City Hall should be built near the current building. "We're talking about moving the seat of city government from where it's been for 400 years. You have to think there's going to be some opposition."

City architects are working on designs for the waterfront plan, which will be presented later this year, and on finding a developer to purchase the current building.

An in-house task force is also studying the way city services are delivered and looking at new ways to perform city business in a new building.

Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.

Link

 

[bowesst]

I think this board could use a political forum. I get tired of seeing everyone's personal political views injected into evry thread.

 

[Lrfox]

Political Views aside, I like the idea of having an outside organization study the possible effects of moving city hall to the waterfront. I think a city hall/ town hall is the heart of a city, and as such it should be IN the heart of the city.

As of now, I'm leaning towards keeping it where it is. But that's not to say a good argument couldn't sway me. If this study shows real negative effects, then I'd have to still say keep it in Downtown. South Boston is not centrally located, not easy to get to via mass transit, and even if (as it says in the most recent article) they build a city services center or whatever in Rox, there's still this issue of accessibility.

While more space to develop sounds wonderful, I don't think now is the time to clear that area. We have 115 Winthrop, South Station tower and a boatload of smaller projects going up or soon to be going up in Downtown that will certainly provide more workspace in Downtown without moving city hall. In fact, if city hall is moved, the need for a building like 115 Winthrop will decrease as we can build out and have no need for going up.

The area in South Boston where the city hall would go is seeing development increase, and hopefully that will continue. I think a major issue there is the need for more mass transit. if there is a subway extension (not likely) or the San Francisco-esque Street Cars that I've heard rumblings about (on this forum, and i also know it's a dream/ fantasy), then maybe City Hall in South Boston is an option. Until then, I don't think so.

 

[DudeUrSistersHot]

A new city hall is an excellent idea. A new city hall on the waterfront is the most horrible idea imaginable, other than putting it on an island or in Allston or something. They could easily put a new city hall tower on the existing site - perhaps above the MBTA station - and sell off the rest of the land in the plaza.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

I agree with Dude. The only way I would support a new city hall on the waterfront is if it was really close to the city, like near the Courthouse. That would be very close and accessible but out near the Black Falcon seems far out. Yes Copley Sq was once way out but it only became the center of the Back Bay because the Fenway was developed. There isn't anything past where Menino wants to build it so it will always be off "in the boonies".

 

[JoeSixpack]

If he were to put it in the boonies, he would put it in Readville.

Can anyone tell me what is below the current City Hall Plaza? There are acres of land there. Plenty to build right next to the existing building, and then destroy it after moving day. Creating a kinder gentler Plaza. Maybe with some green? And more Parking? Hell I'd settle for a fountain.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

There was a fountain. It never worked.

 

[Ron Newman]

Can anyone tell me what is below the current City Hall Plaza?

Subway tunnels, in a different configuration than before City Hall was built.

 

[kz1000ps]

A reminder of what was here beforehand. Click for fullsize: