Downtown Crossing/Financial District | Discussion

Ron Newman said:
The Orpheum used to have pedestrian connections to both Washington and Winter streets. The Winter street entrance now goes to the Corner Mall, and the Washington Street entrance was most recently Aldo shoe store.
Click to expand...

Ron - -sounds as if some developer should buy the "Corner" building and make a nice Orpheum entrance on Washington a la the Hanover Theatre in Worcester
 
underground said:
That area's probably cost prohibitive for new music venues. Plus, not sure how it could compete with either the old established money makers like the Orpheum, Wang, and Wilbur, or the cheaper spots further away from the city center like the HoB and Middle East. Best bet would be something smaller like the live Jazz at Kingston Station or the DJ scene at Good Life. Neither of those venues is that large though (and both are primarily restaurant/bars). If you wanted to create a neighborhood centered around music venues, your better bet would be in a place like Allston, Davis Square, Union Square (Somerville version), or Central Square. In fact, what you're looking for more or less already exists in those spots.
Click to expand...

Right, those are examples of a concentration of live music options, but they don't fit the concept of centrally located, and widely accessible from other amenities. I'm thinking about the person who wants to have a good dinner, then hit the music scene after for drinks and relaxation. Somebody in Dorchester might head downtown for that, but they won't head to Allston for it. Not, that is, unless we want to support the Westy concept of individual vehicle trips within the city.
 
whighlander said:
What about this one just around the corner?

http://www.orpheum-theater.com/orpheum_theater_boston.php

venue_orpheum_bost.jpg


Only problem -- the Orpheum needs a pedestrian connection direct from Washington or Winter St. to the Theatre lobby -- otherwise it seems isolated from the now "burgeoning" DTX population of residents, "soon to be hotel visitors" and students

This is what the 'Orpheum" looked like when it had a Marquee on Washington St.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mit-libraries/3382500304/in/photostream/
Click to expand...

The Orpheum, putting aside it's structural issues and lack of modern amenities, is MUCH larger than the live music venue I am envisioning for downtown crossing. As I said above, Downtown Crossing could use a small/mid size live music venue in the range of 500 or so capacity. The Orpheum's capacity is almost 6 times that size at approx. 2,700. Given its large capacity, it attracts much different bookings than the live music venue I would like to see in downtown crossing. To compare the Orpheum to what I have in mind is like comparing apples and bananas and not even apples and oranges. Boston proper has plenty of music venues on the larger side (HOB, Paradise, Agganis, Orpheum, BOA Pavilion etc.) and not many in the 500 capacity range. The options for such a venue are even fewer when talking about downtown only.
 
Big push for downtown carts
City looking to expand, improve vendor program

By Donna Goodison
Tuesday, July 10, 2012 - Updated 3 hours ago


Boston is planning a $200,000 study to enhance Downtown Crossing’s pushcarts and expand the vendor operation throughout the city’s first “business improvement district.”

The city wants to revamp the merchandise in the 25-year-old pushcart program and possibly add mobile trucks, kiosks and more permanent retail structures across the 34-block BID zone that covers Downtown Crossing and the Financial, Theatre and Ladder districts.

Although the Business Improvement District has implemented umbrellas, cart skirts and uniforms for the 40 pushcarts, many do not comply with design and merchandising standards, according to a Boston Redevelopment Authority request for proposals issued yesterday.

The BRA put out a call for consultants to make vending recommendations in addition to creating design standards for Downtown Crossing’s pedestrian-only zone, plus all sidewalks and streets in the broader BID.

“The design guidelines will leverage ongoing investment to create downtown as a ‘must see,’ world-class destination for years to come,” said Rosemarie Sansone, president of the nonprofit BID.

The study, budgeted for a maximum of $200,000, will be paid for by the city, BRA and BID, which is funded by commercial property owners. Goals include a new system of signs for pedestrian and vehicle access, as well as signs that point people to historic sites and other key destinations.

Randi Lathrop, a BRA community planning director who sits on the BID board, was not available yesterday. A BRA spokeswoman declined comment on the study.

-— dgoodison@bostonherald.com
Click to expand...

And I thought the BID money was a waste. LOL Can we say SUCKERS

http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...mprove_vendor_program/srvc=home&position=also
 
$200,000 may sound like a lot, but a comprehensive data collection and analysis can easily go for that much or more. Presumably they will be conducting a good deal of market research, for example, which means focus groups, interviews, street observation, etc. That's expensive when you consider participant stipends and other costs.

However, I think a far more effective approach in this case would be to simply increase the fee and decrease or eliminate the rules for push carts. The higher fee ensures that vendors with a successful business model will be the ones who can afford to be there. And given that successful model, the vendors themselves should have the only say on things like merchandise selection, worker dress code, etc.
 
I hope they have the chance to interview the man who urinated on the front stoop of my office on Tremont Street, facing the Boston Common. While we watched in horror, inside.

Welcome to Boston!
 
It does not take 200K to figure out if more vendor carts are needed in an area. This is when academia is bad. You have all these master degrees out there that use spiffy buzz words and charge a lot (to help pay off those degrees) to give you an assessment that is not that important. For instance if they are wrong about adding more push carts, you revoke them by only giving out "experimental licenses" that may be revoked if things don't work out so well. It's time consulting firms get called out for, quite often, the over priced (border line) common sense findings they report to you.
 
GW2500 said:
It does not take 200K to figure out if more vendor carts are needed in an area. This is when academia is bad. You have all these master degrees out there that use spiffy buzz words and charge a lot (to help pay off those degrees) to give you an assessment that is not that important. For instance if they are wrong about adding more push carts, you revoke them by only giving out "experimental licenses" that may be revoked if things don't work out so well. It's time consulting firms get called out for, quite often, the over priced (border line) common sense findings they report to you.
Click to expand...

Anybody ever find out what the cost was for entire Rose Kennedy Greenway Study?

Remember this study to find out if building would cast shadows.
 
GW2500 said:
It does not take 200K to figure out if more vendor carts are needed in an area. This is when academia is bad..... It's time consulting firms get called out for, quite often, the over priced (border line) common sense findings they report to you.
Click to expand...

GSW -- as the author of many reports of common sense to my customers (aka as an independent consultant) -- I take special umbrage with the comments

While of course your analysis is true at face value -- the consultants report often reflect the reason why the customer calls for a consultant:
1) This seems so obvious we must have missed something -- let's hire a consultant to confirm our analysis
2) Heh I can't recommend something that obvious to the public without some cover -- let's hire a consultant
3) I've got an idea of what to do -- but no clue as to its cost of timetable -- le't hire a consultant
4) I've got a general idea but no details and no clue as to how to do it -- let's hire a consultant
5) I've no idea what we sshould do -- let's hire a consultant

Of all of the above reasons for which my services have been contracted for as a consultant -- the #1, #2 are surprisingly common

By the way -- the above is just a preliminary assessment -- I recommend further study {hint -- always include this in your report}*

* Told to me in confidence by a very well paid senior consultant whom I hired when I was on a board -- the why .. well that's the inside secret of the consulting industry .........you may not get the follow-on work -- but by constantly calling for follow-on the universe of consulting opportunities is increased for everyone!
 
Certain instances it makes sense, but to spend 200K to see if more vending carts can work. Thats a case when street smarts > book smarts.
 
Actually I think 85% of Westy's posts indicate exactly what a consultant with those big fees does. Fills 160 pages with bluster, semantics, jargon, and other mumbo jumbo, when the meat of the effort fills 10 of those pages.
Justification of the cost, a block to anyone actually reading about the whole thing because it's so boring and long, and makes it look like people got their money's worth because they couldn't possibly write all that blather themselves.

That said. I enjoy many of his interesting posts, even when they derail an entire thread, have no basis in the current discussion and sometimes a sane reality, and when they remind me of an old lonely great uncle at a family get together yammering on about who knows what to anyone who will listen.
 
SeamusMcFly said:
Actually I think 85% of Westy's posts indicate exactly what a consultant with those big fees does. Fills 160 pages with bluster, semantics, jargon, and other mumbo jumbo, when the meat of the effort fills 10 of those pages.
Justification of the cost, a block to anyone actually reading about the whole thing because it's so boring and long, and makes it look like people got their money's worth because they couldn't possibly write all that blather themselves.

That said. I enjoy many of his interesting posts, even when they derail an entire thread, have no basis in the current discussion and sometimes a sane reality, and when they remind me of an old lonely great uncle at a family get together yammering on about who knows what to anyone who will listen.
Click to expand...

Seamus -- you are quite close to most of the truth about consultants and reports. The one exception to that assessment is the gratutitous ad hominem reference to the "lonely great uncle at a family gathering" -- although while you mention it -- it does trigger a burst of memory of interactions with great uncles ..... but I digress......

The reason for the consultant's report format, length, and structure -- very simple -- its the Feds -- most specifically DOD. The use of "Boilerplate" to pad reports to/from DOD is legendary. The rest of the Feds, starting with NASA, NSF, FAA, and then the Dept of Energy picked-up on the verbosity fad, so much so that the Feds despaired of drowning in paper. President (Might have been Ford or Carter) created a Blue Ribbon Comission which issued a voluminous report and ultimately led to the "Paperwork Reduction Act" (1980 PRA and subsequebnt revisions). The irony is now that some forms now slop over to the next page just due to the manadatory PRA reference on the bottom of the page. In addition, the PRA and various agency regulations governing paper of course now leads to the need to justify the exception by additional pages when a particularly voluminous report is now issued. To a certain extent the era of digitial documents and Google with the acceptance of submission of reports, proposals, etc., via pdf has loosed an extended flood of verbosity -- especially with lots and lots of references to other reports found on the web (video and multimedia included).

But the tide may be turning -- just yesterday I heard that the DOD is planning to limit its reports to a Congressional RFI to 15 pages -- although some of the Congressional overseers have alreadty objected to the suscinctness and claim they can't do their oversight job with a mere 15 pages. DOD has promised to report back in a few weeks on its analysis of the impact of limiting reports to Congress with a report limited to 15 pages.

You can't make this stuff up!
 
The good news is I know you understood there was no negativity or maliciousness in the previous post.

As a "consultant" I am fairly aware of what it's all about. I just don't have the finger endurance to type it all.
 
SeamusMcFly said:
The good news is I know you understood there was no negativity or maliciousness in the previous post.

As a "consultant" I am fairly aware of what it's all about. I just don't have the finger endurance to type it all.
Click to expand...

Seamus -- as a consultant -- when I'm not working for a customer I've got to keep my typing fingers in shape -- its kinda just like Gronk when he's not spiking balls in the end zone he has to pose for magazines to keep his ego in shape
 
Synergy Investments buys 4 more office buildings for $31M
Eyeing ‘great potential’ downtown
By Greg Turner
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 - Updated 2 hours ago

Synergy Investments has snapped up four Boston office mid-rises for nearly $31 million, continuing its hot streak of downtown deals.

The Hub real estate investment firm, led by Irish-American businessman David Greaney, bought three buildings on Summer Street and another on High Street. “It just fits right into our strategy of acquiring and operating good, well-located Class B offices,” he said.

The properties were sold in an “off-market” transaction by New York’s Centurion Realty, which is “currently focusing its efforts on its New York portfolio,” said principal Ralph Tawil.

Synergy’s portfolio gained 130,000 square feet that’s about 80 percent occupied. The properties are:

• 71 Summer St., a seven-story structure leased by law offices and a Wendy’s.

• 77 Summer St., a 10-story Beaux Arts-style building with multiple tenants, a bank branch and hair salon.

• 87 Summer St., a five-story building with a Staples copy shop at the corner of Kingston Street.

• 184 High St., a historic building across the street from International Place.

The Summer Street buildings bring to nine the number of properties Synergy owns in the Downtown Boston Business Improvement District, a 34-block area that gets extra services through fees voluntarily paid by commercial building owners.

“We’re big supporters of the BID,” said Greaney, who serves on the nonprofit group’s board. “We think that Downtown Crossing and the Financial District have great potential, and we’ll continue buying in that area.”

Synergy also has made waves across the Fort Point Channel, buying office buildings in the past three years to take advantage of the influx of tech startups to the Innovation District.

“We believe that more and more suburban companies ... are saying we’re going to locate in Boston, because that’s where the talent is,” Greaney said. “We bought into that.”

-— gturner@bostonherald.com
Click to expand...


If they can get FILENES hole filled I can see DOWNTOWN making a big comeback. This investor actually likes BID.


http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...ice_buildings_for_31m/srvc=home&position=also
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top