Downtown Crossing/Financial District | Discussion

Why? Anything is better than Payless and those other tired stores in that crumbling building.

Wish they would put in a building like I saw in Toronto near yonge-dundas square, it had a multiple restaurants on upper floors all with outdoor seating...don't have a picture but one if them was jack astors.
 
617 said:
Why? Anything is better than Payless and those other tired stores in that crumbling building.

Wish they would put in a building like I saw in Toronto near yonge-dundas square, it had a multiple restaurants on upper floors all with outdoor seating...don't have a picture but one if them was jack astors.
Click to expand...

yeah I don't get it either. Let's not pretend that Bromfield is the retail destination it once was. Some of the storefronts on that street have been vacant since I attended Suffolk Law school in the late 90s. It could use a major overhaul.
 
There's nothing wrong with the Payless building. The others on that site would not be missed, but leave the corner alone.
 
It's not a landmark. It's a perfectly good background building, and there's no compelling reason to demolish it.
 
I think its a nice little building I wouldn't want to lose. There's other shit buildings in downtown crossing that could go well before that
 
617 said:
Why? Anything is better than Payless and those other tired stores in that crumbling building.
Click to expand...

Can you tell the difference between a building and the stores in it?

Let's assume they tear this down and put up a cheap pre-cast/alucobond/all-glass job. In 10 years it looks more dated than the (historic and beautiful) building currently housing Payless. Is your solution to tear down the building currently there which has stood the test of time pretty well, and build cheap junk every 10 years just to guarantee there will be a new store signing a lease and moving in?
 
itchy said:
Disagree.
Click to expand...

Would you be willing to articulate your reasons for disagreeing? Of the stretch of Washington from the Paramount Theatre to One Boston Place, this would seem to be the one building on that side of the street that stands out as being subpar to the rest .
 
itchy said:
Can you tell the difference between a building and the stores in it?

Let's assume they tear this down and put up a cheap pre-cast/alucobond/all-glass job. In 10 years it looks more dated than the (historic and beautiful) building currently housing Payless. Is your solution to tear down the building currently there which has stood the test of time pretty well, and build cheap junk every 10 years just to guarantee there will be a new store signing a lease and moving in?
Click to expand...

I would hope that it wouldn't be cheap but honestly that whole corner from city sports to AT&T should be torn down and rebuilt with something 40 trinity-esque...or Avalon Exeter-esque
 
I like 1 Bromfield. The facade has a pleasant simple urban feeling that's missing from post-war architecture.

On the other hand, I wouldn't min something that sort cantilevered over it.
 
jdrinboston said:
this would seem to be the one building on that side of the street that stands out as being subpar to the rest .
Click to expand...

You rate Rogers Jewelry (or the travel agency or whatever it is becoming) higher? Or the MOFO building on the corner of Washington and Temple?

I respectfully disagree.
 
jdrinboston said:
Would you be willing to articulate your reasons for disagreeing?
Click to expand...

Historic: This building is 80-130 years old. That alone makes it historic. It was built using the traditional, masonry-based building style that overall makes Boston a "historic" place and provides the overall sense of a well-preserved city with history that the city is known, and loved, for. A building doesn't have to be able to say "Washington slept here" to be historic.

Classic: The building was built in a classic, pre-deco style. As mentioned, it is a traditional masonry building with classic, pre-modernist architectural detailing and proportions.

QED.
 
^^ What's your point? That this building should be razed because it has not played a significant role in any well-known historical event?

I'm not claiming the building was home to a Great Event in History. I'm saying that it is part of the city's historic fabric, that it is old, well preserved, and that having a city full of such buildings is what makes Boston unique among large American cities - and what makes it one of the best American cities.

You can argue that because Paul Revere's ride didn't start from this building, it should be razed and replaced with a great pre-cast/alucubond building of the sort we get these days. But you sure wouldn't be doing Boston, or the quality of life of anyone in Boston, any good.
 
Also, what's wrong with having a PayLess shoe store around? I shop at this chain (though not usually at the one in Downtown Crossing). It may be sort of boring but it's also useful.
 
617 said:
Wish they would put in a building like I saw in Toronto near yonge-dundas square, it had a multiple restaurants on upper floors all with outdoor seating...don't have a picture but one if them was jack astors.
Click to expand...

That's 10 Dundas East, or commonly known as the Toronto Life building.

March_2008_Toronto_Life_Square.jpg


The building houses some offices, a multiplex (many of the theatres are used during the day to house Ryerson University classes in exchange for the building getting use of air rights controlled by the university), big-box stores, a gym, a food court, and the aforementioned restaurants. The patios are on the far left side, above the AMC logo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top