Fan Pier Developments | Seaport

This would all be fine if it didn't mean that the hideous One Marina Park Drive contvinues to dominate all vistas of the neighborhood.

Not to mention that the "pavillions" replicate the land use values of single value homes. Squash them together and thread a narrow street grid in between, at least.
 
Other highrises would come behind the pavilions - and would hopefully be more inspired than 1MPD (yes, I acronymed). Also, remember though that 1MPD blinks at night... pavilion-goers may think that's pretty "cool" *(or whatever it is pavilion-goers say these days).

If attractive pavilions are what we can build now, it might be a blessing in disguise - I think it's better in the long run anyway than stumpy bland highrises on the water's edge, which, even in the best of times, is most likely what we'd otherwise get.
 
pavilions.jpg
 
That's great!

My only suggestion is: Why earmark different areas for different uses at all? Why a residential area and an offices area? Zone the area labeled "offices" for slightly bigger buildings, but let them be apartments, lofts, offices, whatever floats your boat, and mandate groundfloor retail. And on the townhomes thoroughfare, allow, without mandating, ground-floor retail, or use of townhomes as small-business offices, day care, etc., rather than just residential.

Good stuff, though, Shepard.
 
yesterday from logan, still looks underconstruction,Is'nt the store open already?
205-5.jpg
183-3.jpg
 
One thing I've never understood about all this is why is there not a rush to develop the immediate waterfront with condos and apartments? I mean, in almost any other city water views are a coveted feature to have for your condo and developers can charge accordingly. I know the area has been slow to develop but even still, all we have are those crappy Park Lane or whatever they're called, and they don't even have balconies.

Someone posted a photo of Yaletown in Vancouver and wondered why we can't have that. I ask the same. Where is the push for residential along the water with commericial and office behind?
 
Because for a long time there was much more money to be made on parking than in luxury condos. This area was industrial and rail yards for many years and it wasn't until the mid 90s when serious plans were made to develop the area.

This section of the seaport was just too cut off from the rest of the city to really justify luxury condos, hence the building on the Silver Line. The acutal development stayed in limbo for so long because land owners made so much of parking and were waiting for the real estate market to reach the waterfront.

And you have to understand that this was the only area in the city where there was large space for parking. In most other cities they had destroyed much of their downtown fabric for parking but Boston is one of the few that didn't part of this was due to a good public transit system but part of it was vast acres of parking right off the 2 main highways into the city that was just a short walk from the central business district. I would argue that Boston was really saved by having so much open space available for parking so it didn't need to demolish entire neighborhoods just for cars (it did for people, but that was slightly different).
 
I think the height limitations are dictating the development. At the water's edge the lowest height limitations apply because it's closer to logan. The whole area would have probably been developed a whole lot faster and better IMO if there weren't any.
 
itchy said:
My only suggestion is: Why earmark different areas for different uses at all? Why a residential area and an offices area? Zone the area labeled "offices" for slightly bigger buildings, but let them be apartments, lofts, offices, whatever floats your boat, and mandate groundfloor retail. And on the townhomes thoroughfare, allow, without mandating, ground-floor retail, or use of townhomes as small-business offices, day care, etc., rather than just residential.
Click to expand...
Right on the money, itchy. What you're basically saying is 'get rid of the leaden hand of today's conventional zoning'.

Mandating ground floor retail most places and breaking the properties into smaller increments is also a must. But then:

If you let it spread its wings it will fly.

I couldn't agree more.
 
Here is the current temporary home of Louis Boston. And this one is definitely temp. as the entire interior is still a shell and core building with exposed spray fire proofed columns and all open ceilings with exposed services. They literally just are hanging things on this stuff.

DSCI0066-1.jpg

DSCI0067-1.jpg
Here's the one picture I got inside before they came over and told me about their no photography policy.
DSCI0068-1.jpg
Entrance.
DSCI0069-1.jpg

DSCI0070-1.jpg

DSCI0071-1.jpg

DSCI0072.jpg

DSCI0073-1.jpg

DSCI0074-1.jpg
 
And here is the future "temporary" home of Louis Boston. Which to me looks like a mash up between the Puma City boxes and the Welcome Center.

It looks like they took the upstairs outdoor deck that was the Sam Adams pavilion I think during th Volvo thing, and they took the wood panel finishing from the adjacent welcome center. All in all I kind of like the odd shapes and different finishes. Not the best use of the space, but a pretty good stop gap measure.
DSCI0075-1.jpg

DSCI0076-1.jpg

DSCI0077-1.jpg

DSCI0078-1.jpg

DSCI0079-1.jpg

DSCI0080.jpg
Shot showing the relationship between the 2 buildings.
DSCI0081.jpg
 
Louis in its old digs was so elegant!

Still, imo this is the biggest public relations shot in the arm the Seaport has yet received. Louis surpasses the Convention Center, the Museum of Contemporary Art, the Silver Line and the Courthouse in the public's esteem.
 
This is so sad after so many proposed vision's of what Fan Pier could have been.nice pixs!btw.I see this building sitting here for years,maybe even ending up as something else?
 
erikyow said:
One thing I've never understood about all this is why is there not a rush to develop the immediate waterfront with condos and apartments? I mean, in almost any other city water views are a coveted feature to have for your condo and developers can charge accordingly. I know the area has been slow to develop but even still, all we have are those crappy Park Lane or whatever they're called, and they don't even have balconies.

Someone posted a photo of Yaletown in Vancouver and wondered why we can't have that. I ask the same. Where is the push for residential along the water with commericial and office behind?
Click to expand...

The lack of amenities really hurts things. My wife and I looked at a beautiful condo at FP3 and decided against it because there's nothing around. Where's the nearest convenience store? Where do you food shop? Dry cleanning? Hair cuts? Coffee? Pharmacy? C-store? Options for a quick bite or drink (other than Lucky's)?
Fan Pier obviously has more food options if you're willing to walk down to LTK, etc. But there's really not much other neighborhood retail.
 
That's the problem over here. They seem to think that people will move here, and then the amenities will follow. But, no one wants to live in a neighborhood that lacks amenities. So welcome to the chicken and egg scenario. Shitty thing is, there used to be a few more things in this area years ago. Now, that half the "artists" have been evicted there's even less people to support any low to mid level start-ups.
 
To be fair, its hard to design a building of this function in this location and have it look amazing, but this kind of looks like some wealthy guys home in the woods in concord or something...
 
From the Seaport Hotel, today. We won a free night's stay courtesy of Mass Office of Travel & Tourism. Follow them on facebook and twitter!

fanpier.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top