Fan Pier Developments | Seaport

Hopefully it will stay temporary. I don't think it is a bad building, but it's totally wrong for the site.
 
Well, it's not terrible with material choice. But the design is downright boring. I was expecting something a lot more interesting.
 
Well, I mean, I had never really seen any broad angle shots - just little detail ones from their Facebook page. For some reason, they made it seem like a much better design than it actually is, taken overall.

But, point taken. The sad truth.
 
Since we've already abandoned any hope of building a real neighborhood in the Seaport, this idea actually makes some sense.
Maybe the Plan B 'amusement district' can happen here?
 
I think this has been the logical spot for a casino all along. Let's now turn to the naysayers:

But Vivien Li, executive director of the Boston Harbor Association, said she?s not convinced there?s enough space for a casino and all the parking required for gamblers.
Click to expand...

Vivien Li needs to visit the Seaport every now and again if she doesn't think there's enough parking. However, even with a full build-out, parking can be underground. Very easy Pike access minimizes traffic impact. Plus, of course, walking distance from South Station, Silver Line... Argument fails. Does Vivian need to provide a kneejerk NO to everything within a mile of the ocean just to maintain her pseudo-moral high ground?

Concerns about a waterfront casino and its impact on the South Boston neighborhood have already prompted an ill-fated effort to quash such a development.

State Sen. Jack Hart, a South Boston Democrat, introduced an amendment to the Senate?s casino legislation that would prohibit a casino in South Boston, the Boston neighborhood that includes the Seaport District. The measure never came to a vote because it was ruled unconstitutional, according to a spokesman for Senate President Therese Murray.
?I?m not surprised that a developer would consider the waterfront for a casino given its location next to the convention center,? said Hart. ?But I think I speak for the majority of the people of the neighborhood when I say that folks would rather see a casino at Suffolk Downs.?
Click to expand...

Alright Jack, which "people of the neighborhood" would that be? The artists in Fort Point? The... the... hmm. I'm glad this legislation was deemed unconstitutional. Allowing Southie politics to arbitrarily hijack the Seaport makes for a daunting challenge... the promise of the seaport (if there is any!) is the lack of Nimbys.

The question I have is whether the casino legislation would allow for a casino in both Fan pier and Suffolk Downs, or whether it is one or the other?
 
Casinos are a horrible idea. Surely there are more productive and beneficial uses for such prime real estate. Seriously, how fucking desperate are we?
 
briv said:
Casinos are a horrible idea. Surely there are more productive and beneficial uses for such prime real estate. Seriously, how fucking desperate are we?
Click to expand...

Why? If the city wants a high-class resort style casino that attracts out of state gamblers you could hardly do better than a Wynn project nestled between the convention center and the airport on-ramps.

Of course the flip side is a casino probably kills Hynes plans for a large, high-end residential component across the street.
 
^ Not sure about that. An existing residential component would definitely stifle a casino (NIMBYs), but I don't think the reverse is true. I think that if the casino anchors a sleek entertainment district then a residential component will be in high demand, and would be seen as a worthwhile investment.
 
AmericanFolkLegend said:
Why? If the city wants a high-class resort style casino that attracts out of state gamblers you could hardly do better than a Wynn project nestled between the convention center and the airport on-ramps.

Of course the flip side is a casino probably kills Hynes plans for a large, high-end residential component across the street.
Click to expand...

Why? Because I'd prefer not to see the city transformed into a tacky amusement park for tourists.
 
^^Were not going to get Back Bay v2.0. It's just not going to happen. So right now the two most realistic (only?) options are
a. Waltham-by-the-Sea
b. Tacky amusement park for tourists.

At least b. could be interesting.
 
briv said:
Casinos are a horrible idea. Surely there are more productive and beneficial uses for such prime real estate. Seriously, how fucking desperate are we?
Click to expand...

I agree 100%.......Casinos are not good economic engines for the region. They actually depress local areas. They do not create wealth for the area they only create wealth for the investors.

one of the worst IDEA's I ever heard.......

Seaport & Fan Pier should have been the areas for the New Pats Stadium and Fenway Park. Talk about Missed opporunity.
 
briv said:
Why? Because I'd prefer not to see the city transformed into a tacky amusement park for tourists.
Click to expand...

Briv, I completely understand the point of view.

But the North End, Beacon Hill, Back Bay... the neighborhoods that make Boston great, and which attract tourists here... aren't going anywhere. A casino on the waterfront won't singlehandedly change Boston into a "tacky amusement park for tourists" any more than than the BCEC has changed the fabric of the city towards conventioneer-catering paradise. One institution does not change the fabric of the city. Rather, the key is diversity: residents and visitors alike will have one more thing to do; employers will see one more reason why they and their employees might want to locate here; college graduates might see one more reason to stay rather than move to a more "exciting" place like New York; image - if done properly - can be enhanced...

Obviously, casinos have a downside. No denying it. But we're at a crossroads: either play it safe with Menino Stumps and "temporary"(=permanent) low-rise pavilions, or roll some dice with a big gamble. A high-end casino could much more readily spur the type of mixed use urban development that the seaport desperately needs.
 
Seaport & Fan Pier should have been the areas for the New Pats Stadium and Fenway Park. Talk about Missed opporunity.
Click to expand...

Isn't that kind of what's there already. I can't think of a single football stadium in America that is walking distance from a CBD. Just not a good use of land in the heart of a city.
 
How about creating contemporary North Ends, Beacon Hills or Back Bays? Or are you content with the city resting on its past laurels forever?

Why does it have to be a question between Waltham-by-the-Sea and a tacky amusement park (which would likely still look like Waltham-by-the-Sea)? Why aren't we creating a great place to live, work and do business?

Furthermore, I dont think a casino would be the great resident and business magnet people hope. How many people or companies do hear clamoring to relocate to Atlantic City?
 
Odds are that the casino will go in at Suffolk, I think those people are far better connected to Menino. And I don't think they will allow two in Boston.
 
briv said:
Why does it have to be a question between Waltham-by-the-Sea and a tacky amusement park (which would likely still look like Waltham-by-the-Sea)? Why aren't we creating a great place to live, work and do business?
Click to expand...

I dunno. We should be but we're not. Look at the street layout. Look at what has already been built.
To build a modern Back Bay / N.End / etc. we would need to start from scratch and that will not happen, as much wish for it.

There are only so many options based on the template that has already been laid down.
Our only role now is to push for the best possible one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top