Gillette leaving Southie.

Justbuildit said:
Dreams of a Samuel Beckett pedestrian bridge from the razor factory to the postal office dance in my head…
Click to expand...
Funny enough when they had a public design competition to replace the northern avenue bridge the proposal I submitted was based on the samuel beckett bridge.

IMG_9261.jpeg

IMG_9262.jpeg

IMG_9263.jpeg

https://www.northernavebridge.org/post/143931770395/massachusetts-fallen-veterans-memorial-bridge

If I were to do it again I would probably just propose a network tied arch due to cost and ease of construction, but a cantilever spar cable stayed bridge is definitely the most sexy comparatively and would be instantly iconic.
 
I'd honestly be quite happy if we kept at least *some* of South Boston's industrial past alive, but I fully agree that unlike Necco Ct there's nothing to love about the building itself. (Minus the brick office portion at the Dorchester Ave corner) It's a shame though - the "World Shaving Headquarters" sign had basically everything you'd want in iconic signage... except for being visible from anywhere people actually hang out. I'd love it if that sign was preserved and highlighted in someway in any future development.
 
stick n move said:
Funny enough when they had a public design competition to replace the northern avenue bridge the proposal I submitted was based on the samuel beckett bridge.

View attachment 43873
View attachment 43874
View attachment 43875
https://www.northernavebridge.org/post/143931770395/massachusetts-fallen-veterans-memorial-bridge

If I were to do it again I would probably just propose a network tied arch due to cost and ease of construction, but a cantilever spar cable stayed bridge is definitely the most sexy comparatively and would be instantly iconic.
Click to expand...

Shades of the Leonard P. Zakim Bridge, almost. Hah!!! And BTW, Gillette is moving to Andover. :cry:
 
LOI for the development of the whole Gillette property just dropped. Not a lot of info, but a few highlights:

FAR of ~4.3 across the WHOLE site, open space included (total of ~31 acres)
Built out in phases
No less than 30% of the space for residential
No less than 50% of the space for public realm/parks
Site Tour and Workshop #1 - Thursday, September 19th
Workshop #2 – Tuesday, October 1st
Workshop #3 – Thursday, October 24th

bpda.app.box.com

2024-08-21_Letter of Intent (LOI)_Gillette Redevelopment.pdf | Powered by Box

bpda.app.box.com bpda.app.box.com

Additional info to be found on this website:

Gillette Boston HQ Updates | P&G Gillette

P&G Gillette is excited to redevelop our Boston World Shaving Headquarters into a once-in-a-lifetime, mixed-use community. Read up on project updates here!
www.gillettebostonupdate.com www.gillettebostonupdate.com

Lots more to come. Really looking forward to the updates, more specifics, and community process. This has to be one of the most consequential new development plans happening in the city. Bigger than the Public Garden!

1724268689076.png



EDIT: Really happy about how they're framing this issue on the website as well. YIMBY greatest hits on each of these elements.


1724269478215.png
 
Last edited:
Well, I'm not sure it's very YIMBY to require 50% of the site to be open space, for a property that is literally next to Downtown. Put another way, given that 30% of the site needs to be residential, they could have tried to build 2.7 times more housing than that if they'd simply forgone what will probably be useless corporate lawns.

Now, if they need to do that along the Channel to make it resilient to sea level rise, then fine. But they talk about "contiguous, green open spaces." Boston already has an Emerald Neckalce. You are not Olmsted. Build more housing.
 
We'll have to see how it plays out, but given what's happening at Channelside, 232 A, Lilly building, much of this is going to be berm building or other watersheet resiliency that incorporates public space and does a huge amount to protect South Boston/Fort Point/Seaport. More waterfront public space would be great, especially if it comes with bike and pedestrian infrastructure.

More housing is always better, but mixed use is critical here since there's literally nothing useful on this space now. I'm optimistic at the moment, but this is the perfect opportunity for locals (and noisy people on this board) to advocate for the things that matter most.
 
Equilibria said:
Well, I'm not sure it's very YIMBY to require 50% of the site to be open space, for a property that is literally next to Downtown. Put another way, given that 30% of the site needs to be residential, they could have tried to build 2.7 times more housing than that if they'd simply forgone what will probably be useless corporate lawns.

Now, if they need to do that along the Channel to make it resilient to sea level rise, then fine. But they talk about "contiguous, green open spaces." Boston already has an Emerald Neckalce. You are not Olmsted. Build more housing.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that 50% will actually be "corporate lawns" though. Their wording is "public realm/open space" - - that could be interpreted as 'massive waterfront plaza' or Harborwalk boardwalk', 'concert tent/amphitheatre', etc - - that location (with the great skyline smack dab in front of it) is a postcard setting waiting to be activated.

I think you hit on it with the Channel part though. That area (once the city/state/feds can get the US Post Office to move out on the other side) could be primed to be a mini Riviera/Amsterdam. It truly is an opportunity for a world class urban space - - envisioning the Harborwalk able to finally connect (analogous to the NSRL for pedestrians?). One could envison that HarborWalk boardwalk on both sides with activated outdoor cafes 6-8 months of the year (maybe more with heaters) and boat events in the channel. I could be wrong, but the 50% open space may perhaps be geared towards the Channel instead of further towards the land locked side of Fort Point. The 30% perhaps could be clustered closer to A Street and West 2nd Street (and hopefully as tall and dense as possible - I agree with the need for more housing - in that 30% space).

There is SO much potential for this one area.
 
Last edited:
Is the early commitment to a 4.3 FAR the maximum based on the open space requirements? If not, why are they limiting the FAR at the outset? Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but this site is in a 300-foot FAA zone, slightly higher than the rest of the 250–274-foot Fort Point/Seaport zone. There should be no height maximum lower than the FAA cap from day one of this process. Non-negotiable.

It is hard to overstate how transformational this site could be for the city. Looking forward to this process.
 
www.bostonglobe.com

From World Shaving Headquarters to something new: Gillette launches redevelopment of Fort Point campus - The Boston Globe

The goal, Gillette said, is to create a vibrant mixed-use community as well as a unique waterfront park.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

(btw, the Globe is using a VERY old picture here...)

1724274603139.png

"The Seaport and Fort Point Channel have changed dramatically over the last decade. Next up for redevelopment could be Gillette's 31-acre campus at the far end of the channel.David L. Ryan
Gillette said the work that will happen at the Andover and South Boston properties will represent P&G’s largest single investment in Massachusetts that the Cincinnati-based consumer products company has made since buying Gillette in 2005."
 
the zoning is set by the 100 Acres Master Plan. Dont know/havent looked to see if they are exceeding open space (or if its set at 50% min required) or limiting FAR (or if its set at 4.3 max allowed).
 
The LOI states that "a portion of the site includes tidelands that are subject to licensing under [Chapter 91]".

Chapter 91 requires a minimum of 50 percent open space.

Chiofaro's last design for his Harbor Garage property adhered to this Chapter 91 requirement, but it took several iterations to get there.

The LOI also states that buildings with a total of about 1.5 million square feet currently occupy the site. So the aforementioned calculation of 4.3 FAR (5.8 million square feet) would be nearly 4x the 'current' FAR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top