Harvard - Allston Campus

[BostonObserver]

from http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/9/8/tata-hall-harvard-allston/

“We believe it is imperative that there be no net loss of greenspace and that one acre of new, public greenspace should be created to mitigate the loss of greenspace created by the Tata Hall project,” the letter stated.

It's their campus how is this any of your business?

“Right outside the Tata Hall pedestrian walkway there are no ramps, so people who are handicapped or pushing a stroller cannot use the thing,” said Allston resident Harry E. Mattison.

It's their campus how is this any of your business?

In June, concerns were raised over whether or not Harvard should be starting new development projects when construction on the Allston Science Complex—a would-be mecca for stem cell research—was halted indefinitely in 2009 due to financial constraints.

How is this any of your business? I think they know better what they can afford than you.


from http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/9/14/allston-harvard-university-complex/

Last week the Harvard Allston Task Force, a neighborhood advocacy group, released a wish list in connection with the construction of Tata Hall, a new Harvard Business School complex that will serve HBS’s Executive Education program. Their suggestions included preferential hiring of Allston residents for construction jobs,

What about people from Brighton or otehr parts of the city?

 

[stellarfun]

I think a fair distinction can be drawn between what Harvard does on land Harvard has owned for decades, and land it acquired over the past few years.

In the latter instance, one can make an argument that Harvard is converting industrial and commercial land, e.g., McNamara's concrete plant, into a use that benefits Harvard, and the city and its citizens are losing enterprises of some value (even though the citizens of North Allston would surely be up in arms if Boston Sand & Stone were to apply for and receive a permit to build a concrete plant on say the old Sears warehouse site.) And thus a rationale for some manner of mitigation or compensation to the city and community for loss of said enterprises. (That's not to say I agree with the rationale, but its part and parcel of doing business in Boston.)

But now we have an argument in the case of Tata that green space on Harvard property is really public realm property, and thus if Harvard uses the green space it owns for a new building, it must offset the loss by creating an acre of new green space somewhere else, which will also be public realm green space.

Using that rationale, its not too much of a stretch to then assert that anyone in Allston who builds a new driveway and sacrifices a bit of his or her lawn ought to provide for replacement green space too.

And as for Harvard reconstructing sidewalks on a state highway, why stop there? The community already got Harvard to rebuild the city sidewalks on Western Ave and N. Harvard St., let's have them do Cambridge St. next.

 

[Harry Mattison]

>> It's their campus how is this any of your business?

Actually, the pedestrian overpass over Soldiers Field Road isn't their campus, it is State property under the jurisdiction of DCR.

It seems that some people in the group (maybe everyone) thinks that Harvard has no obligation to anyone other than Harvard, and that is it inappropriate to expect Harvard to contribute anything to the public realm.

But Harvard has been making commitments to improve the public realm and improve the community (beyond the campus) for years. The North Allston Strategic Framework for Planning was written by Harvard, the BRA, and community, with Harvard and the BRA having as much (if not more) influence in its content than the community. It says things like:

"Expand the limited number of neighborhood parks by creating new parks
and improving access to Smith Field.

Enhance access – both visual and physical – to the Charles River from
the traditional neighborhoods and other parts of the community.

All of these elements – revitalized streetscapes,
improved open spaces, strengthened connections to
the river, new housing, improved transit, creation of a
new Main Street, and others – will serve to guide Harvard
in its own vision for a new campus, and therefore highlight
the opportunity for and benefits of cooperation
among the community, the University, and the City."

 

[Harry Mattison]

Using that rationale, its not too much of a stretch to then assert that anyone in Allston who builds a new driveway and sacrifices a bit of his or her lawn ought to provide for replacement green space too.

Really? Harvard is just like any homeowner in Allston? Spending years talking about creating additional greenspace and then building a $100M building on a grass field is the same as adding a driveway to a residential lot?

 

[Harry Mattison]

the development of Barry's Corner will be piecemeal, incremental, and, at the end, more likely a hodge podge than not.

Sounds familiar
http://allston02134.blogspot.com/2008/10/smith-field-isnt-sacred.html

But the real reason that Barry's Corner is will be developed in a piecemeal and incremental manner is that Harvard and the BRA haven't done any planning for it, and now Harvard is coming forward with plans to develop one piece of it. My neighbors and I have been urging Harvard and the BRA to do planning for areas like this for years, but the Community Wide Plan was stopped before it became "community wide".
http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/planning/PlanningInitsIndividual.asp?action=ViewInit&InitID=134

 

[Harry Mattison]

This is a community that opposed density in the new Charlesview (and objects still to the density of the deferred condo mid-rise part of Charlesview), and yet now seeks density at Barry's Corner?

It is easy to stereotype Allston residents or pretty much any community as a bunch of NIMBY, anti-density fools who are ignorant of proper theories of urbanism. If you were paying attention last year you might recall how strongly my neighbors and I advocated for the Brighton Mills McDonald's to be either left as-is (or as-was, now that it has been demolished) or incorporated into a new multi-story building. But Harvard cut a backroom deal with McDonald's and the BRA approved the zoning change so what is happening is the one-story detached McDonald's is going to be replaced with a new one-story detached McDonald's a few yards to the east of its previous location. So you'l have to excuse some of my neighbors who might wonder why a one-story McDonald's is great at Brighton Mills but Barry's Corner should be something different.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2010/8/21/western-mcdonalds-avenue-harvard/

“For quite some time now, there has been an agreement between the city, Harvard, and resident that in order to turn Western Ave. into a thriving Main Street district you need to build multi-story structures,” said Allston resident Harry E. Mattison. “The proposed one-story McDonald’s, however, completely contradicts the type of development and construction Harvard and the city have been preaching for years.”

Personally, I'd rather see something at Barry's Corner that looks more like Cronin's Landing in Waltham than what is in Barry's Corner today. If anyone has some constructive suggestions for what might be a good model for Barry's Corner that would be a more interesting conversation.

 

[GW2500]

If you want something to get a big crowd. Id say a solid bowling alley / bar w/ some apartments on top. I think something like that would put Barry's Corner back on the map. You could definitely fit on the Western ave x North Harvard st. parcel. Question I think is do they want to get that busy and big? The market for bowling alleys in this city is huge IMO. Lanes and Games needs an upgrade so bad, all the rest aren't that big and are expensive, unless you go to Revere which is a little bit of a drive from here.

 

[HenryAlan]

>>
It seems that some people in the group (maybe everyone) thinks that Harvard has no obligation to anyone other than Harvard, and that is it inappropriate to expect Harvard to contribute anything to the public realm.

I can't say whether that's the prevailing view, but it might be helpful for you to articulate a justification for why a private land owner should be required to do something on public land just because it has decided to build on the private parcel. The driveway example might seem overly facile to you, but I'm afraid it won't do to simply point out that Harvard isn't an individual home owner. Why does Harvard owe the community if not the theoretical driveway builder?

 

[stellarfun]

^^^^
A.) I don't think Harvard can or should take the lead re: the Smith playground. That should be the city, which, in effect, should say to Harvard, show us a development alternative that reflects swapping all six acres of Smith playground for land elsewhere. Harvard may be the epitome of arrogance, but even for them, it would be wildly presumptuous to start producing designs for land they neither own nor control.

B.) The principle of having a private property owner offset the conversion of green space on their private property for some other non-green purpose should not be selective in its application. For a similar situation, which applies uniformly to both Harvard in my neighborhood, and to Harvard's neighbors:

What does the law do to protect Special Trees?
‐ It makes it illegal for any person to cut down, remove, girdle, break, top, or destroy any Special Tree without a permit.
(A Special Tree is a tree with a circumference of 55 inches (17.5 inches in diameter) or more. This designation applies to trees on public and private property.)

What if someone does one of the things listed above to a Special Tree without a permit?
‐ They are subject to a fine of not less than $100 per inch of circumference (a minimum fine of $5,500).

Under what circumstances can someone get a permit to remove a Special Tree?
‐ A person may obtain a permit to remove a Special Tree if they can do at least one of the following:
· Prove that the tree Is a Hazardous Tree (poses a high risk of failure and consequent property damage or injury);

· Show that the tree is of a species that has been identified, by regulation, as appropriate for removal (Ailianthus altissima [Tree of heaven]; Morus species [Mulberry]; or Acer platanoides [Norway maple]);

· Pay into the Tree Fund an amount equal to $35.00 for each inch of circumference; or,

· Agree to plant a quantity of saplings whose aggregated circumference equals or exceeds the circumference of the Special Tree in question.

C.) I am willing to bet that the McDonald's on Western Ave. is not financially viable if it were to rely only on foot traffic. All the McDonalds that I have seen that are storefront operations are located in busy commercial/residential areas with high foot traffic. Perhaps you know of an exception.

D.) Density is not achieved by going up from one story to two. If I'm not mistaken, the original plan for Charlesview did not impact McDonalds, but the community thought the original plan was too dense and too high, so two acres were added. As a consequence of adding the two acres to reduce the density, McDonalds had to move. The Charlesview condos on Telford St., if and when these are ever built, are slated to be in an eight story building. The building is shoe-horned in because Harvard doesn't own the abutting parcels. I've not read a single comment from the community supporting a building of this height and density at that location.

 

[Harry Mattison]

^^^^
C.) I am willing to bet that the McDonald's on Western Ave. is not financially viable if it were to rely only on foot traffic. All the McDonalds that I have seen that are storefront operations are located in busy commercial/residential areas with high foot traffic. Perhaps you know of an exception.

Who said the McDonald's would have to rely only on foot traffic? Integrated into a multi-story building there still could be plenty of nearby parking and a creative architect could even figure out how to preserve the drive-thru window.

And McDonald's didn't have to move. Telford Street could have been extended to the south of Western Ave without touching McDonald's.

Anyway, this is all yesterday's news and not particularly interesting to re-hash. And regarding why Harvard should do things on public land - this was Harvard's idea, not mine, so please excuse me for not starting a long philosophical justification of it. I'm only suggesting that Harvard keep the promises that it has made in the past and you can read all Harvard's promises at
http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/planning/PlanningInitsIndividual.asp?action=ViewInit&InitID=34

The suggestion to have a bowling alley in Barry's Corner is a good one - could be like the old Milky Way in JP. Peter Galison's suggestion to have the Harvard Film Archive in Allston is also interesting.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2007/6/7/allston-dreams-allston-is-the-hope/

 

[HenryAlan]

That's not good enough, Harry. What makes these earlier plans binding?

 

[stellarfun]

Universities are not altruistic. (As can be seen in the recent conference re-alignments, old friends and peers, traditional rivalries, can readily be tossed over the side, if a university sees something better. BC just dug up the grave of a cardinal because it needed the land where his crypt was. Nothing is sacred to them.)

Anything that Harvard does for Allston is done because Harvard perceives that it, Harvard, will ultimately benefit from such.

With that said, I don't think it mere coincidence that Harvard -- after being rebuffed by Allston on the art gallery and art conservation/storage center that was to be built on the site of a former utility company garage on the southwest side of Barry's Corner -- goes ahead and spends $350-400 million to re-do the Fogg.

IMO, spending that kind of money on the Fogg means that Harvard will not build the contemporary art museum/cultural complex that was proposed to go where Charlesview currently is (across the intersection from the gallery/conservation center). The ICA cost about $40 million to build, so if Harvard spent even half of what it is spending on the Fogg on a Barry's Corner museum, that would have been a nicely sized, $200 million museum.

The Cambridge neighbors objected to Harvard's proposal to build a largely hidden art museum (designed by the same architect who is re-doing the Fogg) on the Mahoney's nursery land on Memorial Drive. Block the view. Harvard waits a few years, then builds graduate housing on the site. Blocks the view even more.

Absent the art museum at Barry's Corner, and assuming Harvard does not move some of its indoor athletic venues closer to Barry's Corner, what exactly is going to make Barry's Corner a destination for anyone not living or working within 500 yards of the place?

 

[Justin7]

That's not good enough, Harry. What makes these earlier plans binding?

This is what I am wondering as well.

I do not fault you for fighting for what you feel is best for your community. I think that is commendable. The problem is that your entire argument is based on a seemingly misplaced sense of entitlement.

I also fail to understand is why you are against what Harvard is doing. Do you have any complaint other than a) the school isn't (or will not) listen closely enough to the wishes of the community, or b) the elimination of "green space" on private property?

 

[Shepard]

Several years ago I was thinking very seriously about purchasing in North Allston (aka Lower Allston). I didn't buy into the "next Harvard Square" pitch - it wasn't ever going to happen without rapid transit, which I thought should be obvious to anyone involved. And I didn't really expect to see happy LL Bean-clad families ice skating blissfully along streams adjacent to the playing fields, holiday shopping bags in hand - as was featured in some of the renders at the time. Blargh. But nonetheless I was seeing opportunity. The housing stock is generally nice and in well-kept conditions. The 66 and 86 are convenient, and the red and green lines are both close enough by bus or bike and even walking. But Harvard's investment - not in the community, but in their actual campus footprint - was the gold dust that I saw. There was talk of transplanting Charlesview (and actions too), re-orienting HBS towards Western Ave with infill over the parking wasteland (what ever happened to these plans?), talk of museums, science centers, student housing, dismantling Brighton Mills, and building the amenities that the new residents, students and employees would want and need. I asked myself: Are there any neighborhoods that I know of, in any city, that are worse for a university's investment and involvement? No.

Now don't get me wrong - I think that a university's involvement and stewardship in a neighborhood community, beyond its own 'selfish' interests, is highly positive. And Allston already has benefits to show for this, case in point being the well-designed library. Ultimately however what turned me off to purchasing and investing in this area of Allston was nothing other than the self-defeating actions of the "community" (or vocal minority of the community) itself. Back when HBS and the playing fields firmly oriented themselves towards the river, I would buy the argument that what is good for Harvard won't necessarily be good for Allston. But: once Harvard made it clear that its plans were orienting towards Allston for the foreseeable future and with great investment and fanfare, I think the community hostility and sense of entitlement should have ended. At that point, what is good for Harvard is good for Allston, because at that point Harvard is truly joining the community as a stakeholder in its future. As Harry Mattison has said, yes of course Harvard should have been held to a planning process to determine the types of developments it would build - I would argue this should have been far more form-based rather than based on zoning and usage. The community at that point should have realized that Harvard's success in Allston would benefit everyone, while hampering Harvard's progress was helping no one.

Still, for a while, I felt like a tool for not having gotten "in." Well, the market crash was one vindication of this decision making me happy to have invested in one of the safest markets in the US, Brookline. But another vindication was the Stone Hearth Pizza fiasco. Once this happened I realized there was no salvaging what Western Ave could have been - it is destined to be a pleasant but boring and suburban backwater to the rest of the Harvard campus. And trust me, the students who live there and study there as well as Harvard's employees will be equally as unhappy as the community with that result.

The tragedy is that I am just the type of person that I think Harry would have wanted to attract to the neighborhood. I am married, ready to start a family, my wife and I are both professionals (not students!) and civic-minded. I wasn't looking to invest just to flip it and make a buck.

One final observation: I don't think it's exactly correct to think of Harry and co as Nimbys. If anything, I think they have proven themselves to be overzealous Yimbys who want everything but see the game as zero-sum, and therefore consistently overplay their hand to everyone's detriment.

 

[Harry Mattison]

This group seems to be more interested in psychology and philosophy than architecture and planning. Instead of more posts analyzing my "sense of entitlement" and all of the things I have done wrong over the past 5 years, how about more brainstorming about how to make Barry's Corner a better place?

 

[Harry Mattison]

the community hostility and sense of entitlement should have ended

I wish I understood what hostility you have in mind. Whole Foods has faced real hostility in JP. The Pine Street Inn faced real hostility on Upton Street. Suffolk University faced real opposition on Beacon Hill. Harvard has comparatively has a cake-walk in Allston.

 

[whighlander]

This group seems to be more interested in psychology and philosophy than architecture and planning. Instead of more posts analyzing my "sense of entitlement" and all of the things I have done wrong over the past 5 years, how about more brainstorming about how to make Barry's Corner a better place?

Harry -- this forum tends to go in that direction when there aren't any immediate announcements of big projects or pictures of cranes lifting steel

Here's suggestion -- Copy the MIT 2030 document related to Kendall Sq. and read it!

"The MIT Investment Management Company (MITIMCo) redevelopment proposal for Kendall Square and the reuse of other MITIMCo commercial properties near the campus are a central part of the vision for MIT 2030. MITIMCo has been charged with transforming the MIT-owned property adjacent to the Kendall Square MBTA station into a vibrant center where academic missions continue, innovative companies thrive, and faculty, students, Kendall Square employees, and community members enjoy lively retail, dining, and entertainment experiences...."

http://web.mit.edu/mit2030/kendallsquare.html

and further information on the kendal sq initiative website
http://www.kendallsquareinitiative.org/

"Kendall Square is home not only to MIT, but to some of the most innovative companies on earth. Lifesaving cures for complex diseases are pursued here, new technologies are created with breathtaking speed, and pioneering research is moving science forward.

But how people-friendly is Kendall Square? Are there enough dining choices? Can you run errands during your lunch hour? Poke your nose into interesting shops? How often do you visit Kendall Square on the weekend? Are there places to gather with friends and do something fun?"

the MIT 2030 Kendall Sq. Initiative is not a final plan for MIT's backyard -- but it defines a planning process to enervate and make more modern urban / pedestrian friendly the Kendal Sq / Tech Sq. / Main St. / Mass Ave area through future development as well as redevelopment of some of the recent structures

It also provides a good list of the questions and key concecpts associated with such a large-scale university-centric development-- and the web sites feature a lot of commentary that might be relevant.

 

[Harry Mattison]

Here's suggestion -- Copy the MIT 2030 document related to Kendall Sq. and read it!

I have read it and mentioned it on my blog a few months ago. I agree that it asks a lot of provocative questions that would be great to have considered for Barry's Corner.

 

[Shepard]

I wish I understood what hostility you have in mind. Whole Foods has faced real hostility in JP. The Pine Street Inn faced real hostility on Upton Street. Suffolk University faced real opposition on Beacon Hill. Harvard has comparatively has a cake-walk in Allston.

My observation, Harry, is not that you are a Nimby or actively hostile to development. As I said I think there is a certain Yimbyism at play here (yes, like you said, some psychology thrown in with the development talk!) But perhaps years of working with/against river-oriented Harvard instilled a zero-sum mindset in your head. Allston-oriented Harvard could have been different - see what Westie has pointed to above regarding MIT and Kendall - but the tug-of-war continues unabated to everyone detriment.

Harry, I appreciate your call to be constructive here about what we'd like to see Barry's Corner become. I'll post back when I can with some models for development that I've seen work elsewhere, and would be glad to hear your thoughts as well.

 

[HenryAlan]

My idealized vision for Barry's Corner would be Harvard Square 30 years ago. I'm not foolish enough to think that will necessarily happen, but I'd want to see something similar, which is to say land parcels built out to mid-density levels, sidewalk/building interaction, and not a lot of open space. I think this was Harvard's original idea, before they got bogged down in the community politics.

It would be interesting to be able to conduct an experiment, in which there are two Barry's Corner type neighborhoods, each with an educational institution/land owner interested in spending large sums of money on a new campus. Let's give each one 20 years, but require that one negotiate every step with abutting residents, whereas the other only be required to adhere to zoning. Which development would create a better urban space?