ISQ3 | 22 Drydock Avenue | Seaport

millerm277 said:
I mean, I don't think what you want is legal to build here.

This is still in the Marine Industrial Park. Usage is AFAIK required to be industrial/adjacent.

It's specifically called out in the planning documents for the entire area that any retail expansions should only be to serve the unmet needs of employees on-site or for manufacturing operations that want to also sell direct.

They specifically appear to not want to create an environment that will invite people to just come hang out in the general area or to in general be the kind of activated urban streetscape seen elsewhere - and I don't think they're allowed to make it one from a state regulatory/land use perspective, either.

"Allowance for additional retail in this area should be measured by ensuring that it serves the employees on-site rather than creating a destination retail environment." - p.47 RFLMP Master Plan - https://www.bostonplans.org/getattachment/1ce2cf5d-303a-4e68-a8aa-09d727b1c11a
Click to expand...

This district has always been an industrial/ distribution warehouse waterfront, now a bit of an industrial "business" park with the marine field only caveat. I agree that this area should not be retail. You don't want K-mart shoppers navigating this area with so much truck traffic. Even the showrooms in the design center have signs that indicate "Trade people only". The rendering of the corporate types on the roof top deck is a bit over the top. There is literally only 2 months out of the year that this would be a good spot for a party between the wind, rain, fog. Never mind low tide smell and airplanes overhead.
 
The Raymond L. Flynn Marine Park Master Plan is a unique plan that is ultimately under political control by the Mass Department of Environmental Protection and the area is specifically zoned industrial. In fact, the businesses which reside within this zone must conform to "marine industrial in nature". I think we can all see that this isn't really happening, but it's a reasonable standard to promote.

With that being said, I am in favor of a significant (and more prominent/permanent) update to the Leader Bank Pavilion for this area. It's a decent but underutilized venue.
 
Equilibria said:
...Boston needs a place to see Barenaked Ladies and CAKE.*
*capitalization makes a huge difference to the meaning of this sentence
Click to expand...

Oh no, thou shalt not lump those two together!! The late '90s has relics toward which we should look back upon and grimace and those for which we look back upon and smile (and then grimace). The LB Pavilion shamelessly celebrates all relics, but the crowds are oh so different.
 
millerm277 said:
I mean, I don't think what you want is legal to build here.

This is still in the Marine Industrial Park. Usage is AFAIK required to be industrial/adjacent.

It's specifically called out in the planning documents for the entire area that any retail expansions should only be to serve the unmet needs of employees on-site or for manufacturing operations that want to also sell direct.

They specifically appear to not want to create an environment that will invite people to just come hang out in the general area or to in general be the kind of activated urban streetscape seen elsewhere - and I don't think they're allowed to make it one from a state regulatory/land use perspective, either.

"Allowance for additional retail in this area should be measured by ensuring that it serves the employees on-site rather than creating a destination retail environment." - p.47 RFLMP Master Plan - https://www.bostonplans.org/getattachment/1ce2cf5d-303a-4e68-a8aa-09d727b1c11a
Click to expand...

I am all for a working waterfront, but I wonder if we have over-zoned the Designated Port Areas (DPAs), where uses are limited to water-dependent industrial uses, in certain areas. DPA land makes up most of the Mystic River waterfront land in Chelsea, Everett, and Charlestown and big chunks of East Boston. DPA land also makes up most of the Seaport waterfront.

I was in the Hunters Point area of Long Island City recently and the waterfront there has been transformed within the last 15 years from post-industrial to a series of well-utilized waterfront parks (photos below) fronting high-rise mostly residential buildings with easy ferry/train access to Manhattan. It got me thinking about different areas of the Boston area where similiar types of redevelopment might be do-able, but it would be very limited under the current requirements.

DPA maps: https://www.mass.gov/service-details/designated-port-area-boundary-maps

20230527_151056.jpg
20230527_151133.jpg
20230527_151200.jpg
20230527_151225.jpg
20230527_151327.jpg
 
Equilibria said:
Is it? It has something pretty much every weekend evening... https://www.livenation.com/api/calendar/KovZpZAEAdEA/leader-bank-pavilion-upcoming-events.pdf

Boston needs a place to see Barenaked Ladies and CAKE.*

*capitalization makes a huge difference to the meaning of this sentence
Click to expand...

Underutilized in the way that I believe there is potential to create a truly significant music and arts space like Philly's Freedom Mortgage Pavilion, Nashville's Ascend Amphitheater, or Chicago's Jay Pritzker Pavilion. All of which, in my opinion, are great examples of memorable and culture defining city assets.

The Leader Bank Pavilion is good, and it draws good music and crowds, but we have a blank slate which can be turned into so much more.

1685484922279.png

Philly's Freedom Mortgage Pavilion

1685484987807.png

Nashville's Ascend Amphitheater

1685485014243.png

Chicago's Jay Pritzker Pavilion
 
millerm277 said:
I mean, I don't think what you want is legal to build here.

This is still in the Marine Industrial Park. Usage is AFAIK required to be industrial/adjacent.

It's specifically called out in the planning documents for the entire area that any retail expansions should only be to serve the unmet needs of employees on-site or for manufacturing operations that want to also sell direct.

They specifically appear to not want to create an environment that will invite people to just come hang out in the general area or to in general be the kind of activated urban streetscape seen elsewhere - and I don't think they're allowed to make it one from a state regulatory/land use perspective, either.

"Allowance for additional retail in this area should be measured by ensuring that it serves the employees on-site rather than creating a destination retail environment." - p.47 RFLMP Master Plan - https://www.bostonplans.org/getattachment/1ce2cf5d-303a-4e68-a8aa-09d727b1c11a
Click to expand...
If that’s the way it is, then so be it. I guess I would have preferred they just maximize the footprint. I dislike these half-assed plazas. I think they are worse than no plaza at all.

My company has our laboratory in IDB, so I travel through this intersection once in a while. A fair number of people work at IDB and it has some retail inside, but is mostly just lunch. I would have liked to see some urbanism and human connections growing through this “all work and no play” corner of the city.
 
Smuttynose said:
I am all for a working waterfront, but I wonder if we have over-zoned the Designated Port Areas (DPAs), where uses are limited to water-dependent industrial uses, in certain areas. DPA land makes up most of the Mystic River waterfront land in Chelsea, Everett, and Charlestown and big chunks of East Boston. DPA land also makes up most of the Seaport waterfront.

I was in the Hunters Point area of Long Island City recently and the waterfront there has been transformed within the last 15 years from post-industrial to a series of well-utilized waterfront parks (photos below) fronting high-rise mostly residential buildings with easy ferry/train access to Manhattan. It got me thinking about different areas of the Boston area where similiar types of redevelopment might be do-able, but it would be very limited under the current requirements.

DPA maps: https://www.mass.gov/service-details/designated-port-area-boundary-maps

View attachment 38546View attachment 38547View attachment 38548View attachment 38549View attachment 38550
Click to expand...


Boston already has a similar JEWEL emerging on the Harbor (although, I agree with you that another one in Southie would be great):

Piers Park | The Landscape Architect’s Guide to Boston

www.asla.org www.asla.org

In fact that 3rd pic in your post looks awfully similar to:
1685564391276.png


#1 is a home run already.

I can't wait to see Piers Park#2 and Piers Park#3 join it!!!!! This is going to be spectacular for Boston!
 
Last edited:
Second stint now in NYC, eight years aggregately, and I'm tapped. Yeah, there are a lot of cool things, sure. The bad, the frustrating, the nightmare overtake it all; the city is in decline and we need to stop comparing any of it with Boston. We don't want to be this s***hole place. Honestly, zero offense Smutty, my dude, I would love this in Boston. NYC just bandaids mine wounds. To get to Hunter's Point, you have to crawl through hell.

Smuttynose said:
I am all for a working waterfront, but I wonder if we have over-zoned the Designated Port Areas (DPAs), where uses are limited to water-dependent industrial uses, in certain areas. DPA land makes up most of the Mystic River waterfront land in Chelsea, Everett, and Charlestown and big chunks of East Boston. DPA land also makes up most of the Seaport waterfront.

I was in the Hunters Point area of Long Island City recently and the waterfront there has been transformed within the last 15 years from post-industrial to a series of well-utilized waterfront parks (photos below) fronting high-rise mostly residential buildings with easy ferry/train access to Manhattan. It got me thinking about different areas of the Boston area where similiar types of redevelopment might be do-able, but it would be very limited under the current requirements.

DPA maps: https://www.mass.gov/service-details/designated-port-area-boundary-maps

View attachment 38546View attachment 38547View attachment 38548View attachment 38549View attachment 38550
Click to expand...
 
Boston (and Bostonians) have always compared themselves to NYC. It's stupid. They are two different places (with a lot in common). But especially the penis envy has to stop.
 
jklo said:
People def overestimate what can be done there given the proximity to Logan and maybe even zoning. That building has to be close to the FAA limits.
Click to expand...
Correct, this is at the FAA height limit and the uses are restricted to Industrial, Marine and R&D among others, no residential or Class A office space allowed.
 
I didn’t grab a photo but preliminary perimeter fencing starting going up here mid to late week.
 
8/6/23 Demo underway.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0502.JPG
    IMG_0502.JPG
    5.6 MB · Views: 206
  • IMG_0504.JPG
    IMG_0504.JPG
    6.7 MB · Views: 196
  • IMG_0506.JPG
    IMG_0506.JPG
    6.1 MB · Views: 211
  • IMG_0508.JPG
    IMG_0508.JPG
    4.5 MB · Views: 210
  • IMG_0513.JPG
    IMG_0513.JPG
    6.3 MB · Views: 228
Completion scheduled in mid-2026?! Are they using the same contractor as the Porter Square hotels?
 
jklo said:
People def overestimate what can be done there given the proxmimity to Logan and maybe even zoning. That building has to be close to the FAA limits.
Click to expand...
Height =/= a good project. This is bad urbanism--the site plan is weird and there is way too much surface area devoted to loading. Even in the marine park, which is industrial, it could be way better
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top