Lyra (née The Huntington) | 252/258/264 Huntington Avenue | Fenway

stick n move said:
Those buildings have to be kept....
Click to expand...

Great post. i can't help but wonder if the developer postulated that facadectomy would look sorta strange here, because it's only a couple of levels. Very challenged podium to design.
 
odurandina said:
Density here, and not casting problematic shadow at multiple public transportation hubs, several green spaces, the symphony, BPL, Copley Square etc. Another towering home run. Perfect street level can't always be accomplished. Far worse to reduce 400 units to nothing infill, and force people to live further out from the core. When we have as much 'untouchable' as we have in Boston, you have to make smart compromises. This does that in spades.



This is an important consideration. Yet, if we fail on these final high-density parcels, we will all suffer over the long term.
Click to expand...


I disagree.
 
Wretched development. Aren't we, as a city, supposed to be "past this"? The city still doesn't seem to have got religion on preservation, despite the fact that history and architecture remain the city's greatest selling points, equaled only by the universities and hospitals.

Ironically, the immediate area has examples of what works (the older buildings with a strong street presence) and what doesn't (Symphony Plaza East/West - perennial contenders for Worst Building In The City).

It's a damn shame this proposed building would demolish something that works in favor of something a whole lot closer to Symphony Plaza.
 
Apparently the building 258 Huntington used to be a restaurant called "Child's Old France".

You can see a reference to it here:

99SznwT.jpg
 
odurandina said:
This is an important consideration. Yet, if we fail on these final high-density parcels, we will all suffer over the long term.
Click to expand...

No we don't "all suffer". Jesus Christ man... get help.
 
On one hand, that's a beautiful facade. On the other hand, there's no street level interaction by these buildings as currently used.
 
Thank you tysmith95 for creating a new thread for this, I searched and couldn't find one. I agree with the aforementioned comments about the street level being saved, but if they (Matteson) swap the street level in favor of retaining the facades, this will be an absolute knockout especially with all of the new development going in around it.
 
AdamBC said:
On one hand, that's a beautiful facade. On the other hand, there's no street level interaction by these buildings as currently used.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

I worked on the top floor of 252 over 20 years ago, as a telemarketer for the Huntington Theatre. I paid my way through grad school, and forged some of the most enduring friendships of my adult life. I explored a lot of that building after hours, shitfaced, while cast-parties raged upstairs; the lower level was (and I believe still is) the Theatre's scene shop. Next door, 258 was almost exclusively administrative offices. Both buildings have some handsome exterior details, but their interiors were hopelessly compromised from their original lives as movie houses. I've been told that 252 showed stag films in the 60s, but I've never been able to corroborate this legend.

I'm a bit sentimental about these buildings. I'd miss seeing them when I walk down the steps of Symphony Hall after concerts.

With all of that said, the stretch of Huntington between Ginger Exchange and Uno's is pretty barren. A district that hosts three top-drawer cultural institutions/venues could use a fine dining option and a stylish bar catering to theatre- and concert-goers; the Theatre will need to replace the production and administrative amenities lost when 252 and 258 are demolished. It's a tall order for any developer. I'm all for saving the facades; the faux-Koolhaas tower might need to have its wrinkles ironed out to look the part above the revitalized block.
 
Now that I look at this render a bit closer, it looks like a really bad Sketchup model of what they would like this site to look like.
 
pel_north said:
Now that I look at this render a bit closer, it looks like a really bad Sketchup model of what they would like this site to look like.
Click to expand...

+1. The renders will change before they send in a PNF to the BDPA. I think that the renders on their site were mostly for investors to see future plans, plans that will most likely change.
 
Last edited:
I had mentioned this earlier. If we just found out about this today, it is very early in the process. That being said we have to watch this and if needed bring up the streetwall issue at meetings, email, or other means. As of now there is minimal information to go off of. The points brought up in this thread are exactly what the people of this city need to be concerned with. Rise above the city not through it. We already see all over the city that the quality of development has drastically increased. Preserving our old stock is just as important. The west end was one swoop of destruction that happened all at once in one area. If were not careful the entire city could slowly have the same thing happen over time. This way would be a slow erosion that happened over an extended period of time. This is a great location, good height, good design, we just need to keep an eye on it.
 
^^understated.
Any bad press could doom this. The site is on a tightrope.

stick n move said:
I disagree.
Click to expand...

i chose poorly and posted before properly examining that handsome street wall.

FK4 said:
No we don't "all suffer".
Click to expand...

in addition to my concerns over the squandering of good build sites where higher density could have been achieved, generally, i have a very negative view of the city's financial outlook including pensions and improvements to education. Then, i see cities like LA and Seattle are pouring literally 10s of billions into their mass transit, while the T is simultaneously mismanaged and neglected by the state for capital improvements.
 
These guys are seriously out of touch if they think there won't be resistance to demolishing the facades there.
 
@jouhou, I have seen many projects that have gone forward in the past ten years (cough cough Filene's) that have completely disregarded the beautiful facades of the buildings that development was slated to be on. We have lost so much of our great old city. Not to mention to natural disasters, neglect, and vandalization play big roles as well.
You are correct though, more citizens are becoming aware of the buildings that surround them and more and more of our city is being saved and being integrated into the new future.
 
odurandina said:
^^understated.
Any bad press could doom this. The site is on a tightrope.



i chose poorly and posted before properly examining that handsome street wall.



in addition to my concerns over the squandering of good build sites where higher density could have been achieved, generally, i have a very negative view of the city's financial outlook including pensions and improvements to education. Then, i see cities like LA and Seattle are pouring literally 10s of billions into their mass transit, while the T is simultaneously mismanaged and neglected by the state for capital improvements.
Click to expand...


Uh, dude? Nobody on here gives a damn about what interior monologue was running when you posted. It's the same post over and over again, anyway. We all are well aware that you have some kind of frontal lobe dysfunction and impulsively post before thinking, no need to clarify that here. Again, get help.
 
FK4 said:
No we don't "all suffer". Jesus Christ man... get help.
Click to expand...
Of course we all suffer! Any decrease in housing, and commercial stock has systemic impacts across the metro area, and affordable housing dies a death of a thousand cuts by a swarm of NIMBYism for each individual building. It's why if you want affordable housing you need as of right development without onerous parking, setback, FAR requirements, etc. Just because it's said in an overdramatic way by someone you don't like doesn't make it false.
 
I'm confused. The render only seems to show a tear down of the buildings currently labeled 254 and 258. The first floor of 254 is terrible. Unless that building has an important history I'm not sure it's worth saving.

258 on the other hand...
 
I would say keep the Old France building and they theatre it already planned to be kept but the other building here just doesn't seem to have a strong case for being retained the ground floor has already in essence been destroyed and I just don't see a strong case for maintaining a mediocre facade like this.

HgWSJ2r.png
 
Wait ... you are suggesting we demolish something with Keystones!!!? Are you mad!?

cca
 
Yea they cant get rid of that facade at least, its really nice even without much street activation. They should do a facadectomy and do what the BPL Johnson wing did and cut out everything under those arches and make it glass
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top