underground
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,390
- Reaction score
- 3
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
^Definitly. All stakeholders should be involved.
^Definitly. All stakeholders should be involved.
New Bar and Restaurant for Long Warf
- Thread starter PaulC
- Start date
Beton Brut
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 4,380
- Reaction score
- 327
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
Who wouldn't want to eat overpriced seafood in a giant stylized lobster trap?
Who wouldn't want to eat overpriced seafood in a giant stylized lobster trap?
Pierce
Active Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 461
- Reaction score
- 1
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
sooo, since the guy who lives in new york and saw it once last year didn't feel it's necessary, let's can it.
As a former fulton street resident who felt infinitely more connected and "neighborly" to columbus park and long wharf than I ever did to hanover or salem streets i can safely count myself among the nimbys here. Long Wharf was a frequent destination for me, and one of the most visceral "real" urban moments in Boston. Skateboarders, tourists, neighbors, workers on a smoke break, all looking, watching, freighters and ferries, jumbojets, yachts, skateboards, bikes, cars on the tobin, the blue line rumbling under nearby grates. I don't care much for Fred Kunt and his lot but this type of open space is special in its rarity and I'm inclined to agree with him here. So free of programming, with close attention to edges, well scaled, and the ability to feel personal even when its crowded, or civic even when its empty, though I've yet to see it empty, at any hour of the day. That building itself is rather useless and there is a lack of seating in it (probably to keep out those nasty homeless that debase public space for you) and i'm all for it being utilized in some way--but in reality this thing wouldn't be so neatly contained as in that [shiteous] rendering. That lobster claw sign belongs in the prudential food court, not the waterfront. There's enough tourist-fare on long wharf as it is--and enough vacant wharf space being used to store Chevy Suburbans--without having to eat into the public space.
sooo, since the guy who lives in new york and saw it once last year didn't feel it's necessary, let's can it.
As a former fulton street resident who felt infinitely more connected and "neighborly" to columbus park and long wharf than I ever did to hanover or salem streets i can safely count myself among the nimbys here. Long Wharf was a frequent destination for me, and one of the most visceral "real" urban moments in Boston. Skateboarders, tourists, neighbors, workers on a smoke break, all looking, watching, freighters and ferries, jumbojets, yachts, skateboards, bikes, cars on the tobin, the blue line rumbling under nearby grates. I don't care much for Fred Kunt and his lot but this type of open space is special in its rarity and I'm inclined to agree with him here. So free of programming, with close attention to edges, well scaled, and the ability to feel personal even when its crowded, or civic even when its empty, though I've yet to see it empty, at any hour of the day. That building itself is rather useless and there is a lack of seating in it (probably to keep out those nasty homeless that debase public space for you) and i'm all for it being utilized in some way--but in reality this thing wouldn't be so neatly contained as in that [shiteous] rendering. That lobster claw sign belongs in the prudential food court, not the waterfront. There's enough tourist-fare on long wharf as it is--and enough vacant wharf space being used to store Chevy Suburbans--without having to eat into the public space.
statler
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 7,908
- Reaction score
- 496
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
Would you be opposed to a restaurant here if it came in better packaging?
I just can't fathom being opposed to a restaurant in this location. It's ideal for everyone. Tourists, locals and office workers.
This is a great idea, poorly executed.
Would you be opposed to a restaurant here if it came in better packaging?
I just can't fathom being opposed to a restaurant in this location. It's ideal for everyone. Tourists, locals and office workers.
This is a great idea, poorly executed.
Pierce
Active Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 461
- Reaction score
- 1
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
with a small enough footprint i suppose, but with a restaurant comes dumpsters and delivery trucks--i think the main concern (and I'm certainly no expert but just based on reading the north end fish wrappers) is that the outdoor seating would take over the entire upper part of the plaza, ie the compass rose area. And in the land of the free you need to have a 30" barrier around any area that alcohol is served so that would be an invasion of ugly aliens for sure.
And I would add a reservation that the new tenants would try to shoo away the skateboarders that enliven the place, but i'd be willing to wait to fight that if it ever occurred.
with a small enough footprint i suppose, but with a restaurant comes dumpsters and delivery trucks--i think the main concern (and I'm certainly no expert but just based on reading the north end fish wrappers) is that the outdoor seating would take over the entire upper part of the plaza, ie the compass rose area. And in the land of the free you need to have a 30" barrier around any area that alcohol is served so that would be an invasion of ugly aliens for sure.
And I would add a reservation that the new tenants would try to shoo away the skateboarders that enliven the place, but i'd be willing to wait to fight that if it ever occurred.
B
bosma
Guest
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
Sorry but I actually agree with some posters. Any building including a restaurant would obstruct the great wide angle/panaramic views of the harbor including from the beautiful and recently renovated Christopher Columbus Park. There are plenty of restaurants in the area.
Sorry but I actually agree with some posters. Any building including a restaurant would obstruct the great wide angle/panaramic views of the harbor including from the beautiful and recently renovated Christopher Columbus Park. There are plenty of restaurants in the area.
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 9
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
The real purpose of the building, from what I understand, is to enclose a vent shaft and emergency exit for the Blue Line.
The real purpose of the building, from what I understand, is to enclose a vent shaft and emergency exit for the Blue Line.
tmac9wr
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 1,444
- Reaction score
- 63
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
I agree with the opposition on this one. If this was located next to the Long Wharf Marriot in the back parking lot of the Chart House, I'd probably want this to be built. That is, if it was designed better. This is one of the worst designs I have seen. Ever. For restaurants, The Chart House and Legal Seafoods are already there, along with whatever is in the Long Wharf. In the summer there is that outdoor bar located across from Long Wharf (I don't know the name), which is nice.
If they're trying to add some life to the end of the wharf, why not modify what is already there? What about those buildings at the very end of Long Wharf? Why can't they put a restaurant into the bottom 1 or 2 floors of the building which is adjacent to this parcel? There would be plenty of room for outdoor seating and wouldn't require anything to be destroyed.
Take a look at in on Live Maps and tell me what you guys think.
I agree with the opposition on this one. If this was located next to the Long Wharf Marriot in the back parking lot of the Chart House, I'd probably want this to be built. That is, if it was designed better. This is one of the worst designs I have seen. Ever. For restaurants, The Chart House and Legal Seafoods are already there, along with whatever is in the Long Wharf. In the summer there is that outdoor bar located across from Long Wharf (I don't know the name), which is nice.
If they're trying to add some life to the end of the wharf, why not modify what is already there? What about those buildings at the very end of Long Wharf? Why can't they put a restaurant into the bottom 1 or 2 floors of the building which is adjacent to this parcel? There would be plenty of room for outdoor seating and wouldn't require anything to be destroyed.
Take a look at in on Live Maps and tell me what you guys think.
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 9
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
I'm not always one to say that a building should be understated, contextual, and tasteful, but in this location --- yeah, it needs to be.
I'm not always one to say that a building should be understated, contextual, and tasteful, but in this location --- yeah, it needs to be.
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
They are modifying what is already there. I'm not sure where all the confusion is coming from, but they are turning the pavilion, which serves as a vent shaft for the blue line into a restaurant. The building is already there. They are just adding glass walls and planks on top.
Also, and I may be the only one here who feels this way, but I have no problem with the design. It's a harbor restaurant in a small building. I think it fits. It's not as if they had the freedom to build something from the ground up.
They are modifying what is already there. I'm not sure where all the confusion is coming from, but they are turning the pavilion, which serves as a vent shaft for the blue line into a restaurant. The building is already there. They are just adding glass walls and planks on top.
Also, and I may be the only one here who feels this way, but I have no problem with the design. It's a harbor restaurant in a small building. I think it fits. It's not as if they had the freedom to build something from the ground up.
statler
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 7,908
- Reaction score
- 496
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
Really? I haven't been down that way in a while (no reason - if I go to the water front, I almost always go to Rowes Wharf) but I thought the existing building had a smaller footprint than the rendering shows.
Edit: A quick check of Google Earth seems to confirm you are correct, they are just reusing the existing building.
Really? I haven't been down that way in a while (no reason - if I go to the water front, I almost always go to Rowes Wharf) but I thought the existing building had a smaller footprint than the rendering shows.
Edit: A quick check of Google Earth seems to confirm you are correct, they are just reusing the existing building.
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
The striped fencing, or whatever the heck it is, just doesn't work. All they need to do is enclose the existing structure, maintain the current roofline, and put up a nice sign. The sign and the roof addition are out of scale and context with the site and the existing structure.
The striped fencing, or whatever the heck it is, just doesn't work. All they need to do is enclose the existing structure, maintain the current roofline, and put up a nice sign. The sign and the roof addition are out of scale and context with the site and the existing structure.
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
I disagree. Without the roof planks it is a crappy little building that could be anywhere and house anything. With the planks it is a crappy little building with a little context. It feels more like a harbor and it's borderline interesting. This is all obviously a matter of opinion, but I think it adds a little life.
I disagree. Without the roof planks it is a crappy little building that could be anywhere and house anything. With the planks it is a crappy little building with a little context. It feels more like a harbor and it's borderline interesting. This is all obviously a matter of opinion, but I think it adds a little life.
statler
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 7,908
- Reaction score
- 496
Re: Marriott Long Wharf makeover
Which leads to the question of why the existing structure needs to be saved at all (aside from cost). Obviously, the vent and stairway(s?) need to remain where they are but is there anything special about the outer shell that mandates it be retained?
Which leads to the question of why the existing structure needs to be saved at all (aside from cost). Obviously, the vent and stairway(s?) need to remain where they are but is there anything special about the outer shell that mandates it be retained?