New BSA Digs
- Thread starter vanshnookenraggen
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
Ah, I had assumed everyone had seen the H+Y renderings previously and was familiar with them.
Sorry about the confusion. I thought the BSA's current location had been referred to as "The Architects building" for many years. Maybe it isn't anymore.
I seem to remember a fundraising drive during the '90s to buy their current location outright. My only question was why, in a terrible economy, would you trade the equity of a location you own, for a rented spot? If I owned a home right now, I wouldn't sell it (in an awful and deflated market) and rent an apartment. I understand the visibility thing but isn't it a little reckless for an organization that subsists on dues and donations to make a decision like this in these times?
I seem to remember a fundraising drive during the '90s to buy their current location outright. My only question was why, in a terrible economy, would you trade the equity of a location you own, for a rented spot? If I owned a home right now, I wouldn't sell it (in an awful and deflated market) and rent an apartment. I understand the visibility thing but isn't it a little reckless for an organization that subsists on dues and donations to make a decision like this in these times?
Riverworks
New member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 6
Very modern design. It has 3 times more space than the architectural exhibit space at the MoMa!
At least the new location will bring some well needed street-level traffic (and hopefully appeal) to the Greenway area.
At least the new location will bring some well needed street-level traffic (and hopefully appeal) to the Greenway area.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
Eh that area is already pretty active. Atlantic Wharf is so close to the Reserve and Dewey Square (South Sta). It's the mid-section and North End that is a problem. They should have built a building right in the middle of it (like that proposed museum) to show how they, as architects, care about the future of the Greenway. That would have been cool.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
I didn't say active, I said pretty active (in comparison to other areas). It might draw people from Dewey up a couple blocks, but it doesn't even really have a prominent street facade (just that bright staircase). The main HQ is on the second floor with that tiny entrance they show (that got mistaken for a cellar) on the ground.
Last edited:
czsz
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 6,043
- Reaction score
- 5
To be fair, this isn't very hard; MoMa is actually a fairly cramped and crowded museum.
Also, you guys are dreaming if you think the BSA space will be a draw for anyone who's not an archigeek heading to the exhibits. If anything, I'd imagine the new location will be a huge handicap for the society attracting people who don't keep tabs on the profession...there's not exactly an active streetlife here that would suck people in (businessmen rushing back and forth to South Station aren't exactly likely to just pop in for a leisurely arch exhibit).
Why would the BSA move?
A. The space is 3x the size of the BSA's existing space.
B. The lease is subsidized, below market. The City and property owner felt the BSA was the best suitor for Atlantic Wharf's civic space negotiated to fulfill obligations under State waterfront regulations.
I'm sure these two factors made the move attractive. Plus the additional space can be used for private events to raise funds.
What is odd is that the stated intent of subsidizing groundfloors of new construction on tidelands is to enhance the waterfront with a variety of civic uses, yet the City allows these civic spaces to exist on upper floors of the building so the groundfloor can be used for more lucrative commercial and private uses (lobbies).
In other words, moving civic spaces intended for the groundfloor to upper floors defeats the stated rationale for providing a subsidized lease.
A. The space is 3x the size of the BSA's existing space.
B. The lease is subsidized, below market. The City and property owner felt the BSA was the best suitor for Atlantic Wharf's civic space negotiated to fulfill obligations under State waterfront regulations.
I'm sure these two factors made the move attractive. Plus the additional space can be used for private events to raise funds.
What is odd is that the stated intent of subsidizing groundfloors of new construction on tidelands is to enhance the waterfront with a variety of civic uses, yet the City allows these civic spaces to exist on upper floors of the building so the groundfloor can be used for more lucrative commercial and private uses (lobbies).
In other words, moving civic spaces intended for the groundfloor to upper floors defeats the stated rationale for providing a subsidized lease.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
That was pretty much what I was trying to get at. It's not a destination and won't activate anything more than it already is, which isn't very much. A bright, ugly, staircase isn't going to do what they think it will do.
I wish they would have taken an in-your-face approach and plopped their HQ directly in the middle of the Greenway (architecture pavilion of sorts), but times are rough.
czsz
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 6,043
- Reaction score
- 5
^ It probably would have cost less to build this as a pavillion on the Greenway than to insert it into a historic building, but what can you do? It would cast shadows and all that. Mess up the Harbor Towers' clipped-to-perfection suburban lawn.
Actually, I'm surprised no one's suggested using the Greenway for temporary architectural exhibitions. Since we're stuck with it for now as a barren public space, and it's vastly more central than Fan Pier or Fenway backlots, it would make sense as a showpiece for the likes of Puma City, the Louis Boston pavillion, or any number of cheap, temporary design initiatives the city, BSA or whomever could hold high-profile international contests for.
Actually, I'm surprised no one's suggested using the Greenway for temporary architectural exhibitions. Since we're stuck with it for now as a barren public space, and it's vastly more central than Fan Pier or Fenway backlots, it would make sense as a showpiece for the likes of Puma City, the Louis Boston pavillion, or any number of cheap, temporary design initiatives the city, BSA or whomever could hold high-profile international contests for.
Sorry for being a little late to the thread, but I work at the BSA and can provide some pointers to the whys and hows... in short, for any official updates on the new space, we regularly post at Wordpress: http://bsahq.wordpress.com/
Sicilian hit the nail on the head regarding renting vs owning. The BSA currently owns its current building outright. But, maintenance and other expenses are considerable to the point that renting this new bigger space is a better deal.
I love the idea of using the Greenway as exhibit space. For that and other ideas, Eric White here on staff is collecting thoughts. Find him at http://www.architects.org/about/staff-directory
Sicilian hit the nail on the head regarding renting vs owning. The BSA currently owns its current building outright. But, maintenance and other expenses are considerable to the point that renting this new bigger space is a better deal.
I love the idea of using the Greenway as exhibit space. For that and other ideas, Eric White here on staff is collecting thoughts. Find him at http://www.architects.org/about/staff-directory