Rose Kennedy Greenway

Chiofaro Co. hits mayor Thomas M. Menino
Sees waterfront limits as ?pretend planning?
By Thomas Grillo
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - Updated 11h ago
+ Recent Articles

E-mail Print (11) Comments Text size Share Buzz up!The developer of a $1 billion tower on the Boston waterfront claims the fix was in to kill the proposal long before Mayor Thomas M. Menino commissioned a study to guide development along the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway.

In a letter to the Boston Redevelopment Authority, developer Ted Oatis, a partner at the Chiofaro Co., said the study - which calls for a height limit of about 17 stories at the Harbor Garage site - is ?artificial, theatrical and pretend planning.?

Oatis insisted that two BRA employees signaled in advance of the findings that there would be no tall buildings on the Greenway?s water side. And he quoted the mayor from a Herald story saying more than a year ago, ?The chances of Don Chiofaro building it is about as likely as an 80-degree day in January.? He also quoted the mayor more recently telling the Herald the plan was a ?harebrained idea.?

?In hindsight,? Oatis wrote in a letter dated April 22, ?the study was a setup from the beginning. These quotes make us wonder more now about the Greenway Study?s legitimacy.?

Menino denied charges his administration influenced the study?s zoning findings.

?We commissioned a study with experts in the field who came up with the height recommendations for the Greenway,? Meninosaid yesterday. ?We have always believed . . . as I said from day one: We don?t want to Manhattanize the Greenway, and that?s what the professionals came out with.?

In 2009, the Chiofaro Co. proposed replacing the seven-story Harbor Garage with 40- and 59-story towers linked by a 770-foot high ?sky frame? that would be taller than the John Hancock building.

Following strong opposition to the 1.5-million-square-foot development?s size from neighbors at Harbor Towers and Menino, Don Chiofaro cut the height to a maximum of 625 feet, or about 53 stories, and eliminated the decorative connector.

The BRA hired New York real estate consultant HR&A Advisors Inc. and Boston planners Utile Inc. and Toronto architect Ken Greenberg to help shape future development of the Greenway. Last month, the BRA issued zoning guidelines that would limit building height along the Greenway, and specifically at the Harbor Garage site, to 200 feet - a height that Chiofaro insists is too short to make the numbers work.

BRA director John Palmieri fired off a response to Oatis, saying ?Your discontent with the outcome of the public process does not mean the process itself was illegitimate. . . . These guidelines protect the jewel that is the Greenway and not the profit margins of those who seek to build along its edges.?


http://bostonherald.com/business/real_estate/view.bg?articleid=1250359
 
This clown should be FIRED (BRA director John Palmieri)

Palmieri is a complete disaster and is a complete shill to MAYOR MENINO. These people are not healthy for Boston.
 
We don't want to Manhattanize the Greenway. Manhattan: easily the best urban space in US, North America, probably world. Better avoid that at all costs for Downtown Boston. Also don't ever hire HR&A Advisors Inc., Boston planners Utile Inc., and Ken Greenberg.
 
although it was nice to see "They might be giants" in concert on Earth Day.

although the pillars of course blocked my view . . . .
 
The BRA hired New York real estate consultant HR&A Advisors Inc. and Boston planners Utile Inc. and Toronto architect Ken Greenberg to help shape future development of the Greenway.
Click to expand...

TRANSLATION: To counter Chiofaro, the BRA will roll out glossy color renderings of the RKG in the Boston Globe, with no resemblance to the actual zoning variances, public works projects or private development projects in the approval pipeline. In other words, business as usual.

(BTW, Greenberg's team at Urban Strategies were hired to produce an array of utopian ideals for Fan Pier -- none of which were reflected in the BRA approvals)
 
Sicilian said:
TRANSLATION: To counter Chiofaro, the BRA will roll out glossy color renderings of the RKG in the Boston Globe, with no resemblance to the actual zoning variances, public works projects or private development projects in the approval pipeline. In other words, business as usual.

(BTW, Greenberg's team at Urban Strategies were hired to produce an array of utopian ideals for Fan Pier -- none of which were reflected in the BRA approvals)
Click to expand...

So instead of letting Chiofaro a true Bostonian who built International Place to mold the vision of the Greenway. The BRA hires a consulting firm from New York. So what kind of experience does Greenberg actually have since he is from New York? (Manhattanize)
 
TheRifleman said:
So what kind of experience does Greenberg actually have since he is from New York? (Manhattanize)
Click to expand...

To clarify, Greenberg's firm Urban Strategies is from Toronto. Well-respected, but my point was that the colorful renderings of RKG we will see in the Globe will be produced for PR purposes only.

As usual, there will be no City budget for the public elements of the plans, no approvals for private developers to match the plans, and no outcome that resembles the plans.

As usual, there is always a BRA budget for consultants and planners to produce fictional plans. And the Boston Globe always follows suit by publishing them.

Business as usual.
 
A different perspective on the greenway and an idea to give it some life.

So I've been going on the urbanophile blog lately, cause its really good. http://www.urbanophile.com/

He is primarily concerned with the Midwest but he also discusses urbanism in general. Quoted here is his perspective of the Greenway from a recent visit he did during some sort of conference.

Remember the ?Big Dig?? This is where it happened. Where once a huge elevated freeway cut through downtown Boston, now there is a park. At $20 billion, it is certainly questionable whether the expense was worth it, but they at least got the results they were looking for.


4077218727_1ff3eab53d_b.jpg
Click to expand...

He then goes on to say,

Boston was home to America?s first subway. Today, the regional transit system is known as the ?T?.

Don?t be fooled by the MBTA maps. The Green Line is principally a streetcar. And the Silver Line is a bus.
Click to expand...

Okay I included that last quote just to take a dig at the "T".

I know its not a terribly illuminating quote but the picture he chose really highlights one of the nicer section of the Greenway. As an outsider he seems to think the park space is nice. I know most of you all disagree. However I just wanted to bring in a voice from outside this little bubble.



Now I know most of you don't like the Greenway. I also think the park could and should be improved. I live in Chicago now and was out today in Grant Park. It was after work and I wanted to grab a beer. Just so happens that tucked away in Grant Park is The Green--a bar, patio and mini golf course. Ahh, its the little things that make Chicago is great. Pictures here:


l


hours.1.650.jpg


39953512_0e30bcde94.jpg


l


Okay, now I know the idea of serving beer in the park would be tough in Boston but it occurred to me that something like this would be a great fit on the greenway. Maybe on one of the ramps parcels that are tough to utilize. What do you all think?
 
An interesting idea, Ronwell.

Looking at the photos, my eye is drawn to the black metal fence. It's even important enough to turn up in the retro postcard rendering.

Reminded me of this post from several months ago.
 
Well you can't just have people wandering across the golf course, any good county club will tell you that. Besides good fences make good neighbors.

Seriously Chicago loves its fences. I heard that all new construction must have a fence around it although I don't know if that is true. Certainly in my neighborhood where there a lot of new buildings I see fences. Some people may not like them but I don't mind. Most are unlocked and to me they add a certain charm...for the most part.

Two other thoughts: one, they may be restricting access because they do serve beer there. Two, the site is tucked away in the corner of Grant Park surrounded by Lake Shore Drive, Columbus Drive and Monroe Ave. All are really wide streets, wider than anything you'd find along the Greenway. Yet pedestrians still use the space. Again I think this is applicable to the Greenway as far as planning is concerned.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sou...45&gl=us&ie=UTF8&hq=the+green&hnear=&t=h&z=17
 
Can somebody please explain what the city or the RFK Greenway conservancy is doing to make the GREENWAY a better place to visit?
 
^ I don't think it's a question of whether or not the greenway is nice looking or not. I don't think anybody here would say that a nice green park in the middle of the city isn't a pretty thing. The problem is the location [its like a highway divider almost, between two roads], and that there is nobody using them.
 
My biggest beef with the Greenway is not it's primary use as a park. Yes, I definitely agree more needs to be done to make it an engaging space. My problem stems from the fact that it's in the matter of a couple of years gone from a highway to a sacred cow on which all development must bow down to its supremacy. Even if they made the greatest park ever, I still do not believe that it should hold the areas around it hostage for good development.

In fact, my view of the Greenway would have more developments on both sides with the express point of canyonizing it. If you want great, open space, go to the Common or Olmsted Park or the Arboretum. The Greenway is a unique space for a truly dynamic, urban space. And yes, keep access to the water open.

However, you're not going to engage people to the water and, by extension, the Greenway by putting all of it on an altar. If anyway, encourage development on the east side of the Greenway but hold that development to a high standard. However, a high standard doesn't mean focusing entirely on its height. You can have a far more appealing building at 600 feet that will act as a focal point for the area and bring people to the area that can work in tandem with activities on the Greenway to make a truly remarkable space than some blocky stump that won't create a shadow.

But instead, we'd rather bow down to a few blades of grass that no one is using anyway.
 
Why don't they just keep 2 or 3 of the parks (preferably well spread from each other) and make them up to be a larger sort of Post Office Squares. I think that'd be pretty appealing. Plus, the mayor still has "waterfront access" through them. *rolls eyes*
 
^^Keep the North End park, the Chinatown park and a small piece of the wharf parks. Fill the rest in.
 
^ Do you get the impression that --however gently-- the ball has started to roll on this? Campbell certainly believes in it; can he be enlisted in a leadership role? After all, he's spent an entire lifetime as a detached commentator; isn't it time he had something to show for it?

I know he attaches much importance to his architectural registration; advocacy is an important part of the architectural process. For examples of failing advocacy, look at Menino or the BRA: Bozos, all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top