Seaport Square (Formerly McCourt Seaport Parcels)

I wouldn't be surprised either way. There's tons of activity on the periphery (Atlantic Beer Garden/Whiskey Priest, the ICA, the new Jimmy's, BoA Paviliion, Fort Point Channel). Will people walk through the middle once it's built up? That's a good question.
 
Seaport Square: Boston's best future neighborhood, and always will be.

If this does actually get built out, ever, I do hold out some hope. The scaling of the proposal is more Ink Block than Fan Pier, the major flaw being, I think, the horrible lawn right across the street from Fan Pier's lawn. That area will look like a wasteland.
 
Not even: that title is already taken by the mirror Back Bay that was proposed for the current MIT campus area.
 
Shep -

The scale of all development on Seaport Square is roughly the same as Fan Pier, particularly that of One Marina Park Drive.

Predominate new construction: 250' - 300' height, large footprint.

The renderings to date are somewhat deceptive. I've seen some with green colors on top of buildings that creates an illusion of large parks on the ground. There are proposed parks at grade as well.

The new construction is not at all close to Ink Block in scale.

Unless you've seen something I haven't seen.

PS. IMO, at full build, that green in front of Fan Pier will be fine (and active).
 
statler said:
Is there anyone left who holds out any hope for this area?

Does everyone pretty much agree that it will still be a wasteland even after it is fully built out?
Click to expand...

There's always hope. However the biggest hindrance to SBW/ID as a whole is the fact that too much of the land is controlled by only two developers. This has been discussed several times on this thread, the ID thread, and Fan Pier thread...but the fact remains that too few have too much.
 
^ It's a paradox. There was hope insofar as this whole tract was owned by one developer who could master-plan it well (in contrast to what we've seen in the rest of the Seaport). But it also meant that risk, etc., were not spread around.
 
tmac9wr said:
There's always hope. However the biggest hindrance to SBW/ID as a whole is the fact that too much of the land is controlled by only two developers. This has been discussed several times on this thread, the ID thread, and Fan Pier thread...but the fact remains that too few have too much.
Click to expand...

Tmac -- the current story mentions that one of the "master developers" in the SPID is selling several of the parcels to other developers -- I think that is a good sign -- and over time there will be more of that

But there is a trade-off -- initially when a huge new area is being developed -- it is superior to keep the number of developers to a small number so that they can easily coordinate building garages and other quasi-public amenities into the designs

later as a lot of the parcels are built upon -- the remainder do better being dispersed to bring some newer concepts and players into the picture

For example I doubt that the Pru Center could have been done if there were half a dozen developers -- yet today the complex benefits from the several owners - some of whom are doing significant infill developments
 
Good decision on letting construction go ahead, but why not use the opportunity to reevaluate whether this needs to be a park at all? I mean, instead of letting that land go to productive, taxpaying use that can maintain Boston's overindulgent numer of parks, we've just got to wait and let it lie fallow until someone can come up with the funds to build yet another park.
 
stellarfun said:
Children's Museum park and Seaport Square. The museum ain't got the money to build it at the moment.

http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...not_ready_with_design/srvc=home&position=also
Click to expand...

This is the correct call on several levels.

1) Why should Hynes delay his project because the Childrens Museum hasn't fulfilled their responsibilities with a park design???? - - meanwhile, the museum is using the tract for....wait for it......an employee parking lot.

and

2) Concerning Ms. Li's contention about not letting "public amenities" be delayed behind development, there are "public amenities" (i.e. Silver Line) that ARE beneficial if done before the building and then there are "public amentities" that are arguably better pulled off when developed in a mature space - not to sit there in mint condition just in time to be spritzed by the dirt and grime of adjacent construction work.
 
Last edited:
^^^^ Agreed. There is already a "park" attached to the CM watrefront area, and coupled with the Children's wharf it does quite well as a public space, and in good weather both are full.

To add more public space without the public to fill it, is foolish.

If it is agreed to be a park, then fine let it be in good time, but no reason to tie this time table to another lot that is ready to go.

As to ' does anyone still have hope?' I still do for Seaport Square. I know of a few parcels that are moving forward, and am personally involved in one of them, which based on the agressive schedule, makes me feel it is going forward. Once it starts, I expect it to pick up steam rather than peeter out. But, I am the perpetual optimist.
 
I'm surprised the article didn't include a word regarding the cost of the one-floor "Boston Innovation Center" Hynes is being required to build, instead of focusing attention on the expense of a relatively tiny park (a fraction of the size of existing Childrens Museum park). Seaport Square has been the beneficiary of significant development rights from the BRA subsequent the initial investment -- why whine about finishing this small bit of parkspace?
 
Isn't a logical solution to put the money in escrow. Hynes can keep getting interest on it until the CM pulls it out to build the park.
 
Sicilian said:
I'm surprised the article didn't include a word regarding the cost of the one-floor "Boston Innovation Center" Hynes is being required to build, instead of focusing attention on the expense of a relatively tiny park (a fraction of the size of existing Childrens Museum park). Seaport Square has been the beneficiary of significant development rights from the BRA subsequent the initial investment -- why whine about finishing this small bit of parkspace?
Click to expand...

Sicil_--I'm very concerned about the one story innovation center being created by people who know nothing about innovation:

1) First almost no innovation can come from something purpose-built for innovation --- innovation is disruptive and disruption thrives in a serendipitous environment

2) with innovation -- old and rundown is much better than new and spic and span. The greatest center of innovation in the post WWII period was MIT's Building 20 on Vassar St.. This building began as a temporary though substantial structure erected by the U.s. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1940's for the Radiation Lab. In its role as the primary space for the Rad Lab -- Bldg. 20 fostered the innovation in Radar technology which enabled the Allies to win WWII. Subsequently by remaining a temporary building for the next 60 years -- it spawned six major MIT research labs and thousands of breakthroughs in dozens of fields from synthesis of speech to cooling atoms to the lowest temperatures in the universe.

3) buildings housing the most innovative are subject to editing at will -- you need to be able to drill and cut, walls, floors and ceilings -- this is best done in old industrial spaces -- e.g. building 20 was constantly being drilled and cut to meet the needs of the innovators.

4) there definitely should be an innovation center in the SPID -- but it should be in one of the old Boston Wharf Buildings or another old warehouse / industrial space not in some fancy glass box
 
Couldn't agree more.

Plus, if Seaport Square (6 million square feet at full build) is required to make a civic contribution to the area during approvals I think Boston could do MUCH better than a jewel box of meeting rooms and contrived sandbox for entrepreneurial brainstorms. To me, a public school or other significant cultural or very civic purpose would be a wise idea taking the long view.

Pritzker's provided land for the ICA during Fan Pier rezoning process, during which 3 million square feet of new development was approved -- half that of Seaport Square.

But I do think the "Innovation Center" is already nailed down so it's probably too late to consider other options.
 
You're putting much too much into a name.... I look at it as a marketing scheme, and a sign that things are actually going to happen around here. It will be innovative insomuch as it leads to other parcels being developed.

The city is trying to instill would be developers with some confidence that this area will not remain a wasteland around their building if they decide to develop a parcel.

It will also be small and cheap enough, that if they run out of buildable lots... you can tear it down and build something bigger and/or better.

At least it is supposed to have an affordable food component.
 
A great point, SeamusMcFly.

As for possible civic spaces on the waterfront (school, fire, police, community center) that might make sense at full build 25 years from now, I don't think the City of Boston will get multiple bites of the apple to negotiate these in a rezoning (e.g. "Master Planning") effort. The heights are already capped by FAA and so there is no more room for negotiation once projects are approved.

So the destiny of the Waterfront as an urban neighborhood (or not) may be determined by current decisions.
 
Sicilian said:
A great point, SeamusMcFly.

As for possible civic spaces on the waterfront (school, fire, police, community center) that might make sense at full build 25 years from now, I don't think the City of Boston will get multiple bites of the apple to negotiate these in a rezoning (e.g. "Master Planning") effort. The heights are already capped by FAA and so there is no more room for negotiation once projects are approved.

So the destiny of the Waterfront as an urban neighborhood (or not) may be determined by current decisions.
Click to expand...

Sicil -- we have to wait and see how Seaport Sq. and Fan Pier evolve as they are the core of the SPID

We should use as the model the evolution of the Kendall / Cambridge Center which is now spilling out to the rest of East Cambridge

If the SPID is built out and height limited in the area of Fan Pier and Seaport Square -- it will just expand into the other low buildings and parking lots on the periphery
 
I moved all the SPID/Kendall Sq posts over to the Innovation Dist. thread since it didn't really pertain to this particular development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top