Shreve, Crump & Low Redevelopment | 334-364 Boylston Street | Back Bay

Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

From the front page of the Back Bay Sun

Blogger: Save the Shreve Building
by Dan Salerno


A second public meeting to showcase the Druker Company?s plans for the redevelopment of the A-B block of Boylston Street became contentious during the public comment period when a poster from an architectural website stood up to make a mini counter presentation.
Dan Shea, a member of ArchBoston.org, came prepared with a booklet of facts and spoke for over 5 minutes to gathered members of the community while the visibly irritated Ronald Druker and Jay Rourke from the Boston Redevelopment Authority looked on. Shea lambasted the developers for their decision to raze the 104 year oldd Shreve, Crump, and Low building and rebuild on the site.
?I see no reason [the Shreve building] should be torn down to build a mediocre nine story office building,? said Shea, referring to the Druker plans to build a new mixed use premium office and retail building. Shea complained that the design of the new building looked like something right out of architect Cesar Pelli?s K Street project, and that it did not fit the neighborhood at all.
Boston, said Shea, is known for its historic architecture, and the destruction of the Shreve building would be ?throwing part of that history out.? Shea said that a reasonable compromise would be to preserve the fa?ade of the building while building higher behind it. However, representatives from Druker said that preserving the fa?ade was not logistically possible and would place too many constraints on size and parking.
Rourke, who at first tried to stop Shea from giving his presentation, later remarked that he had seen his postings on archboston.org and asked sarcastically if he had brought his family and friends along.
Indeed, Shea was not alone in opposing the project. While the presentation itself more or less duplicated what was presented to the public earlier this summer, the second meeting gave a separate opportunity for members of the community to voice their opinions.
Paul Carlson, a Boston resident, called the new design a ?landscraper,? and said that the craftsmanship of the Shreve building ?could never be duplicated today.? Carlson also posts on ArchBoston.org, though it was not clear if he and Shea had coordinated their remarks.
Some in attendance did speak in favor of the project, most people with a pro-business interest. Meg Mainzer-Cohen of the Back Bay Association said that she agreed with the need to preserve Boston?s historic character, but that over-preservation was ?strangling? the economic life of the city. ?The first block of Boylston has failed to thrive,? said Mainzer-Cohen. ?I am very much hoping this new project will turn the corner for the block.?
Others who spoke in favor of the building included a representative from the nearby Four Season Hotel, which has a financial stake in seeing the block revitalized.
The proposed 121 foot building, designed by renowned architect Cesar Pelli, will feature over 200,000 square feet of ?boutique? luxury office space, along with 21,000 feet of ground floor retail. The construction will necessitate the complete demolition of the old Shreve, Crump, and Low building, along with three other buildings. The building design will feature wood storefronts for the ground level retail, while the upper floors will alternate large bay windows with flat windows up to the penthouse. The current design also calls for a marquee rounded corner at the corner of Arlington and Boylston, which will probably be a highlight of a new ground floor restaurant.
In addition to retail and office space, the building will also have underground parking and a full off street loading dock. The developers also have green aspirations for the building, and will seek a Silver LEED certification, the third highest rating possible.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Awesome. It still pisses me off to no end that the Back Bay residents threw a shit fit over that garage on Newbury St but were silent on this project.

Meg Mainzer-Cohen of the Back Bay Association said that she agreed with the need to preserve Boston?s historic character, but that over-preservation was ?strangling? the economic life of the city.

!!Irony alert!! Disingenuous, self centered, and short sighted.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Awesome. It still pisses me off to no end that the Back Bay residents threw a shit fit over that garage on Newbury St but were silent on this project.



!!Irony alert!! Disingenuous, self centered, and short sighted.

4=6 Newbury caused a stink for two reasons and two reason only: height, and because it was precious Newbury Street. i think most of the NIMBYist folks in the neighborhood don't really care about the south half of Boylston Street. But if enough people make noise, they will start to notice.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Meg Mainzer-Cohen of the Back Bay Association said that she agreed with the need to preserve Boston?s historic character, but that over-preservation was ?strangling? the economic life of the city.
I agree with you Van, this statement just peeves me. Never had NIMBYism been so clear than this quote. I bet if it was any project near her site, she will strongly oppose it and use the preservation card beyond reasons.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Additional demand for the developer: stop being self congratulatory about the Four Seasons. Yes, it was better than what was there before, but the bloom is off the rose. It doesn't look good anymore. The state of the art has passed it by. So don't build a "Four Seasons 2010" on this corner. You are 30 years late.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Meg Mainzer-Cohen of the Back Bay Association said that she agreed with the need to preserve Boston?s historic character, but that over-preservation was ?strangling? the economic life of the city. ?The first block of Boylston has failed to thrive,? said Mainzer-Cohen. ?I am very much hoping this new project will turn the corner for the block.?
Moron, this is the fourth block of Boylsont street. No doubt the Back Bay Association made a deal with the BRA you get what you want on Newbury St if you don't oppose us on Boylston. Having attended the City Hall meeting on The Gaiety theater I would not be surprised if this were true.

Isn't the WEIU the last remaining residential town house on what was once a major residential street. It's hard to believe Menino is called the preservationist mayor. He even has received awards in Washington for his preservation' work.

We need to remember that Druker has owns the buildings and has the right to maximize his profit but he still can do this by saving the facades and building higher. The addition of a large office building would be a great addition to this area. Losing something that makes Boston special would be tragic. We don't stand a chance of succeeding if we try to look like LA or Dallas or any other modern city. Can Pelli find Boston on a map?


Others who spoke in favor of the building included a representative from the nearby Four Season Hotel, which has a financial stake in seeing the block revitalized.
and only a financial stake not a civic stake. He'll be at some other Four Season in a few years. To hell with Boston this is all about money.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I agree with you Van, this statement just peeves me. Never had NIMBYism been so clear than this quote. I bet if it was any project near her site, she will strongly oppose it and use the preservation card beyond reasons.

In defense of Meg, I don't think you can lay the charge of Nimbyism at her feet. She consistently speaks out against overly stringent zoning and protection, including Newbury Street's particularly strict demands. The Back Bay Association is very different than the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I wonder if you folks are confusing NABB with the BBA. I think the Back Bay Association would be more likely to relax Newbury zoning than side with the protectionists at NABB.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

^^ Perhaps, but Meg's own position seems poorly thought-out. At the end of the meeting (after, I believe, the reporter had left), she claimed that the Arlington Building and its neighbors were "no good" and "needed" to be developed.

I then rose and asked her why this was -- could it be because Uncle Druker has spent years accumulating these parcels and has no interest in investing them but every interest in putting together a case so the city allows him to raze the buildings? (As his own "corporate historian" noted, the plans are 3 years in the works.) Maybe 10 years of maintenance instead of neglect would've benefited the corner? She nodded in a way that made me think she finally understood the game and was sympathetic to my argument. Too bad she hadn't thought these things out before she helped Unkie Druker get to the brink of demolition.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Back Bay Association = businesses
Neighborhood Association of Back Bay = residents

Sometimes they agree, sometimes they don't. But they never speak for each other.

Moron, this is the fourth block of Boylston street

I'm not going to hold that statement against her. It is the first block of Boylston Street within the Back Bay, which is the (business) district her organization represents.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Back Bay Association = businesses
Neighborhood Association of Back Bay = residents

Sometimes they agree, sometimes they don't. But they never speak for each other.



I'm not going to hold that statement against her. It is the first block of Boylston Street within the Back Bay, which is the (business) district her organization represents.

Yeah, it's pretty common for people in the Back Bay to call it that, especially because the parallel block of Newbury is called the first block of Newbury.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Pelli spoke in person at the first public meeting back in March.

Druker also said that Pelli walked the site with him. That may be true, but if Pelli himself had anything to do with the design of this proposal (with the exception of paying the salaries of those who did) I'd be very surprised.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Originally this project was rumored to be Frank Gehry. Perhaps he walked away from it jut like Renzo Piano did from Trans National Place.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Who's turning up for this tonight?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I've been in contact with someone from the "Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay" (the one comprised of local residents) regarding their thoughts on this project. In summary, it was conveyed that several association members unsuccessfully sought landmark status for the Shreve building. The association supported landmark designation. That was over a year ago and it would be possible to sign a petition to reopen the issue. Lanmarks commission would be looking for additional information regarding the criteria the BLC uses to designate a building a landmark at this juncture.

I believe NABB member(s) will be at the meeting tonight.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I'll be there.

Does anyone know what exactly the purpose of this meeting is?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

No, I'm not sure. I'm speculating its whether they should impose a demolition delay.
 

Back
Top