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

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

^^ I can't speak for our Mods, but unless you can prove that you're being facetious or that you're criminally insane, I expect there'll be calls for your expulsion.

Is there anyone into having a skull-session tonight, as posted above? Anyone?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

jass said:
Would I be expelled from the forum if I went to the meeting and suggested the building should be demolished and replaced by some lovely open space?
Click to expand...

^Quite likely. But on the bright side, you would be given an honorary board member post in the Alliance of Boston Neighborhoods.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

The "Gang of Two" (Shirley and I) is meeting now. Anyone else?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

how long will you be there?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

We broke up around 6:15. Shirley had another meeting and I had to get home. Sorry if you missed us. We'll both be at the BRA tomorrow.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

After Shirley and I went our separate ways, I walked down Boylston to take yet another look at these buildings. I went into Mohr & McPherson (former home of the WEIU), and chatted up the ladies at the counter about the impending destruction of the block. They are, of course, appalled. The revealed that they'll be occupying the space through Christmas.

I plan on being at City Hall early tomorrow (say 1:45 by the 9th floor elevators).
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I hope to make the BRA meeting. I have work obligations outside of Boston tomorrow but as soon as I wrap up I plan to head into Boston for the meeting.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

At the meeting. Shirley, ShakeShack, and myself. Maybe others. Shreve's is #10 on the agenda, so come late if you can.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Good thing I took a personal day to have my day in kangaroo court. I was not allowed to speak, nor was there any discussion. Gavel up, gavel down.

I did try to voice my opposition and was told that this was not a public hearing (?). Clarence Jones, the Chair, did invite me to voice my opposition to board members after the meeting. So I'm still here.
 
Last edited:
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

What, exactly did the panel vote to approve? Does this mean the project is approved as is currently constituted?

Either way, thanks for making an effort. The fight's not over yet.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

You certainly ruined Jeep's nap when you spoke.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

In brief, the BRA approved an over all concept to be sent on to the Board of Appeals for a hearing on the zoning relief required to build the concept. The approval is conditioned on "further BRA design review."
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Was that you in the gray suit, Toby? Nice hat! Thanks for the explanation.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Ronald Druker is a greasy haired, leathery faced greedy asshole of the first order.

Disappointed by the "meeting," I tracked down Druker in the hallway and tried to get him to answer a few questions. He refused, accused me of being "against him," insulted the newspaper, deferred to the Landmarks commission ruling and walked off without answering a single question.

What the hell is this guys' problem? to rich, power hungry douchebags always get touchy when their power is challenged in the slightest? I've only ever written straight news stories about this.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Insulted what newspaper?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Beton Brut said:
Was that you in the gray suit, Toby? Nice hat! Thanks for the explanation.
Click to expand...


L1090138.jpg


I am getting grey, aren't I.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Sorry I couldn't stick around till after the meeting. They should have done Parcel 24 last.

We should insist that Druker has financing and a tenant lined up before demolition. Hopefully Menino will be long gone by then and Druker would have to work hard to get a new mayor in his back pocket.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Shirley and I stuck around to the bitter end. I spoke to a few of the BRA board members who didn't scurry out of the meeting room at the moment the gavel hit the table-top. I asked if they were interested in further discussing the efficacy of Druker's proposal. They asked if I'd attended any of the public comment meetings, and I told them I'd been at every meeting since June, at both the BPL and City Hall. They suggested that I speak with Jay Rourke, the BRA's point-person on the project. I told them that with all due respect, Mr. Rourke was a horse's ass, in that he conducted himself in a patently unprofessional manner a two of the meetings that I attended, was dismissive of the opinions (and participation) of members of the community (in particular, our own itchy), and behaved as a de facto shill for Ron Druker. One of the members took some umbrage at my questioning the integrity of a BRA staffer. Suffice it to say, we agreed to disagree.

I don't think this is over. The media is key. As you can see from Shake's post above, he's pissed. I look forward to some caustic editorializing.

I look at the process around this project, and it stinks like last weeks codfish. The failure to landmark these buildings by the folks who are entrusted with protecting them is shady. I can't prove collusion -- can anyone? As briv said many pages above: "If this building meets the wrecking ball the preservationist movement in this city is a worthless joke." And consider, if Druker gets his way, what we're going to end up with -- a building that is completely devoid of any architectural merit. Shouldn't "quality control" be part of the BRA's charge, as custodians of our built environment?

So if we lose these buildings, let this be our Alamo. Let the process, and its sad outcome be the loose brick that brings down the Great Wall of Mumbles. For those of you who care about architecture, urbanism, and historic preservation, shut off your computer and go to meetings, wherever you live. If you don't like the game, change it!

And now a word from our sponsor:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMBZDwf9dok&feature=related
 
Last edited:
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Hey y'all,

I am truly sorry for dropping off the radar and not being around to fight this as much as I had hoped. I now live in New York, and the last few months have made for busy times for business consultants. I have stayed away from ArchBoston and this horrid, regrettable, disastrous project for the last 2 months because it is simply too frustrating. I can't sit here in New York, powerless to come to every goddamn BRA meeting at 6:00 on a Wednesday (why can't these people do this when those of us who aren't paid with taxpayer dollars don't have to work?), and not go out of my mind.

I'll try to get back up to speed and see if there's any way I can come to the next meeting, but I have to be at a client site in Michigan next week and honestly don't know when I'll have time to get to Boston.

I'm sorry to say this, but I'd like to get one thing off my chest: It's difficult not to say "to hell with Boston" after trying to battle this inane, worthless project. Even after the destruction of the West End, the Central Artery and the Mass Pike and the clear-as-day lessons that they've given us, Boston continues to destroy its greatest assets and, despite being one of the world's great concentrations of intelligence, is run by a half-wit mayor and his crony small-time business and developer clowns. If there's one thing the Bush era has taught us, it's that incompetent, short-sighted, crony governance is a bad thing. Yet the country's smartest city can't apply this lesson to itself.

In many ways, and this case is a prime example, there are few cities in Boston's class with so little regard for their own integrity or for what makes them desirable places to live in. Why tear down the Arlington Building, or the Dainty Dot or the MDC building, for the sake of third-rate buildings suitable for the Kansas City burbs when we're facing severe recession and the city is littered with empty/parking lots? Whereas I once liked to think that I'd like to return to my home city, I have less and less desire to do that if that city has so little respect for itself and no ability to see beyond crooked, small-time developers ready to destroy the city's treasures for their suburban garbitecture. What's especially absurd is that the Arlington Building could be destroyed at the one time in the last 100 years when it is least likely that a spec office building planned as the city's most expensive and with no lead tenant will actually be built. There is over 20 million sq. feet of office space either approved or under construction in Boston. That's an absurd glut when you're on the verge of a massive global recession that will last for years. Moreover, when it comes to financing, the credit markets are FROZEN. Projects in New York -- and even Dubai, for crying out loud -- are falling through left and right. You're a fool if you think a "super-luxury" spec office building in office top-heavy Boston will get financing if it has no lead tenant. This building will not be built. Instead, if the Arlington Building gets the wrecking ball, we'll get a sandpit across from the Public Garden for years. I have no doubt about this.

Yet, thanks to Menino and his circle, Boston refuses to think like a big city when it could easily grow into a beautiful, cosmopolitan place with a big-city feel. New York, for all our hatred for the Yankees, is run by an intelligent businessman from Medford. It's a city that often tries, at least at the mayoral level, to push its (big-time) developers to build ambitious, urban buildings on empty lots and vigorously (though somewhat inconsistently) preserve its history. It doesn't have a downtown dominated by parking lots, highways, median strips and trainyards, because it builds on that crap. I'll take that over the corrupt, unthinking Mumbles Empire.

Still, I don't want to give up on either the Arlington Building or Boston just yet. I'll try to find a way to squeeze some time to help with any ongoing efforts to save the Arlington Building. And many, many thanks to everyone who's been more dedicated than I.

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

itchy said:
Boston continues to destroy its greatest assets ....

In many ways, and this case is a prime example, there are few cities in Boston's class with so little regard for their own integrity or for what makes them desirable places to live in. Why tear down the Arlington Building, or the Dainty Dot or the MDC building, for the sake of third-rate buildings suitable for the Kansas City burbs .....
Click to expand...

^^^Well put itchy

It is frustrating to see the lack of planning direction at the BRA. The Shreve proposal is the most significant potential loss due to its important location, the desirable aesthetics of existing buildings and the consolidation of multiple parcels to be replaced by a bland monolithic building. The BRA and Menino have failed on the Dainty Dot as well with their last minute so called "compromise" - coupling an insignificant reduction of height off the proposed building with the destruction of the Dainty Dot. They failed with the MDC building as well, Suffolk Univ. had proposed to renovate the existing building, Suffolk changes the proposed use now gets the green light to demolish. Based upon the renderings, the unimaginative replacement here will be less of a building than the existing building even its severly neglected state. The BRA/Menino planning failures are painfully obvious in the combat zone whereby they allowed the destruction of multiple buildings, such as the Gaiety Theater, and the Naked Eye et al. merely because the USES of the buildings were not favored at City Hall. Now were left with the largest kitty litter box in Boston on Washington Street.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top