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

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

commuter guy said:
The Landmarks Commission has scheduled a hearing for 5:30pm on November 10th at City Hall, Room 900. The purpose of the hearing is to determine whether the Shreve building is to be granted landmark status.
Click to expand...

FYI - Also, if you attend please note that you must enter City Hall via the Congress Street entrance after 5:30 p.m.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I must ask, one of the major stipulations for landmark status is significance beyond Boston. What precisely makes this truly remarkable beyond Boston? From what I've seen every washed up mill town in the state has something at least this decent. I can't imagine any reputable architect thinking this is some kind of regional treasure; the ones I've talked to sure don't think it is.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

^ Does this stipulation mean we would knock down Beacon Hill because Federal-era Greek Revival townhouses are also common in Philadelphia and New York?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Of course not, but that's not the question I'm asking there skippy. It's a serious question, if you people really want to save this building and you're going to argue that its merits go beyond Boston, then you need a real reason, not a smartass one liner.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

You refuse to address my larger point questioning your reasoning. If all historic preservation hinged on the uniqueness of a building the world over, we'd be pulling down chunks of Boston left and right.

That said, where is this provision you're quoting? Even if it exists, I doubt that landmarking per se is the only means of saving the building.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

kmp1284 said:
I can't imagine any reputable architect thinking this is some kind of regional treasure; the ones I've talked to sure don't think it is.
Click to expand...

Do any of them have offices in New Haven?

czsz said:
That said, where is this provision you're quoting? Even if it exists, I doubt that landmarking per se is the only means of saving the building.
Click to expand...

The language from the Commission's initial decision in 2006 indicated that, "(T)hey would reconsider a petition should new information that elevates the building?s significance above the local level be discovered.?

And, to your point czsz, Druker could invest some money in restoring and repurposing this set of buildings. But what profit is there in that?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

building?s significance above the local level


And that is?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

How about this: the proposed replacement sucks so bad that it makes the current building look like the Paris Opera House.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

kmp1284 said:
building?s significance above the local level


And that is?
Click to expand...

This is a completely arbitrary standard conjured up by the BLC. The actual statute requires no such criteria be met in order to qualify for landmark status. In its definitions, a landmark is defined as a building, addition, etc., that possesses historical, architectural or aesthetic importance on a city, state or national level. It then goes on to describe these criteria further in subsequent chapters. IMO, the Arlington Bldg. pretty clearly meets the criteria.

I don't have a copy handy, but I'll post it here soon when I get a chance.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

kmp1284 said:
I must ask, one of the major stipulations for landmark status is significance beyond Boston. What precisely makes this truly remarkable beyond Boston? From what I've seen every washed up mill town in the state has something at least this decent. I can't imagine any reputable architect thinking this is some kind of regional treasure; the ones I've talked to sure don't think it is.
Click to expand...

Who here who actually live(s|d) within sight of that building actually gives a f*ck what a "reputable architect" thinks on this point?! this is a part of the social fabric that we're talking about.

as a disreputable former resident of beacon hill i'd like to take the discussion down a notch. the building doesn't have to be high art for it to be very significantly valuable to the community.

i'm all in favor of the property holder's right to do anything responsible he wants with his building, but don't ask me to hand him permission to knock it down. i would be 100% on the side of the public opinion that this building is an asset to the people of boston -- if the moral weight of that makes him sweat more to lift the sledgehammer, so be it.

druker does this and he's off my christmas card list, permanently.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Let me chime in here with my two-cents' worth of profundity: With what appears to be a unique blend of beaux arts and art deco, this IS A VERY ATTRACTIVE BUILDING that anchors it's corner very well, and on those grounds alone, it is worth keeping.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Somewhere back in this thread, I posted about Pelli's new building for Vornado at the NW corner of Connecticut and K Streets in Washington DC. Highly visible corner.

The developers demolished two office buildings, very ordinary facades, to clear the site. And stopped. The site is now gravel-topped and fenced-off, a la a certain lot where a theater worth saving once stood in Boston.

This past Friday, there was a blurb in the Washington Post that the developers were asking permission of the DC government to build and operate a surface parking lot on the site. Admitted they can't get financing for the building, they don't have a lead tenant(s) in sight, etc.

I very much doubt Druker can get financing for his project either at this point, and if SCL were to be demolished, odds are that it would be replaced by a parking lot.
 
Last edited:
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

stellarfun said:
Somewhere back in this thread, I posted about Pelli's new building for Vornado at the NW corner of Connecticut and K Streets in Washington DC. Highly visible corner.

The developers demolished two office buildings, very ordinary facades, to clear the site. And stopped. The site is now gravel-topped and fenced-off, a la a certain lot where a theater worth saving once stood in Boston.

This past Friday, there was a blurb in the Washington Post that the developers were asking permission of the DC government to build and operate a surface parking lot on the site. Admitted they can't get financing for the building, they don't have a lead tenant(s) in sight, etc.

I very much Druker can get financing for his project either at this point, and if SCL were to be demolished, odds are that it would be replaced by a parking lot.
Click to expand...

Or Hartford in the early 90s. The The Aetna Mutual Life Insurance Building, the city's first highrise, was demolished for a Pelli-designed skyscraper. The financing never came and the site has been a surface parking lot for almost twenty years.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Not sure if this was posted already or if it has any consequence for us, but it doesn't seem good:

350 Boylston Street to Bring New Retail/Office Building to the Back Bay

In other action taken during today?s meeting, the BRA Board also granted final approval for the $120 million project at 350 Boylston Street in the Back Bay. The project includes a mixed-use office and retail project at the southwest corner of Arlington and Boylston Streets, diagonally across from Boston?s beloved Public Garden. This corner is also shared with the historically significant Arlington Street Church to the north and the Heritage on the Garden, a residential, office and retail complex to the east. With such prestigious neighbors, the BRA worked hard to ensure that the design of 350 Boylston would reinforce the texture and scale of Boston?s Back Bay as a contemporary building at this prominent corner.

The project consists of a newly constructed, nine-story building with approximately 15,000 square feet of ground floor retail and restaurant space, and eight floors of first-class office space. Additionally, the project includes an approximately 6,000 square foot, below-grade fitness center and spa for use by the building?s office tenants.

The development team includes The Druker Company, as developer; Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects and CBT Architects, as the architectural team; Epsilon Associates Inc., as the permitting consultants; Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, as the transportation consultants; and Goulston & Storrs, as the legal counsel.

The project is still subject to further design review with the BRA before permits can be issued. The project will provide approximately 300 construction jobs.

From the BRA press release area:

http://www.cityofboston.gov/bra/press/PressDisplay.asp?pressID=443
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Tweeter is closing all of its stores, which will cause another retail vacancy here soon.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

A reminder (emailed to me) from Shirley Kressel:

The Boston Landmarks Commission scheduled the hearing to review the new Shreve's Petition for landmark status on Monday November 10th at 5:30pm in Room 900 at City Hall.

If you have questions, please contact Diana C. Eckstein.

Info also posted here.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Lest we forget, there's a meeting TONIGHT @ 5:30.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I cannot make it - I can't remember the last time I got out of the office before 7...

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

The SLC portion of the discussion begins @ 7pm. Drinks after. Come one, come all!
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Beton Brut said:
The SLC portion of the discussion begins @ 7pm. Drinks after. Come one, come all!
Click to expand...


This Fort Point Channel lecture might be more interesting if this chick would look up from her notes once in a while.

45 minutes until the Shreve's fate is decided. I can't see this ending well. Maybe I should have gone to PruPAC instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top