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

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

In the past ten years the Back Bay has become equally (if not more) desirable to the Financial District for blue-chip, Class-A tenants. And there's a huge disparity in supply.

So Class-A office space in the Back Bay is pure gold - if you can get it permitted and built. This is why BP was pushing 888 Boylston up as tall as it could go, and why Druker is salivating over this stump of his.

The problem with office is that you need a fat floor plate to make it desirable. A nice slender residential/hotel building is fine - but for office, you want the flexibility of a fat floorplan.

So we can expect fat stumps here - and anywhere else in the Back Bay for that matter.

All that being said, I would love, love, love Van's slender residential tower for this site. It's a beautiful, perfect solution for the site. Too bad luxury condos aren't selling anymore and Druker doesn't do high-end rentals.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

The problem with office is that you need a fat floor plate to make it desirable. A nice slender residential/hotel building is fine - but for office, you want the flexibility of a fat floorplan.
Click to expand...

Why? I know this true, in the sense that it what businesses are looking for, but is true because it is trendy or because it really makes a difference? Does a fat floor plan really affect how well a business is run?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I will defer to the commercial brokers on this one, but decent size tenants prefer to be on fewer large floors rather than many small ones. You utilize your employees better, need less office machinery, fim culture is better, etc.
Plus large equals flexible. You can subdivide large for small tenants if you have to. You can't upsize small floor plates for large tenants.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

statler said:
Why? I know this true, in the sense that it what businesses are looking for, but is true because it is trendy or because it really makes a difference? Does a fat floor plan really affect how well a business is run?
Click to expand...

You can fit a lot of employees on the same floor, have them in constant contact with each other and generally work as one large, cohesive unit. It also allows you to chop up the space as you see fit with cubicles, partitions, temporary walls, etc.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

So we are screwed.
We'll never see anything on the scale of Liberty Sq again. It all Seaport or bust from here on out.
Great.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Look on the bright side, stat. I'll let you know when I find it. Large floor plates is why there's a lot of interest in warehouse loft office space, those are just wide, open, totally flexible spaces. And, just because the interior requires large, uninterrupted space, doesn't mean the facade can't be to a finer scale.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I suppose that is a good point. Old warehouses had large footprints and warehouse districts can be pretty cool. Hmmm...

Drucker is still a jackass.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

A lot of non-clinical departments belonging to LMA institutions are now located in repurposed warehouses in the Fenway area (north side of Brookline Ave).

statler said:
Drucker is still a jackass.
Click to expand...

I prefer the sobriquet douche-nozzle.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Seaport Center is an old brick warehouse building with gigantic floor plates. It's the red brick building on D Street that Menino gave $3-4million of our tax money to billionaire Robert Beal, so that JP Morgan would move there.

"Hey you gotta have leadership in the Seaport District" he said at the time, "that's why Vertex is gonna be doin' biotech at Fan Pier - gonna be a whole new city down there"

Wrong, wrong and wrong, but still amusing two years later.

But back on topic... a big floor plan is more desirable for office for all the reasons stated, but slender still works for residential and hotel uses.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

statler said:
So we are screwed.
We'll never see anything on the scale of Liberty Sq again. It all Seaport or bust from here on out.
Great.
Click to expand...

We still have the MassPike air rights!
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

It would really take very little sacrificing and/or compromising to make smaller footprints desirable again, and think of it: How much communication is not actually electronic anyway? Are people afraid of stairs and elevators?

You would think so with all of these new public school buildings of one story that stretch out for three quarters of a mile. They're impractical, wasteful, and absolutely ugly, yet we continue to build them.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

riffgo said:
It would really take very little sacrificing and/or compromising to make smaller footprints desirable again, and think of it: How much communication is not actually electronic anyway? Are people afraid of stairs and elevators?
Click to expand...

In a word, yes.

(Riffgo, I wonder. Could it be that the economics of our time have pushed us to larger organizations rather than small ones that used to fit neatly into 10 Post Office Square, the Liberty Square buildings, the low number Beacon St. buildings, etc? Is that why we get the Seaport District, Canary Wharf, La Defence and not Haussmann?)

Multiple floors seem to breed social balkanization, which hurts productivity. Multiple SMALL floors have not only that flaw, but are economically inefficient. Internal stairways (as distinguished from common stairways) which arguably might better interfloor circulation are expensive to build out, you have to pay rent on the "space", and you don't generate income off of it.

Sacrifice and compromise are not listed in the pro forma!
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

A new design for this proposal will be presented to the Boston Civic Design Commission tomorrow at 5:15 in the BRA Board Room, 9th floor, Boston City Hall. As I've posted in the event section, Pelli has left the project and Stern has replaced him as the project's architect. From what I hear, this latest design is even worse than the last one.

See event details here: http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=82495#post82495
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Stern, eh?
OK, I have no luck predicting winning Mega Millions numbers, so with that disclaimer, here are my predictions. Precast brick panels. Precast "limestone" lintels and trim. Precast finials on the corners of a precast balustrade. Massing? Think the New England Life Building (or whatever they call it now) in its most recent iteration, only precast!
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Any chance at all for a fa?ade preservation, as at Exchange Place?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I expected this revision. I discussed my revulsion at Druker's Pelli-penned design with a consulting engineer who's working on one of the "garage" projects (can't say which) and he mentioned that the proposal was being revised.

Sadly, I can't make this important meeting, but others need to be there. )I'm in the office til 6pm, and there's no chance I can cut out early.)

Take good notes, briv!
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I may attend the meeting but, but my understanding is that the demolition of the old building has been approved.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

joebos said:
I may attend the meeting but, but my understanding is that the demolition of the old building has been approved.
Click to expand...

Demolition has been approved , but, this being an election year, I think if enough people come out against this, and we do it loud enough, we can make a difference.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Neighbors seek say in $120M Back Bay project
Shreve?s design flap
By Thomas Grillo
Tuesday, September 1, 2009 - Updated 2h ago

bf931cbe9e_ShreveRendering_09012009.jpg


Preservationists and neighborhood activists are fuming after learning about design changes for the former Shreve Crump & Low building.

The Boston Preservation Alliance and some members of the Impact Advisory Group, a panel appointed by City Hall to advise the Boston Redevelopment Authority, say they have been left out of discussions about changes to the Druker Co.?s proposed $120 million building at Arlington and Boylston streets.

?What?s the harm in asking us our opinion?? said Mark Slater, an IAG member from Bay Village. ?The city formed the IAG to make sure the public?s voice was represented, only to abandon us at the end.?

But BRA Director John Palmieri said the IAG?s role is to consider mitigation of the development. ?The IAG was instrumental in helping to vet the project, but it?s the BRA?s responsibility for any design changes,? he said.

The nine-story project at 350 Boylston St. was approved last year pending design review. Tonight, the Boston Civic Design Commission will examine the latest proposal that now includes setbacks on the seventh, eighth, and ninth floors, a limestone exterior and bay windows have been replaced with decorative glass panels. The design commission will provide the BRA with its opinion of the revisions.

Ronald Druker, the developer, said he hired a new architect - Robert A. M. Stern - who made ?subtle? changes to the design in response to criticism of the architecture by the neighborhood.

?My family has been committed to this city for more than 100 years and we have a legacy of fine buildings,? Druker said.

But Ann Gleason, chairwoman of the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay and an IAG member, said she is disappointed that Druker failed to present the revisions to the group.

?I have always had respect for Ron,? she said. ?But it seems out of character for him not to inform the IAG about the new plan.?

http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...ject_shreves_design_flap/srvc=home&position=4
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

It's an improvement...I'll give it that much
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top