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

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

hmm, presentations given. Tenor of the questions from the commissioners not encouraging. Really pushing back against the petitioners.

Not feeling good.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

^thanks for keeping us updated. I've got my fingers crossed up here... wish I could do more.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Despite a stirring presentation by Diana Eckstein and Tony Fusco (Boston Art Deco Society) the Landmarks Commission voted 5-2 for bulldozers and "cast limestone."

I wonder how the commissioners will feel when Druker's financing falls through and the site is a parking lot...
 
Last edited:
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

It was a strong presentation. I was feeling hopeful until Tsipis started in with his questioning. I've never been to one of these hearings before - kind of a rude awakening. The hand-wringing of the commissioners over how they couldn't in good conscience vote for taking up the petition based on the landmark criteria was completely hollow. One of them even said it: no one wants to see this building torn down and this new yawner of a building take its place. They had the power to stop it, and instead they failed the city. There was easily enough in that presentation to recommend the SC&L for landmark status. And even if the commissioners didn't think that was the case, but still wanted to save the building from the bulldozer, they would have had plenty of cover.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Unfortunately, despite a very impressive presentation by the those seeking a landmark designation, the end result was not favorable. Diana Eckstein and Tony Fusco (Boston Art Deco Society) did a fantastic job. Tony Fusco made a compelling argument that the building was very unique example of a hybrid between Art Deco and Beaux Arts. He stated that the building was an early conservative restrained form of Art Deco. When the building was altered Shreve wanted something new and modern (Art Deco) but yet conservative and restrained fitting for their image. The result was the hybrid of Beaux Arts and Art Deco styling. He stated that this was the only significant building of this particular hybrid style remaining in the Back Bay. The only other comparative building of this hybrid style in the area is 75 Federal St. downtown.

The Landmarks Commission restricted but did not shut off public comment. The Commission asked for a show of hands from the audience to gauge the position of those attendance. The room was full and probably 90% raised hands in support of the landmark petition. A former Landmarks Commission member was allowed to speak (I don't recall her name) and she urged support of the petition stating she thought very significant new information was provided since the last petition was considered.

Although members of the Landmark Commission voted to deny the petition, it was stated by members of the Commission that it was obvious that the Druker's proposal was overwhelmingly viewed unfavorably and that the proposed new construction was a downgrade from the existing building. Commission members explained their limited authority imposed by statute. It was also mentioned by some member(s) that that the architect was not particularly notable and/or building was not significant beyond the local level.

Meeting ended and the bad result was partially mitigated when Briv, Beton Brut, Boston Needs a Shake Shack, Back Bay locals (Diana and Margaret) and myself swiftly retreated to a nearby watering hole.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

It was also mentioned by some member(s) that that the architect was not particularly notable and/or building was not significant beyond the local level.
Click to expand...

For a minute I thought you were talking about the replacement. Now that might not be a bad standard...
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

commuter guy said:
Meeting ended and the bad result was partially mitigated when Briv, Beton Brut, Boston Needs a Shake Shack, Back Bay locals (Diana and Margaret) and myself swiftly retreated to a nearby watering hole.
Click to expand...

I should have stuck around! Next time, definitely.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

You know, the Mayor appoints the board members, and if they cross him, he throws them off (and otherwise punishes them professionally). They knuckle under, excusing it by saying they have to stay on the board to be there for the really important decisions. I do know one guy on one of these stacked and intimidated boards who refused to betray his principles (and the plan & zoning); he voted against, and he was kicked off -- and he was a business rep.

Let's try to keep the building alive, somehow (as we did with Fenway Park until a smarter owner came along), and try for a smarter Mayor next term, someone worthy of this city. How do we do that??

Do any of you know Druker well enough to talk some sense into him? Or Menino? Or Menino's would-be challengers?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Another save: the Northern Avenue bridge, which Menino was determined to tear down a few years ago. Community residents managed to save it long enough for it to become useful to the VIPs, and now somehow they've managed to scrounge up a few tens of millions of dollars to restore it.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

according to linkedin i'm:

1 person from Reuben Kantor, Chief of Staff, Boston City Councilor Mike Ross
1 person Douglas Banks, Editor of Mass High Tech (not perfect, but may archboston.org as a tie-in?)

anyone who knows boston politics better than me think mr. kantor could have influence here?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Question: Is Druker's sister on that committee?

Is there value in asking SCL neighbors to sign a petition?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I don't love the SCL building; it would be better somewhere else. This spot ought to have something stronger. But Drukerama is a bowl of warm spit. Pity so many sycophants are willing to add their drool to the pool. But Diana and all of you are nice to put up a good fight.

I'll miss the Chick's Union. At least the doorway and interior. I guess it is too short for the space it occupies.

Time for another glass of champers, I guess. Maybe play a little guitar.
 
Last edited:
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

nm88 said:
Question: Is Druker's sister on that committee?
Click to expand...

Shirley Kressel just asked the same question (privately, via email).

Does anyone know? Is there a mechanism to research this?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Beton Brut said:
Shirley Kressel just asked the same question (privately, via email).

Does anyone know? Is there a mechanism to research this?
Click to expand...


No. His daughter is on the Boston Preservation Alliance, which originally petitioned on behalf of Shreve's landmarks status. There is no Druker relative on the Landmarks Commission.

I wonder how his daughter feels about his Super-Villainesque wanton destruction of historic buildings in favor of giant boxes of shit.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Well then, someone should ask her. Does anyone know her phone number or e-mail or street address?
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

^ Good idea, Ron. That just might have a powerful effect.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Her name is Kim Stockwell.
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

Shreve building fight heads toward court
By Greg Turner
Friday, November 21, 2008


Diana Eckstein figures if the Boston Landmarks Commission can?t see the architectural value of the former Shreve, Crump & Low building in Boston, then an ?actual judge? just might.

The lawyer will appeal to Suffolk Superior Court to keep alive an effort to save the 104-year-old, art deco-style edifice overlooking the Public Garden.

Hub developer Ronald Druker won approval in October from the Boston Redevelopment Authority for his $120 million plan to demolish 330 Boylston St. and replace it with an office-and-retail building.

But last month, a group led by Eckstein petitioned the city to give the building ?landmark? status. A similar effort two years ago failed.

This time the panel voted, 5-2, not to accept the petition, nipping a second review in the bud.

?The decision wasn?t for the city, it wasn?t with the people in mind, it wasn?t with the historical or architectural significance of the building in mind,? said Eckstein. ?It was politically motivated.?

Eckstein, noting Mayor Thomas M. Menino?s support for Druker?s development, said she?d have a ?better chance of winning? in court.

The Druker Co. issued a statement saying it will continue with the planning stage of its project. ?We are confident that the (Landmarks Commission decision) will be upheld,? it said.

Bryan Glascock, director of the city?s Environment Department, said the Landmarks Commission did extensive research to determine the building?s value.

?A lot of the issues the petitioners put forward really didn?t pan out,? he said. ?It wasn?t a unanimous decision (this time) but a majority felt the building was not significant beyond the local level.?


[URL="http://www.bostonherald.com/]Link[/URL]
 
Re: Shreve, Crump & Low bldng may be replaced w/ new develop

I feel as though we are stalking this woman...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top