ext_340171 ([identity profile] emcicle.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] davis_square2015-06-23 12:09 pm
Entry tags:

Related to SS Building issues

I just noticed in the Boston Globe article about the structural issues of the Social Security building this morning that it states that Roche Brothers has pulled out of moving into that space. That's the first I've heard about it falling through, and I'll be disappointed if it's true.

[identity profile] keithn.livejournal.com 2015-06-23 09:33 pm (UTC)(link)
The ZBA shot down every proposal for that building except Roche Brothers because that's exactly what the city was trying to force the developer to put in there, whether economically viable or not. Roche Brothers fell through and now we're back to square one. Why it fell through, we'll probably never get a straight answer. I wish we had a local newspaper worth a damn in this city.

If the city wants to dictate exactly how the building is used they should make an offer for it and buy it... except then when things inevitability go south, they wouldn't be able to pass the blame.
Edited 2015-06-23 21:36 (UTC)

[identity profile] wintahill.livejournal.com 2015-06-24 03:31 pm (UTC)(link)
As much as I dislike how the Zoning board, the Ward 6 Alderman, and various "community groups" handled the previous proposals that were brought forward for new tenants in the Social Security Building I am not sure the city actually owning it would improve the situation. They do not have a very good track record either.

The city owns the old Homans building over by my house and it has sat vacant for many years. This past winter it was declared structurally unsound and half of Medford Street has been blocked off from traffic every since. I have not seen any actual construction happening to shore it up and make it safer, all of the construction happening around it is for the GLX. The city seems pretty content just to ignore it, I guess they can't sue or fine themselves for being bad landlords though.

[identity profile] keithn.livejournal.com 2015-06-24 10:09 pm (UTC)(link)
That's pretty much my point. Sorry for not being clearer.

The city has basically given itself full authority over that building without any of the responsibility. My point is that it is a charade. I don't think the city should actually buy it, my point is that they should get out of the dictating business because it is going very poorly, as expected.

What the city should actually do is approve any reasonable proposal the owner puts forward for that building and let the market dictate what happens. We could have a restaurant and gym there already, but instead, partly due to the city's meddling, we have a crumbling ruin.

The city also needs to remove its stupid parking requirements for Davis Square businesses. People take the T to Davis Square. The parking requirements only serve to force owners to apply for a variance, which is the tool the ZBA uses to dictate what goes into a space or not. They don't give a crap about parking. It's just dirty politics.
Edited 2015-06-24 22:12 (UTC)