Case Studies: Weaving Complexity

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

g

vin

W ea

A

se

Ca

y

ud

St

in

e

th

pl ex

m

Co

ro l

e

of

:

ity

e

th

ite

ar ch

ct

in

m

co

1

pl

ex

de

ve

m en

lo p

tp

ro jec

ts

1

2

:

ity

In tro du ct io 2. n 1 H ist o 2.

2 B ry os of t h to 2. n’s e S 3 T he C ou Ar rea th E tB t lo ive nd ck Ec on om y

t

ex

pl

m

Co ra c

Ab st

g

W ea vin

Pr oc es s

5 C on clu

n

sio

4

6 7

3.

3.

by

5

3.

3

3.

4

2

3.

3.

1

3.

:L

or en

G oo

dk ni gh t

|J

as on

Hi

c

ke

y

Ho m e Th Inc e .

M a Th y e or T B h Th RA om e as BR M Th A en e in De o Th ve l e Ar ope Th ch r-N it e e Ar ect w tis - Ic At ts on lan tic

3 P lay er s

ANALYSIS

CONTENT

3

5

1

1 Abstract

Learning Objective: What unique role can architects play in orchestrating complex development projects?

The quality of development projects is often compromised by economic concerns and excessive pressures to reach a middle ground, which can result in a watered down version of the design. An innovative hybrid typology is possible when these pressures are leveraged to activate a wider sphere of stakeholders and opportunities are found to enhance the project through their involvement.

The viability of artist housing is contingent on the financial success of the developer.

This is an extremely difficult typology for a developer and therefore, a strong facilitating entity is necessary to ensure that all parties are communicating their concerns and meeting their goals. This case study examines the ArtBlock, a development of artist live/work spaces and market rate housing, as a representative example to

illuminate the challenges and opportunities of this process.

The case study begins by examining the historical context of the neighborhood in Boston, MA in which the ArtBlock is sited, known as the South End. It then explores the specific needs of artists and their social and economic impact on both the community and city scales. Following this, the case study looks at the specific stakeholders in the ArtBlock project and the complexity each brings to the project. The specific details of the ArtBlock project and the role of the architect in this process is then examined in order to better understand the unique skill set of an architect and explore their contribution to a complex team.

It takes a unique set of skills to synthesize

the aspirations of the multiple constituents.

A developer is typically driven by economic goals. A client or user is driven by the desire to have a programmatically sound space in which they are comfortable – both physically and mentally. A building has a scope of influence beyond its own walls.

Neighbors are also affected by the aesthetics of a building. Property values can be affected as can the view from a neighboring structure and therefore neighbors and community members must also be viewed as stakeholders. It is necessary for a successful project to involve a mediating party to ensure a beneficial collaboration. This case study explores the suitability of the architect in such a role.

7

The ArtBlock The Corner of East Berkeley and Harrison streets in Boston’s South End. The Development was a joint venture between a private developer (New Atlantic) and the city of Boston (BRA).

The project was influenced by local artist and neighborhood communities.

9

2

2.1 History of the South End

The South End neighborhood in Boston, Massachusetts is known for its rich history and diversity. The neighborhood has become a hot spot for the creative class in Boston. Its streets are lined with beautiful brownstones and small shops and restaurants. Chain establishments are harder to come by and store owners often create a relationship with their customers.

It is an inward facing community with strong bonds among neighbors and yet the desire to be inclusive is well established. The neighborhood has a significant gay community and a variety of economic classes and races are represented in a typical cross section. The community has a number of affluent residents but unlike the Back Bay, one of Boston’s other affluent neighborhoods, located just north of the South End, it seeks to create a welcoming environment for visitors from all over the city.

The South End has a colorful history.

The original foot print of Boston saw the South End as a salt marsh area on either

side of the original neck of Boston on which Washington Street ran. During the nineteenth century, there was an influx of working class immigrants moving into the city center. This wave caused many of the wealthier Bostonians to move from the city into the suburbs. The move was aided by the extensive mass transit system in Boston allowing Bostonians to move further and further from the downtown area. This massive shift in the economic vitality from Boston proper into the suburbs caused overburdened budgets in the city center. To combat this loss of affluence, the decision was made to fill the salt marsh along Washington Street and create a neighborhood to attract the upper class, thus the creation of the South End. The streets in the South End were laid out in a regularized grid. Interspersed among the row houses were parks and squares to capture an old world charm. The row houses were designed specifically for the affluent, each being equipped with a servant entry and stairwell. The streets

are wide and lined with trees. Each row house had outdoor space in either the back or front of the row house, or more often, both. The front gardens created a buffer zone between the residences and the brick paved pedestrian walkways and were often separated from the pedestrian way further with an ornate cast iron fence. The neighborhood was made even more exclusive by a set minimum cost on the homes. The assurance of neighbors with similar wealth was thus attempted.

The establishment of the South End as an affluent neighborhood was never completed. Shortly after the South End was constructed, Back Bay, the neighborhood just to the north of the South End began the fill process. Because Back Bay is closer to the traditional center of wealth, Beacon Hill, the South End was passed over by wealthy residents who opted instead to move into Back Bay. Vacancies in the neighborhood were quickly taken over by multiple tenants who split the homes into smaller, often awkwardly shaped, affordable units. As the buildings were split and poorer residents

11

Map of Boston c.1842 Showing Boston prior to subsequent infill projects. The Future ArtBlock site is highlighted in red at the southern end of the “neck”.

Beacon Hill Financial District

0

.25

.5 Miles

N Downtown Crossing

Back Bay Theater District

Chinatown

Fenway/Kenmore

South Boston

Jamaica Plain

Roxbury

Dorchester

Composition of Boston’s “Creative Production Chain” 0

.25 Miles

N

reation reation

Production

Manufacturing

Distribution

9.0% 19.0%

55.8%

2.1%

21.7%

Industries

13

1.43%

Mulli ns

n St leto App

2.6% 22.6%

1.2%

-30.0%

en Warr

44.3%

Ave

Dw

igh tS

Trav eler

t

23.6%

Way

EB

erke

St

m ha alt W

ley S

t

St

fo ad Br

rd

St

t tS on

Ran

llin Ro

em Tr

$52,521

s

dolp

St

hS

t

t

$43,334

Alba ny S

$49,477

St

$68,169

n to Up

58,123 58,123

W Ne

47.8%

St

25.5%

on wt

4.5% 4.5%

28.2% aw Sh

nP

ark S

t

St Ply

Franklin Square

ne St

H

ri ar

n so

e Av

St

kli

2

on pt m

18

n to ing

oo

11

h as W

Br

21

Unio Blackstone Square

E

10 10

m

141.2%

e Av ut

E E

Ne

Ca St

St

on nt

on wt

E

Department of Employment Training, BRA/Research Analysis Co d or nc St

The South End The ArtBlock development is highlighted in red

moved in, the wealthy began to move out at an increasingly fast pace.

The South End was one of the cheapest places to live in Boston by 1900. Immigrants from a wide range of cultural backgrounds made the neighborhood their new home. Small businesses began to populate the lower levels of the row houses, animating the streetscape. There was an incredible amount of diversity within the South End; Eastern Europeans, Chinese, Greeks, Syrians, West Indians, Puerto Ricans, and others made their home in the South End. The various immigrant groups were internally segregated within the district with fluid territorial boundaries. There was constant expansion and contraction of the individual immigrant neighborhoods as various groups moved in and out. Despite the variety of cultural backgrounds and potential for conflict, the residents of the South End lived in relative harmony held together by the fact that all were pitifully poor.

The South End began to be character-

ized as a neighborhood of low rent. The immigrant populations that had lived so harmoniously together began to see a new wave of neighbors; prostitutes and drug traffickers began to move in. It was cut off from the rest of Boston by the Orange Line and as the original immigrant populations earned enough money with honest work, they moved out furthering the decline of the neighborhood into a slum. The 1950’s-1970’s saw many of the original populations either moving out or learning to avoid areas of the neighborhood that were particularly dangerous.

The 1950’s saw an interest in urban renewal projects. The South End was one of the neighborhoods eyed for an urban renewal project. Originally, a scheme similar to the West End redevelopment was on the books – razing the neighborhood and starting with a clean slate.

However, the resulting outrage at the West End redevelopment can be thanked for saving the South End. A number of rehabilitation tactics were adopted such as updating public amenities and tree

plantings. The cultural patchwork of the South End made a single blanket solution impossible.

During the mid 1960’s, the rehabilitation efforts began officially. The Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) initiated many infrastructure renewal programs such as updating the sewer system in the neighborhood. Following these improvements, a new wave of immigrants began to move into the South End – gays, lesbians, and artists. The neighborhood had extremely low rents, close proximity to the city, and social tolerance making it a welcoming place for this new wave.

This latest influx of residents started the redefinition of the South End. When artists move into a neighborhood, the creative class often follows close behind.

The South End saw this cycle begin.

Drawn in by the diversity of the neighborhood and the latest arts movement, wealthy residents began to move in and property values began to rise. This cycle runs the risk of chasing out the very com-

munities that raised the property values in the first place. Artists in the South End started becoming an endangered species, similar to the artists of the Fort Point area during the early 1990’s, as they were priced out of the very market they created.

15

N e w Y o r k , CA NY-NJ o-Oakland,

n g t o n , D C - MD - V A

M i a mi , F L

Baltimore, B a l t i mo MD r e , MD Atlanta, A t l a n GA t a , GA

Finance & Insurance

Miami, FL

P o r t l a n d , O R - WA

2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4

…… 1.60

…… 1.56

…… 1.45 …… 1.32

1.2 1.0 0.8

IL

Newark, N e w a rNJ k, NJ

Research Analysis Dallas, D a l l aTX s , TX

…… 1.26

Sa n J o s e , CA

San Jose, CA

C l e v e l a n d , OH

Cleveland, OH e -B e r na r di no , CA

ernardino, CA

P i tts bur g h, P A

Pittsburgh, PA

Ho u s t o n , T X

Houston, TX D e t r o i t , MI Detroit, MI

S t . Lo u i s , M O - I L

. Louis, MO-IL

Visual Artists

Musicians

Advertising

FL

Performing Artists

De nv e r , CO

Denver, CO

t . P e te r s bur g , Petersburg, FL

Designers

s City, MO-KS

0.0

Architects

n s a s C i t y , MO- KS

0.4 0.2

Authors

s s a u- Suf f o l k, NY au-Suffolk, NY

Many cities have realized the economic benefits associated with a dedication to the arts and the creative economy. The Boston Redevelopment Authority has defined the creative economy “as those activities which have their origin in individual creativity, skill and talent and which have a potential for wealth and job creation.”

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 17 Film, crafts, performing arts, photography, advertising, and sound recording are just some of the activities that fall into the category of the creative economy. In the US, industries such as film, video, and music recording generate nearly $450 billion in annual revenues.

29 Largest Metro Average = 1.34

l a d e l p h iPA-NJ a, P A-NJ delphia,

…… 1.12

…… 1.00

0.6

U.S. Average = 1.0

P h o e n AZ i x , AZ Phoenix,

Indepe Artis

Su Ser

Soun Mu

Motion Pi and Vi

Her

80% Boston’s Location Quotient for Select Creative Occupations

2.2 Boston’s Creative Economy

C h i c a g IL o, Chicago,

Advert

90%

Health Care & Social Assistance

Sa n Di e g o , CA

tland, OR-WA

Prof., Scientific & Tech. Services

o l i s - St . P a ul , MN

Educational Services

r a ng e Co unt y , CA

s-St. Paul, MN

San Diego, CA

Accommodation & Food Services

S e a t t l e , WA

B o s t o n , MA - N H

Admin., Support Serv.

Retail Trade

CREATIVE INDUSTRIES

Other Services

Seattle, WA

oston, MA-NH

Boston’s Specialization By Creative Industry Segments

Source: U.S. Census County Business Patterns; BRA/Research Analysis 100%

i s c o - Oa k l a n d , C A

on, DC-MD-VA

ge County, CA

Performin

s Ang e l e s , CA w Lo York, NY-NJ

Broadca

Massachusetts.

os Angeles, CA

Applie

Publishin Printin

Artistic Concentrations for the 29 Largest U.S. Metro Areas by Employment, 2000

…… 29 Largest Metros Average

Share of State Creative Economy Employment (2002)

70% 60% 50%

Heritage

40% 30%

Performing Arts

Advertising Applied Arts Publishing & Printing

Broadcasting

20%

Independent Arts

10% 0% -50%

Boston’s Share of State Employment = 17.2%

Sound & Music Support Services Film, Video & Photography

-25%

0%

Information 25%

50%

75%

Technology Percentage of Change, 1998–2002 Employment Range

om The Artistic Dividend Revisited, Ann Markusen et.all, March 2004

Creative Industries

= 0–999

= 1,000–3,999

Source: BRA/Research

100% 125% Tourism

Education= 4,000+ & Knowledge Creation

roduction Chain”

ston’s Specialization By Creative Sub-industries Promoters of Entertainment w/o facility

Dance Companies

425.4% growth Creative industries contribute to the Zoos & Botanical Gardens stributionsocial atmosphere and the economic vitality Industries of a city a variety of ways. They Musicalin Groups & Artists create jobs and income; performance adcasting arts attract other businesses such as Book Publishers 21.7% restaurants and shops.

Consumers spent 1.43% Direct Mail Advertising $10.2 billion ($2 billion more than they did Newspaper Publishers Architectural Services on spectator sports) on performing arts Agencies Radio Broadcasting Media Representatives in 1999 (data from the Bureau Art Dealers 44.3% and events 23.6% Libraries & Archives Publishers Museums of Economic Analysis).

By doing this, Interior Designers Independent Artists Bookstores & News Dealers

$43,334

-25%

28.2%

Boston’s share of State = 17.2%

$52,521 0%

25%

Cable & Program Distribution

50%

75%

Percentage of Change, 1998–2002

141.2%

100%

125%

Economic Impact of Boston’s Creative Economy (2002)

creative industries added $10.7 billion

BRA Data on Impact of Boston’s Creative Economy (top) Creative Industy’s Pivotal role in supporting Boston’s wider economy, (bottom) Direct financial contribution of Creative Industry to Boston’s Economy

CITY OF BOSTON

METRO AREA

$6.5 billion

$7.6 billion

Total Jobs

47,020 jobs

60,800 jobs

• Direct

29,720 jobs

-

17,300 jobs

31,080 jobs

$1.1 billion

$2.6 billion

$10.7 billion

$12.7 billion

Gross Regional Product

• Indirect Personal Income Output

- CREATIVE PLACES -

Source: BRA/Research; REMI Simulation

Creative industries added $10.7 B to RGP

TOLERANCE

17 Artistic Concentrations for the 29 Largest U.S. Metro Areas by Employment, 2000 Los Angeles, CA

Super Centers

s Ang e l e s , CA New Lo York, NY-NJ N e w Y o r k , CA NY-NJ San Francisco-Oakland, S a n Fr a n c i s c o - O a k l a n d , C A

Washington, DC-MD-VA

Wa s h i n g t o n , D C - M D - V A

Seattle, WA

S e a t t l e , WA

Boston, MA-NH

B o s t o n , MA - N H

Orange County, CA

Or a n g e C o u n t y , C A

Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN

Mi n n e a p o l i s - S t . P a u l , MN

San Diego, CA

Boston’s Location Quotient for Select Creative Occupations

Sa n Di e g o , CA

Miami, FL

2.0

Portland, OR-WA

1.8 1.6

M i a mi , F L

P o r t l a n d , O R - WA

Baltimore, B a l t i mo MD r e , MD Atlanta, A t l a n GA t a , GA Newark, N e w a rNJ k, NJ Dallas, D a l l aTX s , TX

0.6

IL

P h i l a d e l p h iPA-NJ a, P A-NJ Philadelphia,

FL

Sa n J o s e , CA

San Jose, CA

C l e v e l a n d , OH

Cleveland, OH

U.S. Average = 1.0

Ri v e r s i de -B e r na r di no , CA

Riverside-Bernardino, CA

P i tts bur g h, P A

BRA Data comparing Boston’s Creative Economy to other major urban centers

Pittsburgh, PA

Ho u s t o n , T X

Houston, TX D e t r o i t , MI Detroit, MI

S t . Lo u i s , M O - I L

St. Louis, MO-IL

0

0.5

1

Source: Adapted from The Artistic Dividend Revisited, Ann Markusen et.all, March 2004

29 Largest Metro Average = 1.34

Visual Artists

Musicians

De nv e r , CO

Denver, CO

Advertising

Authors

Ka n s a s C i t y , MO- KS

Kansas City, MO-KS

Performing Artists

0.0

Na s s a u- Suf f o l k, NY Nassau-Suffolk, NY

Laggers

…… 1.26 …… 1.12

…… 1.00

0.4 0.2

P h o e n AZ i x , AZ Phoenix,

T a mp a - S t . P e t e r s b u r g , Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL

…… 1.56

…… 1.32

1.2 1.0 0.8

C h i c a g IL o, Chicago,

…… 1.60 …… 1.45

Designers

Traditionalists

1.4

Architects

Niche Players

…… 29 Largest Metros Average

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

17

Beacon Hill Financial District

0

.25

.5 Miles

N Downtown Crossing

Back Bay Theater District

Chinatown

Mullin s Way

App

Fenway/Kenmore

t

nS leto

Dw

Ave ren War

Trav

t

EB

m ha alt W

erke

St

St nt

fo ad Br

to Up

mo Tre

igh tS

rd

ley

eler St

St

St

WF

ourth

South Boston

St

n

on ris ar

St

H

ark S

Alban

EB

erke

t

E

St

St

n

n wto

Unio

Ca

ley

pto m

Ne

erke

Ply

E

EB

e Av

nP

Roa d

Unio

t

tage

St

ut

St

n

m

e Av

hS

Fron

St

s

wto

aw Sh

llin Ro

Ne

an Ju

dolp

y St

St

W

n Sa

Ran

nto n St

Widett Cir

St

ley

d or nc

erke

St

Co

EB

Jamaica Plain

in

n

E

h as W

gto

St

Number of Studios

Roxbury

120

Dorchester

60 30 15 5

Status of Studio Lost At Risk Permanent New/Planned Unio

nP

ark S

nP

ark S

t

ley

St

0

(Left) Map of Artist Housing Locations and conditions in Boston, adapted from BRA data

(Right)BRA data on the employment impact of creative enterprise in the city Management of Companies

Construction

Manufacturing

Real Estate & Rental Leasing

Information

Wholesale Trade

Sports & Recreation

Utilites

Source: U.S. Census County Business Patterns; BRA/Research Analysis Health Care & Social Assistance

Finance & Insurance

Prof., Scientific & Tech. Services

Accommodation & Food Services

Educational Services

Admin., Support Serv.

CREATIVE INDUSTRIES

Retail Trade

Other Services

120,000

Transportation & Warehousing

Boston’s Creative Industry For., Fish, Hunt & Agr.

Jobs

19

EMPLOYMENT COMPARISION - BOSTON (2002)

100,000

80,000

60,000

40,000

20,000

they contribute to government revenues, not just themselves personally but also through the businesses which they attract and help support. Creative industries attract skilled and resourceful workers to an area and as artists are often employed by another business separate from their art, they bring their creativity to the job place.

The creative economy also encourages tourism. In 2001, the Travel Industry Association of America (TIAA) reported that 65% of American adult travelers included a cultural, arts, heritage, or historic activity or event while on a trip of 50 miles or more. The tourism attracted by creative industries is also, on average, a wealthier traveler and therefore more apt to spend money than other types of tourism. The creative economy also has the unique capability to document and augment a location’s history, traditions, and cultural roots. The introduction of artists into a neighborhood will raise property values and create a vibrant neighborhood as well as extending the hours of operation of a

neighborhood. Artists often do not follow the nine to five of a more typical job, which contributes to safety and revitalizes rundown neighborhoods. The presence of the creative class promotes social tolerance and cultural diversity, key components to a healthy city and economy. Artists and creative activities find new uses for underutilized, abandoned, and derelict spaces in neighborhoods making them places of vibrancy and/or exhibition.

The number of people working in the arts is estimated at 7.6 million and is growing yearly at a rate much higher than other economic sectors. In Boston specifically, the importance of the creative economy has come to light significantly in the recent past. In 2002, the creative industries added $10.7 billion to Boston’s total economic output (7.8%). Research has shown that disadvantaged neighborhoods benefit significantly from the presence of cultural industries with much lower delinquency rates occurring in neighborhoods with significant involvement in the arts. In 2001, the Mayor

passed artist space legislation showing his commitment to the creative economy in Boston. In 2008, Governor Deval Patrick’s administration also expressed support for Massachusetts artist by appointing the nation’s first “creative economy” director.

Finance & Insur

Health Care & Social Assista

Prof., Scientific & Tech. Servi

Educational Serv

Accommodation & Food Serv

Admin., Support

Retail T

CREATIVE INDUS

Other Serv

Transportation & Warehou

Constru

Management of Compa

Manufact

Inform

Real Estate & Rental Lea

Wholesale Tr

Ut

Sports & Recrea

For., Fish, Hunt &

Source: U.S. Census County Business Patterns; BRA/Research Analysis

21

Composition of Boston’s “Creative Production Chain”

Creation Creation

Production

Manufacturing

Distribution

Share of Employment, 2002

19.0% 19.0%

55.8%

2.1%

21.7%

1.43%

Employment Growth, 1998 to 2002

22.6% 22.6%

1.2%

-30.0%

44.3%

23.6%

$58,123 $58,123

$68,169

$49,477

$43,334

$52,521

Wage Growth, 1998 to 2002

4.5% 4.5%

25.5%

47.8%

28.2%

141.2%

Number of NAICS Industries

10 10

21

11

18

2

Average Wage, 2002

Boston’s Creative Industry BRA generated cross section of Creative Industry in the city

Industries

Department of Employment Training, BRA/Research Analysis

2.3 The Building Location

725-735 Harrison Ave

Boston, MA [South End District] Typology

Mixed-Use

Residential, Live/Work, Gallery Scope

New Construction

Two 5 Story Buildings w/

sub-level Parking

Gallery + Office and Support Space

Renovation Existing Joshua Bates School [c.1884] Studio + Perfor- mance space

Construction Type

Steel Structure, Cavity Wall + Com posite Concrete deck, Masnry +

Metal Cladding, Glass Storefront

Program Town Houses-10 duplex units Lofts- 16 units Subsidized Lofts-26 units* *affordable artist live/work lofts available to households earning up to 80% of median income.

Art Gallery 2,000 sf Bates Art Center refurbishment of existing 1884 structure, including artist studios and theater Square Footage

74,270 sf new construction

12,000 renovation

Project Cost

$21M Completion

Fall 2006

The ArtBlock The Historic Bates Center flanked on either side by the ArtBlock development. The single story glass gallery, in the foreground, was intended to herald the development’s position as a center for the arts, and to reach out to the surrounding neighborhood.

23

Harrison Street Elevation

Graphic by Icon

Street Level Plan

Graphic by Icon

East Newton Elevation

East Brookline Elevation

25

Graphic by Icon

ArtBlock Renderings Early renderings, by Icon, of the artblock project. Great attention was given to material choices. All of which went through a review process with the BRA and Local Groups

Graphic by Icon

ArtBlock West

ArtBlock West Harrison Elevation

Facade Detail

ArtBlock West East Newton Streetscape

27

ArtBlock East East Brookline Streetscape

ArtBlock West East Newton Streetscape

2

1b

1a

2

5

3 2 6

2

2

4

2

First Floor West 1a 1b 2 3 4 5 6 7 7a 7b 8

Market Rate Loft Artist Loft Townhouse Corridor Elevator Terrace Mechanical Gallery Office Kitchen Parking

0’ 1/16 “ = 1’-0”

8’

16’

N

ArtBlock West

2 2

Entry

1b

2

8

2 2 Garage Level West

1b

1a

1b 1b

2

Second Floor West

1a

1b 1a

1b 1b

29

1a

1a

1a Third-Fourth Floor West

Fifth Floor West

ArtBlock West 1a 1b 2 8

Market Rate Loft Artist Loft Townhouse

Parking

0’ 1/64 “ = 1’-0”

32’

64’

1b 1a

1b 1a 1b 1a

ArtBlock East

1b 1a

Fifth Floor East

1b 1a 1b 1a 2

1b 1a

Third-Fourth Floor East

1b

2 2 2

Second Floor East

ArtBlock East 1a 1b 2 8

Market Rate Loft Artist Loft Townhouse

0’

32’

64’

1/64 “ = 1’-0”

Entry

8

Garage Level East Parking

5 2

1b 4

31

6

1a

2 3

7b 7a

5 2

7 2

First Floor East 1a 1b 2 3 4 5 6 7 7a 7b

Market Rate Loft Artist Loft Townhouse Corridor Elevator Terrace Mechanical Gallery Office Kitchen

0’ 1/16 “ = 1’-0”

8’

16’

N

Entry

Market Rate Loft Interiors

Subsidized Artist Loft Interiors

Town House Interior

33

Market Rate Loft Bedroom

35

3

3 The Project Team Developer New Atlantic Development New Atlantic Development 59 Temple Place, Suite 1000 Boston, MA 02111 President|Peter Roth

Boston Redevelopment Authority [BRA]

UrbanArts Institute/Mass. College of Art|Ricardo Barreto

Community Planning Department Director|Shiela Dunn Deputy Director|Randi Lathrop

Historic Preservation Consultant Commonwealth Collabortive, Inc.

High Performance Design Consultant Architect Icon Archietcture INC, 38 Chauncy St. Boston, Massachusetts, 02111 Principal In Charge: Nancy Ludwig FAIA, LEED AP Project Designer|Kendra Halliwell Construction Administration|Fay Raynor

General Contractor CWC Builders, Inc. 7 Wells Avenue Newton, MA 02459

Cultural Development Consultants Jim Zien-Public Placemeakers Jero Nesson|ArtSpace

Landscape Architects Geller Associates

Agencies

Public Art Program Management

Kimberly Vermeer|Urban Habitat Innitiatives

Enviornmental Consultants Paragon Enviornmental

Property Manager Josh Considine|Urnban Management

Boston Redevelopment Authority [BRA] Artist Space Innitiative Senior Project Manager|Heidi Burbidge

LLP

ARTIST SPACE INITIATIVE Mayor Thomas Menino

Project Structure

2

37

Contractor

RFP BRA [Community Planning]

3

BRA [Project Managment]

Home Inc.

1

4

5 New Atlantic Development

Community Gardens

Icon

Cathederal Housing

Washington Mainstreets

Engineers

Neighborhood Group

Consultants 7

SE Artist Group

6

CMYA2’s preservation and development proposal

The Bates Center

CMYA2’s preservation and development proposal

Brick Detail

3 .1 HOME, Inc. (“Here-in Our Motives Evolve”) Director: Alan Michel

Address: 165 Brookside Ave Extension.

Boston, MA 02135 Phone: 617.427.4663(HOME) Fax: 617-427-4664 Contact: alanmichel@homeinc.org http://http://www.homeinc.org Brief: HOME, Inc. is a 30 year old nonprofit organization. Their mission is “to make a positive difference in the lives of young people.” They teach youth primarily video production to foster confidence and creativity that will carry into adulthood.

HOME, Inc. focuses also on cultivating teamwork and communication and critical thinking skills. They see their contribution to youth as a stimulus for lifelong learning in the individuals with which they interact.

A Program in Home Inc.’s Black Box Theater

Interior Detail

CMYA2’s preservation and development proposal

3 .2 The Mayor - Thomas Menino The Mayor signed the Artist Space Initiative into law in 2002. The bill was based heavily on surveys of, and dialog with, local artist communities. Its aim was to permanently establish, through deed and zoning restrictions, artist communities within Boston’s neighborhoods. The bill was an effort to combat the pressures of gentrification that were forcing artists further and further outside of Boston’s center. The Artist Space initiative provided both tax incentives and direct investment and subsidies to private developers willing to work with the BRA in incorporating affordable artist specific units into their housing projects. Through the civic arm of the BRA, the ArtBlock project was the first development undertaken under the auspices of this legislation. From the Mayor’s perspective, he was looking to preserve and augment Boston’s creative economy, a $10.7 billion a year industry.

39

3 .3 The BRA Community Planning Address: One City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201

.4 The BRA Project Management Address: One City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201

phone 617.722.4300 fax 617.248.1937

phone 617.722.4300 fax 617.248.1937

www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org

www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org

Randi Lathrop, Deputy Director of Community Planning

Heidi Burbridge, Project Manager – Artist Space Initiative

Shiela Dunn, Director of Community Planning

Brief: “The BRA’s responsibilities include: reviewing proposed development projects that require zoning relief, are subject to development review, are proposed to be located on publicly-owned land or in Urban Renewal areas, or that receive public subsidy. making recommendations on major construction and redevelopment activity to the city’s Zoning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeal. drafting and recommending new zoning measures and serving as staff to the city’s Zoning Commission.

The BRA owned the three lots comprising the ArtBlock site prior to development. .

The BRA released the ArtBlock RFP in May of 2003. The BRA-issued RFP was heavily informed by a survey of nearly 10,000 artists launched by Mayor Thomas M. Menino in 2002 to formally study and quantify local artists’ housing needs and financial status.

drafting master plans that address the city’s needs for infrastructure, downtown and community economic development, and that include design guidelines and development controls. acquiring, selling and leasing real estate to achieve economic redevelopment and to promote public policy objectives, such as encouraging growth industries and appropriate land use policies. issuing revenue bonds and notes, which do not constitute indebtedness of the city, to finance projects. owning and operating three industrial parks. providing financing and loan programs for businesses, as well as technical assistance and other business services. providing job training, placement, and support services.”

3 .5 The Developer- New Atlantic President: Peter Roth

Brookside Artist Studios by New Atlantic and Icon, 2003

Hibernian Hall Arts Center by New Atlantic and Icon, 2005

Address: New Atlantic Development 59 Temple Place, Suite 1000 Boston, MA 02111 T. 617-338-7600 F. 617-338-9320 Peter Roth, President 617-338-7600 x319 Margaret Kruse, Office Administrator 617-338-7600 x307 “ArtBlock has given us an opportunity to combine our commitment to the arts with a chance to create something truly unique in a vibrant part of the city.” -Peter Roth Brief: New Atlantic, led by Peter Roth, was a developer with an interest in the arts.

New Atlantic had a history of experience with the needs of both the speculative condo market, and the specific needs of artist housing. Mr. Roth and the BRA had collaborated on developments in

the past, and had an established working relationship. New Atlantic was one of the few developers willing to take on the risk of undertaking the design and execution of the ArtBlock’s Hybrid housing typology. At the time, such projects where without precedent in the city of Boston.

41

3 .6 The Architects - Icon Address: 38 Chauncy St. Boston, Massachusetts, 02111 USA T. (617) 451-3333 F. (617) 451-1328 contact: bbernier@iconarch.com http://www.iconarch.com “ICONarchitecture, inc. designs for the cities of tomorrow - both here and abroad - weaving sustainable designs into the urban fabric to revitalize forgotten places, capture the public spirit and create value.

From infill development to urban villages to adaptive use, mixing innovative housing with retail, work and learning environments, we create memorable places.

We believe you should love where you live, learn in inspired surroundings, delight in creative places to play, preserve the best of the past, and plan sustainably for the future. Engage us!

ICON architecture is a women-owned business.“

ICON architecture, inc.

Nancy S. Ludwig, FAIA LEED AP; Jonathan S. Lane, AIA AICP; John R. Shields AIA; Steven A Heikin AIA; Dennis Frenchman AIA; Richard O’Dwyer; Beatrice Bernier DPLG; Judy Jorgensen; Janis Mamayek, AIA Brief: Services Architecture, Interior Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Planning, Programming, Urban Design, Historic Preservation, Sustainable Design, Graphic Design Focus Multi-Unit Residential, Mixed-Use, Academic, Institutional, Corporate Projects Maverick Landing Avenir Artblock The Plant Olmsted Green Aqaba Jordan Master Plan Hotel Dartmouth Blackstone canal Emerson College Entryway Boston East Westin Hotel, Portsmouth, NH Provincetown Virtual Cultural Center

The main players from ICON active with the ArtBlock project were Nancy Ludwig, Fay Raynor, and Kendra Halliwell. Nancy was the main contact for the developer and the BRA. It was she that acted as the public face of the project and presented the proposal at public meetings. Kendra Halliwell was the project designer. She spearheaded the project through design and planning phases. Fay Raynor took over the project when it went into the construction documents and construction administration phases.

Drift Wall by Brian Knep, studio artist in Artblock’s Bates Arts Center

3 .7 The Bates Artists Address: 731 Harrison Avenue Boston, MA 02118

www.batesartcenter.com “A small group of creative people with big ideas” Many of the tenants at the Bates have been there for the majority of the time that HOME, Inc. managed the property.

They were renting their work only units well below market rate and were very dedicated to the Bates. The artists describe themselves as intellectual artists.

They have said that a creative community is the most important factor in the growth of their artwork so a space in which they can collaborate and display their latest pieces is critical for them.

43

45

4

Public Comment Period on Proposals BRA tentatively designates Developer Community Meeting Blackstone Community Meeting/BRA Design Review/PNF Submitted BRA Design Review Bates Artist Groupt Meeting BRA Design Review/BRA Scope Review BCDC Approval/SELC/DND BRA Board Approval/Zoning Board Approval

Development Proposals submitted to BRA

RFP issued by BRA

First Unit Sold

Developer Final Designation Approved by BRA

SELC BRA Design Review Construction Bid Set Completed/SELC/TAP BRA Design Review SELC/BRA Design Review

DESIGN

2005

2004

2003

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

4.1 Timeline of Icon’s Involvement

2009

2008

Final unit sold

Gallery Space Leased to Mobius performance artist group

Grand Opening Ceremony with Mayor

Partial Completion Certificate Granted

CONSTRUCTION

2007

2006

Ground Breaking

47

4.2 The HOME, Inc. years

The story of the ArtBlock begins well before the BRA put out their Request For Proposals (RFP). The anchor of the project is a historic building in the middle of the site. It is a two story structure built of brick and brownstone carving. There is wrought iron detailing, a slate roof, copper flashing and a large copper cupola.

In 1884, the Joshua Bates Elementary School was constructed on newly filled land in the South End of Boston. It was designed by Arthur Vinal in the Richardsonian Romanesque style popular at the time. The Bates was designed with the thought that public buildings should represent the epitome of design to enlighten the minds of all who enter the doors. It operated as an elementary school until 1974 when the City of Boston closed the school. Ownership of the Bates was taken over in 1976 by the BRA and was made into artist w ork only space.

HOME (Here-in Our Motives Evolve), Inc. director, Alan Michel, was one of the few lucky tenants of the beautiful old school house. In 1977, Michel’s organization,

the nonprofit, HOME, Inc., signed a lease with the BRA on the building and became the building manager. He occupied three of the studios in the building with his video production studios.

The BRA owned many properties in Boston and it was not uncommon for them to turn over management of a property to a private entity who would lease it for a very small fee and keep the rents earned on the property. The BRA had a long term lease with Alan Michel, granting him rental on the property for $1 per year and put him in charge of the management of the property. During these years, Mr. Michel ensured that the artist units in the building remained affordable while supporting his own non-profit, HOME, Inc. within the building. The HOME, Inc. website touts the many programs that were supported within the Bates during their tenure as manager including: exhibition space for the various artists operating out of the building, theater space, workshop and lecture space, support facilities, and the affordable studio spaces.

In 2000, Alan Michel and HOME completed a historic preservation study of the Bates, which is listed in the State Register of Historic Places, with the assistance of the Massachusetts Historical Commission.

The purpose of this report was intended to attract developer’s interest to the project and help HOME, Inc. develop the site with additional affordable artist live/work housing in the South End. The feasibility study was performed in conjunction with Christopher Hussey of the architecture firm, CYMA 2, Inc. It examined the redevelopment of the Bates Arts Center and the two adjacent vacant properties. They included an existing conditions survey in addition to making recommendations on planning, as well as maintenance and repairs to the Bates. The study was used by the BRA to develop an RFP for the site.

Under Alan Michel’s management of the property, artists were granted highly affordable units within the historic Bates School but the many issues with the space brought on by its old age were largely ignored.

Many of the windows leaked significantly.

The boiler was near its breaking point. The roof had numerous leaks – “like a sieve” – according to one long time tenant of the Bates Center. These maintenance issues were addressed in the feasibility study involving the manager, however many of the tenants were unhappy with what they considered continual negligence in the management.

49 CYMA 2, Inc. 17 Ivaloo St. Suite 400 Somerville, MA 02143 t 617.623.1112 e cyma2@aol.com “CYMA 2, Inc. is a small architecture and planning firm with a reputation for creating responsive designs.”

Christopher Hussey, AIA Former Principal, CYMA 2, Inc.

The Bates Center

4.3 The BRA, Bates artists and the development of the RFP The BRA, Bates artists and the development of the RFP While HOME, Inc. searched for a developer to take an interest in their proposal for the site, the BRA began the official process of writing a Request For Proposals. In 2002, a year before the RFP was released, the BRA began to work with the existing tenant in the Bates. The tight knit group of artists wanted to ensure they had a say in the project’s development as an entity separate from Mr. Michel’s organization.

The Bates tenants were small in numbers but very vocal in the project. When the BRA first approached them with the idea of developing the site, the artists feared losing their affordable studios and their beloved building. Other artists in the community assured them that working with the BRA would mean losing their current workspace. The BRA had little success in ensuring artist affordability in other areas of Boston prior to ArtBlock.

For example, the Fort Point area, once a vibrant neighborhood teeming with cre-

ative industries had been developed in the 1990’s without significant regard to issues of affordability for artists. With the scars from these wounds still fresh, many artists warned the tenants of the Bates that they too, would see an end to their affordable space.

The tenants of the Bates worried that the BRA would side with the developer and their requests would fall on deaf ears as had happened before. The relationship between this unique group of artists and the BRA, however, became a rich and fulfilling one through a series of lucky circumstances and strategic moves on the part of both the artists and the BRA. The Bates tenants were motivated by a love of the Bates and the desire for affordable studio space. When the BRA first approached them, they pulled together, signed a mission statement and had regular meetings to discuss their individual desires for the future of their space. They found a Volunteer Lawyer for the Arts (VLA) to help them fight for

their space and give them the appearance of power, though in reality, they had none.

Their VLA, Christopher Maffucci was present at most of their meetings with the BRA and the developer or architect.

A variety of other factors contributed to the success of the relationships between the BRA and the artists of the Bates. Randi Lathrop, the project manager with the BRA,

Bates Tenants The tenants of the Bates are overall, an older more mature group. They describe themselves as intellectual artists. They love the Bates and have taken great pains to restore it. One of the 13 original slate black boards still exists in the building, lovingly restored to its original appearance by one of the tenants.

In addition to being a sculptor, one of the tenants is a carpenter and helped do much of the interior work himself.

Another of the artists has an interest in historic preservation – she bought a

lives in the South End and therefore has a vested interest in the neighborhood. Like some of the tenants of the Bates, she has an interest in historic preservation so the Bates renovation was an engaging project for her. Heidi Burbridge, the Senior Project Manager - Artist Space Initiative, was a new hire and was eager to see the project through. The Mayor of Boston had

200 year old home with her husband to restore. Her extensive knowledge and interest in preservation led her to undertake the restoration of the interior of the Bates. The artists in the Bates had mostly been there for many years. Because there were so few of them, they were able to form a strong group, committed fully to saving their space. There had been an ongoing tenuous relationship between many of the tenants of the Bates and the management so the tenants were hopeful that the redevelopment would give them freedom from the potentially disagreeable situation.

just signed legislation in favor of artist housing one year prior making it a ripe time to pursue such a project.

Because ArtBlock was to be the first artist live/work project in Boston, there was particular interest in making it a success. It was a high visibility project so there was much at stake. It was in a prominent location in the South End. It needed to succeed to show the city’s dedication to the creative economy and stand as a precedent for future development. Therefore the BRA worked in close contact with the previous tenants of the Bates.

Working simultaneously, though somewhat removed from the BRA, Alan Michel and HOME, Inc. worked to find a developer to finance the project. HOME, Inc. gave tours to prospective developers prior to the release of the RFP, eventually finding one that would work with the architect CYMA 2 on a proposal for the site. The development proposed

by HOME, Inc. would consist of a pri-

vate development on the E. Newton Street site and would provide direct access to the Bates Arts Resource Center for handicapped access. Mr. Michel’s proposal envisioned the preservation of the community garden and could include artist’s live/work spaces, retail spaces, a theater, shops and a restaurant.

The RFP took a year to develop with the extensive input from the community. The tenants of the Bates Center were not the only group who had a say in the new development. The BRA also met with representatives from the Cathedral Tenants Association, Community Gardeners, Blackstone-Franklin Neighborhood Association and the abutters. The BRA worked extensively to get input from the community on the project. The RFP included that proposals that gained support of the neighborhood would be considered more favorably during the selection period. Community involvement was critical to obtaining the project.

51

The RFP “The development objective for the Site is to make affordable artist live/work, artist studio, and cultural space available in a building or buildings that are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The plan for the proposed project should meet several important goals: A. Create affordable artist live and work space that is appropriate to the needs of artists and contain some homeownership component to be deeded for long term use by artists and marketed in conjunction with the BRA’s artist certification process; B. Provide an option for existing tenants working in the Bates to remain in their present studio spaces at affordable rents; C. Provide sufficient, yet minimal, number of conventional residential market-rate residential units in order to generate the internal cross-subsidy that is needed to maximize the number and the affordability of the artist live and work spaces in the new construction component; D. Preserve and contribute to the interior and exterior architectural, archaeological and historical integrity of the by providing affordable work-only studios for artists; E. Preserve the integrity of the neighborhood through careful detailing and use of materials compatible with existing structures; F. Preserve the existing non-profit art retail and gallery space in the Bates building and integrate and preserve additional uses such as a small theatre, gallery, education, and/or retail spaces in the Bates; G. Provide new ground floor retail space on Parcels R-10A and R-10C; H. Relocate and improve the Community Garden by the Department of Neighborhood Development (DND) designated developer of the 700 Harrison Avenue Site in accordance with the specifications and guidelines of South End/Lower Roxbury Open Space Land Trust (SELROSLT); I. Provide on-site, underground parking to the residents and tenants, and for services of Parcels R-10A, R-10B, R-10C; and J. Maintain the streetscape by sensitively blending the new development with nearby structures that would ensure a high quality of urban design. “

The RFP asked that the site be developed with at least 60% affordable artist only units and that they be indistinguishable from the market-rate units in their design, location, sizes, and finishes. The architect/developer team was also asked to include a variety of upgrade packages for the varying needs of artists. The live/work spaces were intended to accommodate two different definitions of artists: “Low impact” artists such as painters, some jewelers/sculptors, clothing design/manufacturing, leather goods, print making, and audio recording not requiring sound insulation; and “high impact” artists such as sculptors/jewelers requiring a welding torch with an open flame, wood working with heavy machinery, spray painting, dance and audio recording requiring sound insulation, photography with on site film processing and any other artwork requiring toxic or hazardous products.

Each unit was to be properly ventilated to account for any potentially hazardous materials that may be used.

The Bates Center required a number of

upgrades to be made as part of the development project. The RFP called for restoration of the windows and other building improvements to bring the facility up to code and historic preservation standards. An elevator was needed as well as the addition of handicap accessible toilet rooms on each floor. The main goal of the Bates upgrades was to improve the building as an artist space without passing too much cost onto the artists in the form of increased rent on their spaces. The affordability aspect remained the most critical part of the project for the artists.

Aside: The upgrades to the Bates wound up being significantly more expensive than the developer had anticipated and quickly used up the money allotted for the Bates Center upgrades, leaving the artists without a number of the upgrades in the initial proposal including a new boiler and the extensive repairs to the slate roof. The artists were initially upset by what they interpreted as a false promise but have since come to realize the developer’s proposal is not a promise, nor can the developer anticipate a significant increase in steel prices or a bust in the housing bubble.

53

4.4 Response to the RFP and Formation of the Team New Atlantic Properties and seven other developer teams requested copies of the RFP from the BRA. Of those eight developers, two responded with strong proposals to the BRA. One team included New Atlantic Properties teamed up with ICON architecture, inc. New Atlantic had a previous relationship with ICON architecture, inc. and both had worked on similar building typologies in the past.

team was selected to develop the site.

Their stated goal was the creation of “an artistically-inspired, community-oriented environment of high quality.” They proposed 32 affordable artist units spread throughout two buildings, one on either side of the Bates Center. Both before and after submitting their proposal to the BRA, the project team met several times with a variety of community groups

to be strained relationship between the two. The Bates artists were persistent in their dealings with the BRA and continually requested that the developer discuss the project with them directly.

Through the urging of the BRA, the developer saw the benefits of including the Bates tenants in the design process.

Their stated goal was the creation of “an artistically-inspired, community-oriented environment of high quality.”

The other team had the influence of Mr. Michel of HOME, Inc. Both proposals satisfied the desires the BRA laid out in the RFP thus leaving the BRA with a difficult decision to make. According to the BRA, the decision was made for them as the other team that had submitted had some internal conflict that might prevent them from starting the project immediately and efficiently.

The New Atlantic/ICON architecture, inc.

including the tenants of the Bates Art Resource Center, representatives from Cathedral Tenants Association, South End Historical Society, Worcesteer Square Neighborhood Association, Blackstone-Franklin Neighborhood Association and the abutters to the site. At first, the team was hesitant to meet with the tenants of the Bates and was more inclined to deal directly with the building manager, Alan Michel of HOME, Inc. for fear of getting involved in what seemed

ArtBlock West and Gallery The Gallery was a gesture toward botht he artist’s desire for community, and the city’s desire for an improved streetscape in the neighborhood.

55

4.5 Community Involvement

New Atlantic Development “believes strongly that a better project will result from continuing public and community involvement.”

The team presented their proposal during a BRA-sponsored community meeting.

The BRA introduced the design team to the community and a presentation of the proposal, led by the ICON architecture, inc. followed. This meeting helped to

- Use of Public Alley 710 for vehicular and service access to project - Proposed building materials, massing, and design - Levels of affordability for continued work-only studio space in the Bates, and for the proposed new artist live/work spaces - Trash handling and removal - Future ownership and manage-

New Atlantic Development “believes strongly that a better project will result from continuing public and community involvement.” shed light on the concerns of the community. Following the meeting, the community was provided with a public comment period in which they could submit any feedback they had on the project to the design team’s attention where it would be dealt with accordingly. Some concerns brought to light during the process include: - Concern about 6 story building height of ArtBlock East (since reduced to 5 stories)

ment of the Bates Art Resource Center - Construction period impacts on adjacent building, vehicular circulation in the area, and on groundwater.

The architect responded to each of the 60-70 comments generated during the community meetings. Garnering the trust of the BRA and of the community allowed the architect to manipulate some parts of the RFP to better work with the project. For example, the RFP asks that

the entrance to the underground parking be from one of the side streets. The neighbors across the alley asked that the new development avoid use of the alley. The architect was able to convince those residents that the new complex would have minimal impact on the alley traffic using the logic that the artists would be coming and going at atypical times throughout the day. By responding to all other concerns, the architect/developer team was able to get the community to respond favorably to a change in their original desires for the development.

Aside: The architect planned to use a unique exterior material and expected it to be met with concern by the BRA and the community. To prepare for this potentially difficult discussion, ICON prepared drawings and performed precedent studies of other buildings in the South End. This showed that the material would fit in with the surrounding context of factory scaled buildings. The material was also used mainly on the inward and rear facing facades, on the Bates side of the buildings.

Two years later

The ArtBlock was completed in winter 2007 with all of the artist units already sold and most of the market rate units spoken for. The housing market bubble burst shortly after the ArtBlock units went on the market meaning New Atlantic did not make the return on the property that they had anticipated. The last unit proved to be very difficult to see and Peter Roth from New Atlantic liked the development so much he decided to purchase it for his own. The exterior materials palette of the building has been mimicked by other buildings in the area since for its response to the existing character of the South End and its decidedly modern twist.

ArtSpace 731 Gallery “The new ArtSpace 731 Gallery is intended to be the premiere artistowned and managed exhibition space in Boston. Its location central to the overall ARTBLOCK complex at sidewalk level, couples with a design that maximizes transparency and public accessibility, will assure continuous public interaction with artistic and cultural activity on the site.�

The glass gallery in the East building has been the one source of disappointment on an overall successful project. Because it is all glass, it does not respond well to the needs of many artists who need both blank walls to hang their work on and protection from overbearing sunlight. The gallery provides neither of these things so finding a tenant for the space was a challenge. Eventually it was taken up by Mobius, a performance art group that operates mainly off site leaving the gallery at the ArtBlock a quiet empty glass box.

57

59

5

5 Conclusion

The BRA played a critical role in the ArtBlock project: the stitching together of the various stakeholders and ensuring aspirations were met. The BRA was the point of connection between the developer/architect team and the community groups. This role is critical in all projects, particularly complex ones where there are many different stakeholders, each with their own definition of success. Not all communities and projects have an entity like the BRA to mediate between the parties. It is in these projects that the constituents become a hindrance instead of an asset.

There is an opportunity in such cases that architects can, and should, capitalize upon. This is the role of the conscience.

The BRA commented that architects are “yes” people. Every party member can ask for something and the architect is happy to oblige. There is a danger in this role, however. What is good for one person is often not so for another stakeholder. The architect can act as a mediator between possibly conflicting aspirations

to reach a conclusion that is best for both parties and does its best to be right for the greater good.

To do this architect must foster relationships and push for interaction between the parties, as the BRA did with New Atlantic and the tenants of the Bates Center. The architect is trained as a problem solver. Given the role that architects already play in coordinating drawings and multiple building systems, coordination of the stakeholders seems a natural step. The BRA involved the community before the RFP, when the project was just an idea. This helped ensure that the architect and developer were considering their wishes from early on and those wishes could inform the design instead of the design team fighting to keep a design element late in the game.

Architects are well placed to have a fairly neutral role within a project team. Their main concern is not monetary, like the developer’s. Given that they are often a part of the developer’s team, they can help

ensure that a developer is working with the community groups and that the community groups are working with one another to produce the best possible building.