Comment 71289

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted November 16, 2011 at 11:39:02 in reply to Comment 71286

"they haven't maintained the building at all, since they have always planned to move. From what an employee has told me, they haven't so much as painted a wall in that old building. I would say shame on the board..."

Bingo. Shouldn't buildings require inspection to ensure they aren't being allowed to rot because of intention to eventually move. How many are being neglected on purpose because there is a devloper that wants the property and once it get's to a certain point of decay, the its falling apart card can be used?

How long has the City/Mac been eyeing this chunk of downtown land? The Mac continuing Ed site is a nice example of re-use (not that I know what it was before). I too love the facade of the Board-Ed building. I bus by it twice a day. Obviously how it ads to downtown isn't based on tenancy who has long since been looking for a way out of the core.

It seems a big concern with Mac moving in from previous conversations with Mahesh, is that they will likely build their own cafeteria and the added 50 people who will be working downtown, may not even be supporting all the amazing local small business eateries that surround it. Institutions like Liberal Arts would likely enjoy the growing night life and trendy new(er) joints that are popping up.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds