Gillette/P&G Redevelopment | South Boston

Charlie_mta said:
What then is it? Just that the development would change the neighborhood? I'm genuinely curious what the problem is.
Click to expand...
Parking is part of a larger NIMBY toolkit. While it may well be the top motivation for some NIMBYs, it is mostly just used, along with shadows, tree loss, traffic, "character", etc., to prevent any kind of change whatsoever. I am quite convinced that making free parking available to every single NIMBY would leave us with 95% of NIMBYs still complaining about the other issues. Such an offer would obviously add to the price, making the whole project more unlikely, but it would not eliminate pushback, far from it.
 
Ugh, disappointed. I liked the renders for the development that was supposed to replace it, even if they had too much lab space
 
It might not end up so different. If designs and engineering were already mostly complete, they could easily swap it from lab to office, maybe fit a few more floors. Don't forget the opposite happened at the Lilly building on Necco street after GE walked away. It was originally rendered for the GE office space and was adapted to the current Lilly lab/office. Compare renders below.

1773231563075.png

1773231589218.png
 
Learning that P&G is electing to build their own building instead of taking space in an existing one must feel like the biggest slap in the face to the developers of 10 World Trade, which has 255,000 sf of unspoken for office space on top of 290,000 sf of unspoken for lab space in their entirely vacant building that is just down the street. 🥲
 
Yea it seems crazy... I think a lot of holders of office/lab space would do an incredible amount of backflips for a tenant
 
awood91 said:
Learning that P&G is electing to build their own building instead of taking space in an existing one must feel like the biggest slap in the face to the developers of 10 World Trade, which has 255,000 sf of unspoken for office space on top of 290,000 sf of unspoken for lab space in their entirely vacant building that is just down the street. 🥲
Click to expand...
A few thoughts:
  1. There's likely value to Gillette of moving directly next door as opposed to moving even one mile away. Employees' commute patterns (and parking!) won't have to change at allfor many years until the old campus is torn down and redeveloped.
    1. For this reason I expected Gillette to take the old State Street building that's also directly abutting their current building 🤷‍♂️
  2. With a new build Gillette gets to customize the space exactly to how they want it. This is easier (and potentially cheaper!) than retrofitting a generic lab-space built on spec.
  3. It'll take a couple years to build out their new building, and that may fit better with their overall timeline for the move. They don't necessarily want to move tomorrow; they want to move on a multi-year timeline in sync with the expected timeline of redeveloping their current facility.
 
They also stated they want something they can stay in for 125 years so owning your own building vs leasing makes sense there.
 
awood91 said:
Learning that P&G is electing to build their own building instead of taking space in an existing one must feel like the biggest slap in the face to the developers of 10 World Trade, which has 255,000 sf of unspoken for office space on top of 290,000 sf of unspoken for lab space in their entirely vacant building that is just down the street. 🥲
Click to expand...
Gillette's lab space needs are pretty bespoke -- it is not generic bio lab space. They are not a biotech, they are very high volume precision consumer products player.

They are going to get much more of what they need building their own building to spec than trying to do a build out on a lease.
 
JeffDowntown said:
Gillette's lab space needs are pretty bespoke -- it is not generic bio lab space. They are not a biotech, they are very high volume precision consumer products player.

They are going to get much more of what they need building their own building to spec than trying to do a build out on a lease.
Click to expand...
Thats moving to andover though, I’m pretty sure this is just going to be office space.

“In 2023, P&G Gillette announced it would move manufacturing operations out of its longtime South Boston site to its Andover campus, while finding a new place in the city neighborhood for its roughly 750 corporate and research workers.

P&G Gillette considered leasing other spaces, or staying on its 31-acre existing campus, which is in the early stages of being redeveloped. In the end, though, the company said it would build a brand new building at 232 A St. on an already-permitted site that it sold to Breakthrough Properties, a Tishman Speyer-Bellco Capital joint venture, in 2021.”
 
stick n move said:
Thats moving to andover though, I’m pretty sure this is just going to be office space.

“In 2023, P&G Gillette announced it would move manufacturing operations out of its longtime South Boston site to its Andover campus, while finding a new place in the city neighborhood for its roughly 750 corporate and research workers.

P&G Gillette considered leasing other spaces, or staying on its 31-acre existing campus, which is in the early stages of being redeveloped. In the end, though, the company said it would build a brand new building at 232 A St. on an already-permitted site that it sold to Breakthrough Properties, a Tishman Speyer-Bellco Capital joint venture, in 2021.”
Click to expand...
Remaining manufacturing is moving to Andover. But the announcement said R&D functions stay in South Boston. R&D for Gillette products still means robotic manufacturing development, metallurgy and specialty coating labs, as well as more general chem labs.
 
Can I get a math check on this? A billion dollars for the building alone?
 
That's an all-in number. From the Globe coverage:

The $1 billion estimate provided by P&G Gillette includes construction, land acquisition, and equipment purchase costs.

They also note that Gillette sold the land for $80M but we don't yet know what they bought it back for; presumably it's less than that. Not sure what equipment costs are, but presume it's a relatively small fraction vs the other inputs. So yeah seems like the building itself is a big part of the $1B price tag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top