[ARCHIVED] Harbor Garage Redevelopment | 70 East India Row | Waterfront | Downtown

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

KentXie said:
Wait wait wait, I thought the goal was to demolish the garage so that there's a section in between the two towers that would open the way to the waterfront from the Greenway? It would not accomplish this by keeping the garage, thus the one important requirement is not fulfill. Dead on water.
Click to expand...

I think the point is that if he doesn't demo the garage and build something new from scratch then he doesn't have to comply with all the rules. While he is accused of being a money grubber, he has chosen the path of most resistance to making more money from this parcel. I think his ego drives him to want to build a spectacular tower with first class public amenities - something to be proud of. That is not a bad thing, I wish more developers took personal pride in their work. He doesn't need to do this whole song and dance for the public, he is choosing to.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

fattony said:
I think the point is that if he doesn't demo the garage and build something new from scratch then he doesn't have to comply with all the rules. While he is accused of being a money grubber, he has chosen the path of most resistance to making more money from this parcel. I think his ego drives him to want to build a spectacular tower with first class public amenities - something to be proud of. That is not a bad thing, I wish more developers took personal pride in their work. He doesn't need to do this whole song and dance for the public, he is choosing to.
Click to expand...

It does point out some of the perverse public policy incentives built into Chapter 91.

I own a huge hunk of concrete on the waterfront, that blocks significant public access to the waterfront. As a developer, I can:

a) build on top of my hunk of concrete with an even more massive structure, and really screw the neighborhood.

or

b) tear down my hunk of concrete, and start over, but only if I give up 50% of my land area to public open space.

Anyone see the irony in these incentives?
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

^^^^
It makes no sense. (Chap 91 in this scenario makes no sense)

And the reality is if Chiofaro choose A scenario there is NO RISK for him. So he could screw everybody and still make money.

There basically is no incentive from the city or state to actually make the developer take the risk.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

stellarfun said:
If Chiofaro kept the current garage, reclad it with spiffy material, used it as a podium, built 35 stories on top ... he gets ... [a] new building with none of the cost of excavating deep into primordial muck for a new garage.
Click to expand...

It's not obvious to me how one builds 35 stories over an existing garage with 'none of the cost'. It may be doable, but it's not obviously a 'better deal'.

Theoretical benefits of redeveloping existing garage without removing it:

1. No need to temporarily house Harbour Towers' residents' cars.
2. Cost of demolition.
3. Excavation / bracing / waterproofing of new hole.
4. Cost of new building strucure (net of upgrades).

But with:
1. Tons of staging issues and safety issues.
2. Very significant foundation work (how to drill piles in 8' ceiling garage?).
3. The new columns would have to be sited away from the existing columns, but not interfere with garage operations.

I'm sure someone could figure out a way this is doable. But economically sensible, I doubt it.

I have never been inside, but I would guess it's all precast. If the existing structure is worth salvaging, I would guess you would take-down the existing floors by each quadrant, store them offsite, install the new foundation and then re-erect the precast and re-pour the topping slab. No idea where the new columns would go. Perhaps you pull the whole thing down at once, but of course then benefits one, two and four above are much less relevant.
Maybe take out a column bay on the southwest corner to become a new access point (core) for the building.

I don't understand the math behind 35 stories plus the garage less than 400'. But ok.

Perhaps Chiofaro is trying to bluster his way into his preferred design figuring he can sacrifice height once the FAA kicks in and show flexibility to the city and North End, and overcome the HT residents through promise of public benefit and making them appear to be only self-interested. But given the cost realities suggested above it would seem to be pretty sensible for the developer of this parcel to at least try to get a clean, new tall max revenue project.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

fattony said:
I think the point is that if he doesn't demo the garage and build something new from scratch then he doesn't have to comply with all the rules. While he is accused of being a money grubber, he has chosen the path of most resistance to making more money from this parcel. I think his ego drives him to want to build a spectacular tower with first class public amenities - something to be proud of. That is not a bad thing, I wish more developers took personal pride in their work. He doesn't need to do this whole song and dance for the public, he is choosing to.
Click to expand...
In large measure, I agree.

When Chiofaro first announced the project he said, IIRC, it was going to have the most expensive residential space in Boston. He took particular pride in having IP charge the highest office rents in Boston. He paid $155 million for 1.3 acres and a 35+ year old garage. (When he refinanced his balloon note on the garage some months ago, he apparently had paid only interest during the term of the five year note because the note has a higher amount second time around.) So he considers this site as perhaps even more of a signature project than IP.

However, time seems to have passed him by. He can't finance a signature office building because the only businesses willing to pay the added expense are those who want to own the building as a headquarters, see Liberty Mutual. Thus, he has to be market-rate competitive with the competition. On residential, he can't be the most expensive, because the Four Seasons residences has trumped him.

Trying to get an understanding of any one scheme for the garage is like trying to capture quicksilver. Last month, he revealed renderings of the tower bases, with particular focus on the arcade/pavillion, and the proposed steps to the sea. No elevations; 'renders of the towers', he explains, 'are not yet done'. Horsefeathers, unless he was too cheap to buy them.

This month, a single rendering of the two towers is revealed, as seen from far away. In less than a month's time, one tower has lost over 60' in height, and the other is now clad in terracotta. There are no revised renderings of the bases to see how the terracotta harmonizes with the metal and glass of the other tower, or how the juxtaposition of materials will now look in the arcade area. (There is now a rendering showing the arcade full of blossoming cherry trees in springtime.) There is no explanation for how 60+ feet was chopped off, yet the gsf remains the same.

Contrast what Chiofaro put together for a proposal for parcel 15, and what he has so far presented for review on the Harbor garage site.

http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/getattachment/0ada715a-e8fa-435d-8eef-dd0fca5bce2f
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

I see what you're saying, but the scenarios are quite different. Parcel 15 was a competition that required each developer to lay it all out. He owns the garage, so he can woo as he feels necessary. Also, there aren't 2 harbors towers directly next Parcel 15 that he had to deal with.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

jeff h, zoning often gets grandfathered. The grandfathering is usually a valued asset/attribute of a site. In this instance, the presumption is that an existing building envelope / floorplate would be grandfathered for Chapter 91 purposes; in most instances that would be a plus. My example is Russia Wharf, where Chapter 91 open space requirements were not applied. They hollowed out the old buildings, built the tower, and re-built the remaining floorplate of the old buildings.

paperless paul, assuming an available garage floorplate of 52,000 sq ft, -- about 90 percent of the total site -- and 325 sq ft per space, that results in 8-9 levels of underground parking.

The available footprint may be significantly less if Google maps is right and the CA/T runs under the southwest corner of the garage.

If he wants to start construction before 2022, Chiofaro's only obligation is to find parking for the hundreds of spaces provided to HT under an easement. Could he not demolish half of the interior of the garage at a time, sink whatever pilings and footings he needs, rebuild that half, and move to the next half, and repeat the process?

As for the Harbor Garage being pre-cast, I don't know, was I. M. Pei working in pre-cast in the early 1970s? The HT are cast-in-place.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

stellar,

I understand the "grandfathering" of zoning.

But Chapter 91 seems to "assume" that we want what is already in place on the waterfront, versus what could replace it.

That worked well for Russia (aka Atlantic) Wharf.

It does not work for the Aquarium Garage.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

stellarfun said:
paperless paul, assuming an available garage floorplate of 52,000 sq ft, -- about 90 percent of the total site -- and 325 sq ft per space, that results in 8-9 levels of underground parking.

The available footprint may be significantly less if Google maps is right and the CA/T runs under the southwest corner of the garage.

If he wants to start construction before 2022, Chiofaro's only obligation is to find parking for the hundreds of spaces provided to HT under an easement. Could he not demolish half of the interior of the garage at a time, sink whatever pilings and footings he needs, rebuild that half, and move to the next half, and repeat the process?

As for the Harbor Garage being pre-cast, I don't know, was I. M. Pei working in pre-cast in the early 1970s? The HT are cast-in-place.
Click to expand...

You may be right about levels, I'm only pointing out what his colleague said at the first public meeting. He said about 70' deep and that it was feasible and the first thing they checked. In my view this seems plausible.

The garage spandrel's are clearly precast, but I have limited internet access now so I can't confirm anything else. But given the location by the seawater and the garage use, precast seems the likely choice at least for decking, girders and spandrels.

You are right that he only needs to preserve 350? spaces during construction and is trying to buy out as many as he can anyway. This limits the amount of structure that needs to remain open during construction.

At any rate the main issue is maintaining the circulation if you cut out half the garage. Typically you will then lose half the ramps (the ramps appear to be interior). I won't speculate further on this as it's a simple consideration if you know the layout of the garage then there are potential ways around this which may range from somewhat difficult to pointless.

The real issue is either (1) replacing or (2) saving, lowering and re-erecting the structure. If you keep the existing structure and re-erect it, you still need to figure out where the new columns will go. If you build a new structure, then it is much easier to fit the new structure around a new garage layout. On the other hand, if you demolish and rebuild the structure you aren't saving any cost except the underground garage. And if you lower, remove and re-erect the building you also aren't saving much.

And if you can get the right building above it, I don't think this as big a problem as some here seem to think. For example see this Haley & Aldrich note on Russia Wharf, or the Pier 4 / Fan Pier work. Plus you get an extra 70 or in your 8/9 floor version almost 90' of building.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

paperless paul said:
I apologize if I misused your quote.

I have no particular knowledge, interest or like of Chiofaro, but quoting Johnson, an infamously difficult and complicated character does not leave me much wiser. Why does he say 'wrong' and how does that relate to this proposed project? To me, it's not clear.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the late response. Been away. Johnson felt IP was too big for the neighborhood. It's why he thought the only way to meet the challenge, build the size Chiofaro demanded, was to build a "village." That's what Johnson meant when he called his client "wrong." (But as you say, both men were difficult. One still is. There may have been other issues. Probably were. Interesting - could this by why DC is not seeking the services of a Gehry or Hadid? Just a thought. Maybe he's tried.)

You can dispute my taste and that's fine. I can be just as "wrong" as the next guy. Personally, I find Chiofaro's latest renderings "preposterous" and uninteresting. It feels more like a sales document than anything and, frankly, dated. Some cool ideas about public realm to get people engaged but few other details beyond height and "stair steps." Okay, that's where we are in the process. But my fear is the man is not up to the challenge of the site. Boston will be wonderful whatever he accomplishes here, but this is one of the few places where something iconic and special could and should be built. We may disagree on design but I know everyone on this forum agrees with that.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Know matter if you Like or Dislike International Place:
I feel that IP has become the Postcard of the City of Boston more than the PRU
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

TheRifleman said:
Know matter if you Like or Dislike International Place:
I feel that IP has become the Postcard of the City of Boston more than the PRU
Click to expand...

Hum, I respectfully disagree.

The Hancock Tower is the "Postcard for the City of Boston" -- particularly when juxtaposed with the Richardson Trinity Church, the Copley Plaza and perhaps the McKim Public Library.

IP is a giant "Andersen Windows" advertisement. It would be perfectly at home with the brash word TRUMP on the side, in 10 ft. gold letters.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

JeffDowntown said:
Hum, I respectfully disagree.

The Hancock Tower is the "Postcard for the City of Boston" -- particularly when juxtaposed with the Richardson Trinity Church, the Copley Plaza and perhaps the McKim Public Library.

IP is a giant "Andersen Windows" advertisement. It would be perfectly at home with the brash word TRUMP on the side, in 10 ft. gold letters.
Click to expand...

IP has become quite literally a postcard icon of Boston. Go look at a postcard stand and look at how many of the postcards feature it. There are two main subjects of Boston postcards: Waterfront/IP and Back Bay/Hancock/Pru.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

datadyne007 said:
IP has become quite literally a postcard icon of Boston. Go look at a postcard stand and look at how many of the postcards feature it. There are two main subjects of Boston postcards: Waterfront/IP and Back Bay/Hancock/Pru.
Click to expand...

And I'm starting to believe that Waterfront/IP is a better picture.

Jeff--I didn't say you have to like the building I'm just posting a fact.
Everybody will have their likes and dislikes. But you cannot take away that Chiofaro built something of significance for the city's skyline.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

datadyne007 said:
IP has become quite literally a postcard icon of Boston. Go look at a postcard stand and look at how many of the postcards feature it. There are two main subjects of Boston postcards: Waterfront/IP and Back Bay/Hancock/Pru.
Click to expand...

+1
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

I hate looking at the international place buildings, they make Boston's skyline look like a joke. The harbor towers too. We need more skyscrapers to distract people from noticing those buildings.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

lynqueezy said:
I hate looking at the international place buildings, they make Boston's skyline look like a joke. The harbor towers too. We need more skyscrapers to distract people from noticing those buildings.
Click to expand...

Rofl I see what you did there.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

TheRifleman said:
Know matter if you Like or Dislike International Place:
I feel that IP has become the Postcard of the City of Boston more than the PRU
Click to expand...

I believe that's true. And it's funny, no matter what we may think about something when it is first built, over time we come to admire and even love it. We do that because it's our city. At least, that's what I find I do.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

JeffDowntown said:
Hum, I respectfully disagree.

The Hancock Tower is the "Postcard for the City of Boston" -- particularly when juxtaposed with the Richardson Trinity Church, the Copley Plaza and perhaps the McKim Public Library.

IP is a giant "Andersen Windows" advertisement. It would be perfectly at home with the brash word TRUMP on the side, in 10 ft. gold letters.
Click to expand...

I answered Rifleman before I read your missive. The view from the water has become so iconic that one can't help but think of it as one Boston signature.

However, Trinity Church remains one of my favorite buildings anywhere. And MMW's library is a treasure, outside and inside, that any city would be proud to have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top