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

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

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.

And I do have to admit that the central waterfront view gets used a lot. If you Google Boston skyline, though, you still get a slight majority dominated by the Hancock Tower, usually with a Charles River, sail boat setting.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Harbor Garage project is everyone’s concern


By Tom Keane | Globe Columnist August 03, 2014

When it comes to plans to redevelop the Boston Harbor Garage, the worries of abutters matter, but the public interest matters more.

I once used to live at Harbor Towers, the two concrete buildings perched on the edge of the Boston Harbor next to Rowes Wharf.

“Best views in the city,” my father once told me.

“Why’s that?” I asked.

“Because they’re the only ones that don’t have to look at Harbor Towers.”

True enough. The Harbor Towers are ugly, products of the same architectural insanity that gave us Boston City Hall, the State Service Center, and, adjacent to the Harbor Towers, the garage. The towers and the garage were both designed by I.M. Pei, a saint to architects — proof, I guess, that even saints can sin. The hulking, impersonal garage is particularly malign: It tells you much about our past attitude towards the water, and the way we blithely polluted it, that the best use for such frontage was a place to store idle automobiles. So one would think that everyone with an interest in the renaissance of Boston’s waterfront would welcome proposals by the garage’s owner, Don Chiofaro, to tear down the building and replace it with something better, something beautiful.

And pretty much everyone does seem welcoming, with one ironic exception. The residents of the Towers — some, but by no means all — have girded for battle. On July 21, the Towers’ trustees greeted Chiofaro’s plans with a scathing 12-page letter. The critique struck wearisomely familiar themes: too high, too dense, too much. “We support redevelopment of the Harbor Garage site,” one of the trustees insists to me, but when I ask what, if anything, would satisfy them, I get this response: “Let them propose something and we’ll see.” It’s an old game: Make developers negotiate against themselves.

Why the opposition? Perhaps, once the garage is done, they fear they’re next. Perhaps it’s mere NIMBYism. Or perhaps it’s because the towers are dependent upon the garage: It houses not only resident parking (a deal that’s due to expire in 2022) but also the buildings’ HVAC and mechanical systems.

All of this confrontation has created the widespread perception that the battle over the garage is basically a fight between the towers residents and Chiofaro. That’s a shame. It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be. This is everybody’s battle.

Cut off from the city by the elevated Central Artery, Boston Harbor was once a squalid and inaccessible mess. Today, thanks to the Big Dig, the Deer Island sewage treatment plant, and efforts by innumerable individuals and organizations, the city is reclaiming the water. A crucial player in that has been Vivien Li, head of the Boston Harbor Association and a driving force behind the creation of the HarborWalk, a path of waterside public access that extends for 39 miles. She also sits on a key harbor review commission, one of the many entities that will be reviewing Chiofaro’s proposal.

Chiofaro’s plan has breathtaking beauty. It envisions two towers, one terra-cotta, the second glass. Uses would be varied, including offices, residences, retail, and a hotel. The two towers would be connected by public space with a retractable roof. Views from the street to the water would be plentiful, and the city skyline would be strikingly improved.

A good start, in other words, but there’s still a long way to go. The project’s mass may, indeed, be excessive. Li points out to numerous concerns, including shadowing, wind and congestion. Creative thought about mitigation that might lessen their impacts, she says.

More broadly, she argues, buildings can’t be viewed in isolation, but rather have to be considered as part of the fabric of the area. For example, can the plans for the Harbor Garage be a spur for rethinking the space in front of the New England Aquarium?

Still, she and many others — such as the activist group BostonNow — frame these issues in the context not of how do we stop it but, rather, how do we make it work? Chiofaro’s plans have provoked much discussion, and for good reason: The public has a deep and abiding interest in what becomes of the entire waterfront. Harbor Towers has a loud voice, no doubt. But it’s everyone else’s that deserves a listen.
Tom Keane can be reached at tomkeane@tomkeane.com

Tom Keane Spot on.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/...one-concern/9RUuo0AwsyyfIO4upNLPYN/story.html

No reason why Chiofaro development should be under serious consideration. This is about what is best for the public not Harbor Tower residents.

I think its a disgrace that the City & state officials are promoting a taxpayers money pit development for the BCEC which was already developed 10 years ago but dragging their Feet on Chiofaro Private Development.

The difference between private development compared to Taxpayers funded Development: Its like Chiofaro saying he needs to rebuild IP after 10 years....But instead that development will probably remain standing after 100 years.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

“Let them propose something and we’ll see.”

Um, it's not your decision, and I'm still puzzled why you think we require your approval. Good job shooting yourself in the foot too.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Every single article that mentions Harbor Towers residents opposing proposals on height grounds needs to reiterate that they're living in some of the tallest buildings in the city.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

In Washington, what's going on between the HT residents and Chiofaro is called a Kabuki Dance. The core issue is that the HT residents have a property interest in the garage for another eight years. They are less concerned about the height and the view then they are in securing space in a new garage at a reasonable price after their current easements expire. Because Chiofaro doesn't have the financing for his project, he can't discuss terms with them. (If he offered to sell them 600 spaces at $100,000 a space, that would finance much of his garage construction.)

So we've been able to witness five years of a Kabuki dance, with eye candy renderings but no real substance, and howls of protest about height and views.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

If Chiofaro waits 8 years to redevelop the garage, can he move to redevelop without any reserved spaces for HT residents? In other words, does their ownership stake essentially evaporate at that time? Or would he need to buy them out?

If their ownership stake is set to evaporate, I don't understand how Chiofaro doesn't have tremendous leverage here.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

If Chiofaro waits 8 years to redevelop the garage, can he move to redevelop without any reserved spaces for HT residents? In other words, does their ownership stake essentially evaporate at that time? Or would he need to buy them out?

If their ownership stake is set to evaporate, I don't understand how Chiofaro doesn't have tremendous leverage here.

Their easements with respect to garage spaces end in about eight years. However, they will still have an easement, perhaps in perpetuity, for HT utilities infrastructure within the garage site. IIRC, Chiofaro early on, when he was proposing the interim floating garage, said he would move and rebuild the utilities infrastructure off the garage site. HT would have to consent to his doing that.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Stellarfun: I think you live in your own Magical world of Bullshit.

Chiofaro/Pru Owns the garage: Yes..... there is an agreement concerning the HT Utilities Grid and some of the parking spots.
You act like Harbor Towers trustees control the outcome of this development. That is complete bullshit.

If this project gets approved I'm sure that the developer will have a responsibility for the parking spots and figuring out a situation for the Utilities Grid. But to say that Harbor towers trustees are the key to this development is complete horse-shit.

I'm still waiting for Chiofaro to go bankrupt as you once presumed that he would default on the Harbor Garage Note
 
Last edited:
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

I'm not even going to touch Rifleman's comment, but this occurred to me last night:

Don Chiofaro is [EDIT: 68]. Not to be morbid, but don't the HT residents just have to play out the string on this until he's gone? I don't get the impression that his company will keep pushing aggressively like this under any conceivable successor, as his passion for building on this site is born mostly of personal grudges against the HT residents and Mayor Menino.

Sure, when 2022 rolls around the garage can come down - sooner if Chiofaro threatens the residents with no parking in the new project unless they compromise (which would tank their property values many years in advance of it actually happening) - but will the only champion of this idea actually be around to push it then?
 
Last edited:
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

I'm not even going to touch Rifleman's comment, but this occurred to me last night:

Don Chiofaro is, I believe, in his 80s. Not to be morbid, but don't the HT residents just have to play out the string on this until he's gone? I don't get the impression that his company will keep pushing aggressively like this under any conceivable successor, as his passion for building on this site is born mostly of personal grudges against the HT residents and Mayor Menino.

Sure, when 2022 rolls around the garage can come down - sooner if Chiofaro threatens the residents with no parking in the new project unless they compromise (which would tank their property values many years in advance of it actually happening) - but will the only champion of this idea actually be around to push it then?

He is 68.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

"True enough. The Harbor Towers are ugly, products of the same architectural insanity that gave us Boston City Hall, the State Service Center, and, adjacent to the Harbor Towers, the garage."

Don't agree with this at all except for the garage. HT is as clean and elegant as you can probably get with concrete. It's the lawn and in-ground pool that is problematic and off-putting. The fact that buildings like this are not conventionally "pretty" is part of their appeal.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

The fact that the Harbor Towers Trustees did not let the Harbor Towers Residents actually vote is very disturbing in itself.

Not sure why the Trustees just assumed that nobody want's this project. Maybe they are right but to not let the people that own the condos to vote on Chiofaro project is very troubling.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Is this board similar to a condo association?
Then It is usually their job to make decisions for the whole group.
Still disturbing, but of course they didn't ask. That would mean they'd have to state their real findings or lie about it.
This way they are just making wild guesses based on talking to a few "select" residents.

If you ask 10% of residents, and they all give the same answer. Then it becomes safer to extrapolate that answer. Provided you ask the right 10% <wink>.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Their easements with respect to garage spaces end in about eight years. However, they will still have an easement, perhaps in perpetuity, for HT utilities infrastructure within the garage site. IIRC, Chiofaro early on, when he was proposing the interim floating garage, said he would move and rebuild the utilities infrastructure off the garage site. HT would have to consent to his doing that.

If the utilities are moved at no cost and with no impact of operations to the residents, I don't think they have as much leverage here as with the parking. They are entitled to their utilities, not where they are housed. They are in mechanical spaces that the residents don't have access to. They are not going to tinker in the middle of the night because their AC ain't cold enough.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Is this board similar to a condo association?
Then It is usually their job to make decisions for the whole group.
Still disturbing, but of course they didn't ask. That would mean they'd have to state their real findings or lie about it.
This way they are just making wild guesses based on talking to a few "select" residents.

If you ask 10% of residents, and they all give the same answer. Then it becomes safer to extrapolate that answer. Provided you ask the right 10% <wink>.

If we are talking about the Board of Trustees, than it is the group legally elected by unit owners to manage the association and it's internal/external business as dictated under Chapter 183A.

Legally speaking, they are under no obligation to poll unit owners since they have been duly trusted with managing the association and protecting its legal and financial interests as they see appropriate. However, a requisite percentage of unit owners can petition the board to force any particular issue to be reopened. Of course, each individual unit owner is a potential abutter to the project and can voice their support/objection as would any other property owner in the city.

I'm confused however, looking over the articles and the posted material. What evidence do we have that there hasn't been any discussion among unit owners regarding the associations' official stance?
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

If the utilities are moved at no cost and with no impact of operations to the residents, I don't think they have as much leverage here as with the parking. They are entitled to their utilities, not where they are housed. They are in mechanical spaces that the residents don't have access to. They are not going to tinker in the middle of the night because their AC ain't cold enough.

I'm hearing the word "easement" thrown around. If this indeed an "easement" rather than a lease, than it's not as simple as relocating the utilities. Depending on the legal wording, an easement can be tied to specific conditions or permanent. If its the latter, the Harbor Towers association has a legal right to the garage property and they would need to agree to any sort of plan that involves removing or altering their stake in it.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

This is my point. If the approval for this project goes through the proper channels and gets the okay. Then Harbor Tower residents will not be the deciding factor. Chiofaro/Pru will probably be legally responsible for the parking and Mechanical systems but these issues will not determine if Chiofaro can redevelop the site.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Don Chiofaro captained Harvard football; in his senior year, he was the only unanimous All-Ivy choice; he's been inducted into Harvard football's Hall of Fame. He also played middle linebacker with a height close to 5'8" and a playing weight between 215 and 225 pounds.

"When you got dinged or got your bell rung, you just blew it off," [Henry] Carson [Giants MLB] said. "You didn't even tell people about it. It was one of those things that you just played through because you were a warrior, you were trained to suck it up and go."

Players used to believe that concussions occurred only with a loss of consciousness. Today, it is known that any temporary disturbance of the neurological function after a traumatic head injury constitutes a concussion. ...
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=4880756

Going forward, if I were Don Chiofaro, I would wonder about the long-term consequences of my legacy as a great football player.
______________________

An 'agreement' is not the same as an easement or covenant. Short definition of easement:
the right to use the real property of another for a specific purpose. The easement is itself a real property interest, but legal title to the underlying land is retained by the original owner for all other purposes

Easements can be for a period of years, or they can be in perpetuity. They are set out in the title to the property, so Chiofaro is/was well-aware that these easements on the garage property existed at the time of his purchase of the property.

At one point in the distant past, IIRC, a frequent poster on Harbor Garage threads, championing Chiofaro's development proposals, argued that the city of Boston should evict the HT car owners from their HT garage spaces be exercising eminent domain so Chiofaro could proceed with his development.

As for Chiofaro and bankruptcy -- the Harbor Garage wouldn't be his first bankruptcy as a developer -- I said he had a $85 million balloon note from an investment company in CT that was due in 2013, and if he did not pay the $85 million that was due, he would have to re-finance, or sell the property and use the proceeds to pay off the note, or let the lender take it over because he was in default. As it was, he re-financed in June, 2013, and increased the principal amount on the new, five-year note to $90 million.

Assuming he is paying 5 percent simple interest on $90 million, that requires about $12,200 in daily parking revenue 365 days a year, or nearly $10 revenue for every space.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top