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

Status
Not open for further replies.
HT just spent multi-millions to update the internal HVAC systems in the towers and had the buildings' exterior thoroughly checked- there not about to collapse anytime soon.

There's that word collapse again. Did I suggest that? I don't think so.

I have no fears they're about to collapse soon. I've known two HT condo owners, the special assessments for repairs are a real killjoy even for people in the income bracket to afford those units. And those millions spent on the HVAC were the focus of extremely unpleasant battles within the owners' association. Also remember: this was built in the 1970s as high-rise affordable housing. You do realize what sort of baseline quality that implies, right? A huge percentage of other 1970s high-rise affordable housing has been demolished by now. This site saw an extraordinary improvement of the location, burn-off of affordability restrictions, and a resultant turnover of residents to wealthy people - the sort who can afford to keep it viable.

So, collapsing any time soon? Nope, not a chance, and if I ever implied that it accidentally, consider that implication to be hereby retracted.

But, a finely built structure? No. A well maintained structure? Not in its early decades, as I understand it. Much better now. Does it have a long glorious future ahead of it? We'll see. There's no guarantee it'll keep attracting the sorts of folks who both can afford it and will keep throwing money into it.

I have not tracked prices in this thing as all the new luxury housing has come on line. But it certainly gets marketed as "some of the most affordable luxury housing ion downtown." So it's already attracting buyers that are down a few rungs from the nicer, newer stuff, and yet its maintenance costs are going to be way higher than the newer stuff. If we held a long-term bet, along the lines of "which high-rise housing in Boston will hit financial crisis first?" I would have my money on Harbor Towers. (This would have to be a really long term bet - I'm guessing ten-fifteen years or more.)
 
Having been built as affordable high rises, was the pool an original feature? If not when was it added?
 
According to this web site, the pool was an original feature put in when a third tower for whatever reason got nixed:

Having been built as affordable high rises, was the pool an original feature? If not when was it added?

I was only briefly skimming, these pages might have more detail on the pool that what I just culled.

There are numerous pages of entertaining reading here. Whether it's all true, I have no idea, but it's entertaining as hell. Check out the fourth page, in which the place had by the late 70s allegedly taken in a fair number of what today are called sex workers. Businessmen from downtown could allegedly leave their office, slip under the Artery for a "nooner", and be back at their desk before their lunch hour was up.

Original income restriction was 95% of AMI, which back in those days I suspect barely would have been an actual restriction, odd as that location was. By that I mean, the locational oddities and shady reputation would have kept away a heck of a lot of people above 95% AMI anyways. I'd be super curious to know what percentage of applicants were turned away.

ETA: There are various 70s vintage photos in there that show the pool, confirms what he says in the text.

Edited again to add the bloody link:

http://affordablehousinginstitute.o...-towers-part-1-towering-contradictions-5.html
 
Last edited:
According to this web site, the pool was an original feature put in when a third tower for whatever reason got nixed:



I was only briefly skimming, these pages might have more detail on the pool that what I just culled.

There are numerous pages of entertaining reading here. Whether it's all true, I have no idea, but it's entertaining as hell. Check out the fourth page, in which the place had by the late 70s allegedly taken in a fair number of what today are called sex workers. Businessmen from downtown could allegedly leave their office, slip under the Artery for a "nooner", and be back at their desk before their lunch hour was up.

Original income restriction was 95% of AMI, which back in those days I suspect barely would have been an actual restriction, odd as that location was. By that I mean, the locational oddities and shady reputation would have kept away a heck of a lot of people above 95% AMI anyways. I'd be super curious to know what percentage of applicants were turned away.

ETA: There are various 70s vintage photos in there that show the pool, confirms what he says in the text.

I'm sorry if you linked to this prior...can you direct me/us toward what you are reading regarding HT? Thanks
 
Last edited:
That blog is wild. It's like 10 pages of Whighlander posts plus a million different colors.

LOL, really. And like I said, I do not vouch for the veracity of his history on HT.

This guys is very well known in the affordable housing finance world. Colorful and ultra-lengthy postings there, too. I don't always agree with him on his affordable housing opinions but I never ever dismiss them - he is incredibly knowledgeable and experienced in affordable housing. So on affordable housing I would not lump him in with Whighlander. In that domain, he's right way more often than wrong. Big believer in going more vertical, and also building more of everything, to ease affordability crunch (as am I), so most aB-ers would appreciate that. But taciturn, he ain't.
 
LOL, really. And like I said, I do not vouch for the veracity of his history on HT.

This guys is very well known in the affordable housing finance world. Colorful and ultra-lengthy postings there, too. I don't always agree with him on his affordable housing opinions but I never ever dismiss them - he is incredibly knowledgeable and experienced in affordable housing. So on affordable housing I would not lump him in with Whighlander. In that domain, he's right way more often than wrong. Big believer in going more vertical, and also building more of everything, to ease affordability crunch (as am I), so most aB-ers would appreciate that. But taciturn, he ain't.

Was just referring to the insane number of asides and images. Interesting and highly amusing read though. The Cobb quotes are pretty great.
 
This is so True: What a bunch of Hypocrites.


Downtown View: Pots and Kettles

By Karen Cord Taylor on Tue, Dec. 15, 2015 in Real Estate / Development, Commentaries

Opposition to Don Chiofaro’s Harbor Garage Project has heated up. But some of it is the pot calling the kettle black. Or people in glass houses throwing stones.

Hypocrisy is addressed in the New Testament. “why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?” Apparently humans have exhibited this behavior for a long time.

First it was Harbor Towers. Some residents of the tallest structures currently on the harbor objected to the height of Chiofaro’s buildings. (The rest of us were hoping the proposal’s greater height would draw attention away from those unattractive Pei stacks, making them less prominent.)

Then they complained the proposed project did not have enough open space, that it would block people from the harbor.

Yet Harbor Towers itself has little open space, blocking the public on all sides with solid fences or an iron picket fence barring people from sitting on the grass. The residents of barrier buildings so unwelcoming and so antithetical to the public’s enjoyment of the harbor should reflect upon their own failures before falsely accusing another project of the same.

Aquarium officials are now modeling Harbor Towers’ behavior. Aquarium spokesman Tony LaCasse said the Aquarium is not against the garage’s redevelopment—it just doesn’t favor THIS development.

But that position is hard to square with the Aquarium’s objections. An Aquarium petition asks the public to support “safe and affordable access and where visitors and residents can enjoy open spaces and walk along the water.”

Yet the Aquarium and its IMAX theatre present their own substantial barrier to the harbor. They take little advantage of their waterside location. The main building abuts an unfortunate part of the Harbor Walk, a dreary plaza edged with plastic sheeting, with some seating, tables, utility equipment and unrelenting sun.

An even worse side contains a walkway shrouded by the grim concrete of the Aquarium’s north wall. The least the poorly sited Aquarium could do would be to refrain from criticizing a new development that meets the harbor in a better way.

And that is what Chiofaro’s proposal does. His buildings are only two of three original designs being built or proposed in Boston. (The third is Caesar Pelli’s design for the Government Center Garage.) Boston’s other new buildings are mostly a tired cliché, the flat-topped glass box. The Harbor Garage architects, Kohn Pederson Fox, have proposed a beautiful terra cotta-clad pointy structure that visually slides into its sparkly, pointy-topped lower sibling.

Moreover, at pedestrian level those buildings provide the most imaginative public harbor access of any building in Boston. Chiofaro has proposed a lively walking street with a retractable cover between the two buildings. It is the “Walk to the Sea” that planners have dreamed about for years. Dramatic and beautiful—just what this city needs.

If I were the Aquarium, I’d be anticipating the hordes drawn to Chiofaro’s street and planning how to direct them only a few feet away to the seals and the fishes.

But Aquarium officials don’t see it that way. They say the project’s construction would bother their animals—as would any new project. So how could they support anything that would get rid of the garage?

Both Harbor Towers and the Aquarium have another refrain—they want to pull up the gangplank, rejecting new residents and office workers who will need what they have themselves—room for cars.

The Aquarium spokesman did not like new residents and workers competing with the Aquarium’s visitors, 40 percent of whom come by car. He was critical of the Aquarium’s own Blue Line station, saying the escalators don’t work.

In their opposition, Aquarium officials seem stymied at helping visitors find other ways to get to their door. In a recent analysis, the Aquarium proposed several parking strategies that could serve as points for negotiation.

But that institution should not hold the entire city hostage to its parking needs. Aquarium officials show a lack of imagination and little confidence in solving problems.

Besides, this is a distraction. It’s not only Atlantic Avenue that will see more traffic and compromised parking. Every area around the city’s new development will face the same situation.

Yet we know how to solve traffic and parking problems. We just need the will to bring about solutions.

Copy London’s congestion pricing, vast Underground and plentiful double decker buses arriving within minutes of one another. London is still congested, but all cities are congested. It’s part of the zest. Visit a city that has no congestion, and you’ll be where no one wants to go.

The Aquarium must not know that if the Dukakis-Weld North South Rail Link is achieved, a Central Station would lie within a short walk, bringing suburbanites to the Aquarium’s doorstep.

Boston is not going to stop construction, and that construction will bring more cars, and perhaps some solutions. Instead of bellyaching about a new development that causes fewer problems than their own buildings do, these opponents would do better to find the imagination and will to work with the city to get rid of the blighted garage and address matters that involve no hypocrisy.

Their lives will be better. In the long run, we will all benefit.

http://northendwaterfront.com/2015/12/downtown-view-pots-and-kettles/
 
Great piece. It is so dumb to plan a city around suburbanites who come into town a couple times per year and are too lazy to take the subway that is right next to the aquarium.
 
Great piece. It is so dumb to plan a city around suburbanites who come into town a couple times per year and are too lazy to take the subway that is right next to the aquarium.

The previous mayor went to great lengths to keep the Aquarium right where it is when they wanted to move to Charlestown in order to expand.

The Aquarium wouldn't be viable without those lazy out of towners who don't want to spend an extra hour navigating T Station after T Station with their kids.

The Aquarium is a much more interesting use of the waterfront than Harbor Towers Part II... If it comes down to another mediocre tower versus Aquarium, then Aquarium.
 
The Aquarium wouldn't be viable without those lazy out of towners who don't want to spend an extra hour navigating T Station after T Station with their kids.
.


Seriously. I love when people say, "why don't the lazy suburbanites just take the T." That may work from Brookline, some parts of Newton and towns on the Orange and Red lines. It's not so easy to get from places like MetroWest to the Aquarium by T/Commuter rail. Can it be done? Sure. But who the hell is going to spend 2.5-3 hours round trip getting to and from an Aquarium that is 15-20 miles from their house. With little kids in tow too. Just not realistic. And how much money does it actually save on parking when you need to buy 4 round trip commuter rail tickets?
 
Seriously. I love when people say, "why don't the lazy suburbanites just take the T." That may work from Brookline, some parts of Newton and towns on the Orange and Red lines. It's not so easy to get from places like MetroWest to the Aquarium by T/Commuter rail. Can it be done? Sure. But who the hell is going to spend 2.5-3 hours round trip getting to and from an Aquarium that is 15-20 miles from their house. With little kids in tow too. Just not realistic. And how much money does it actually save on parking when you need to buy 4 round trip commuter rail tickets?

I almost exclusively take the commuter rail from the South Coast with kids for a number of reasons. If not, I take the Red Line from Quincy.

1) Kids under 12 are free on the T. So you're only paying for two adult fares (assuming both parents go) if you have two little kids.

2) Kids enjoy the experience of taking the train. It's a novelty and it's part of the fun. Our kids talk more about the train than they do the aquarium. I enjoy relaxing on the train at the end of the day.

3) Traffic, even on a weekend, is a crap shoot. If i can dodge it by taking the train, great.

4) Two adult commuter rail fares are a little more expensive than parking at aquarium, but when you figure in the wear and tear saved by not adding 100 miles r/t on the car, possibly avoiding traffic, and the fun the kids have on the train, the trade off is worth it. Taking the Red Line is cheaper than driving in even with four of us.

I think the T/Commuter Rail are more appealing than you're leading on. Two little kids on a train with two parents really isn't that big of a hassle. It's the cluttered exhibit areas in the aquarium that are the worst. Many adults who live outside of the city loathe driving in the city. I'm not one of them. When my girlfriend and I come into town w/o the kids, I drive. But many suburbanites and exurbanites will take any opportunity not to drive and park in the city. It's amazing how anxious people get about it.

I'm also not sure where the 2.5-3 hours r/t comes from. The Red Line from Quincy is the slowest mode. That's still not close to 3 hours r/t on the weekend and I live well over 20 miles from the city. Commuter Rail is just as fast as driving for the most part. Hell, if i ever drove in on a weekend, I'd probably find street parking or park at a garage with good weekend rates (shouldn't pay more than $10 for all day on Sat/Sun). I'd be walking a good ways anyway.
 
This is anecdotal but backs up the claim above. I have a lot of family in Rhode Island and one year we were visiting them and my parents planned on going to Boston for a day but instead of driving in and doing a day trip and then going home because it is on the way we took the train in from S. Attleboro because it was cheaper and easier. At the time my sister and I were both under the age of 10. So you might be surprised how many people are willing to do it.
 
So you might be surprised how many people are willing to [take transit to the New England Aquarium].
..Once.

It isn't the trip to anyplace that kills you as a parent, its that trip home. Your visit to the NEAQ has a hard stop at exactly that moment the kids say "my feet hurt" or "I'm tired"...before that nobody wants to leave and after that moment nobody wants to start a transit trip. At that "stop" moment, all fun is impossible and kids barely have patience for walking to the car and often (desperately) need a nap, not a transfer at Govt Center or State or a long walk to NS or SS.

NEAQ is EXPENSIVE. It has to be FUN for the people with annual memberships--suburban families who use their memberships as "rainy day"/"snow day"/"school break" distractions. (see also the MOS and Lego Discovery Center mobbed at above times). This isn't about generalized transit access, it is about a target demographic and what *their* choice set looks like. They've got laser tag, Jordan's Furniture IMAX/rides, and competing membership-museums most of which have free parking or at least discounted member parking.

The exception is the Children's Museum, which at least has a short, line-of-sight walk to South Station.

It is easy for young, fit, Green/Orange/Silver singles on this board to assert that the transit trip is "easy", but the reality is that the blue line doesn't serve the NEAQ's target demographics (NEAQ is too expensive for any 1-seat riders from E.Bos/Revere) and the Green line is too slow in the direction it is long and too short in the direction it is fast. For a blue connection, the Orange line is too infrequent for good 2-seat rides (and still doesn't tap many prosperous families, and mostly relies on drive-and-park-and ride...if you're going to have to drive to Malden/Wellington/Assembly, you either what the fun there (Lego Discovery Center) or you want to cut a segment--usually the transit one--and park directly).

Suddenly you're looking at 3-seat and 4-seat rides from places that actually have families with kids and money (and cars) and can entertain the kiddies at places that are much easier to get to. Or a long outdoor schlep from South Station or North Station on what's supposed to be a good "rainy day" venue? No.

Sure, if you WORKED at the Aquarium, you'd take transit. If you're a tourist or a single city person you'll take transit. But ain't no way* once you're a prosperous car-owning kid-having suburbanite that you're both going to pay the big bucks for an admission/membership to the Aquarium and then have to drag kids through transit connections or street walks who are "tired of walking" and need a nap. Their auto-dependence clearly snuck up on the Aquarium and they're doomed if they lose easy parking access.

*LRFox and I are exceptional in our train-loving, and hardly the basis of NEAQ's business model. And NEAQ knows this.
 
Last edited:
I'm also not sure where the 2.5-3 hours r/t comes from.

This depends on a lot of factors. However, most people don't live directly by the train stations so they will have to drive to those, find parking, and pay for parking. Then they need to purchase passes and walk to get the train or commuter rail. Just missed your train? That's going to add time just standing around. Need to switch to multiple trains? That's going to add time. Not on the blue line? You're likely a 10 minute walk from any T station.

Now do that in reverse. Walk back to whichever line you need, catch/miss the train, take into account any connections, walk from the train back to your car, and finish the drive home. Lots of steps with multiple opportunities to get stuck waiting for trains means the time can add up in a hurry.

This didn't even account for those times when the trains are late, or just stop and sit in the tunnel as the clock continues ticking.
 
This is so silly. The Aquarium does not own the garage and has no right to complain about its necessity or demolition. I know it's a cash cow for the owner, but just close it and see how quickly all sides give in to the plan.
 
If the Aquarium Executives were savvy they would have bought the garage but keeping a Cement Block like this on the Greenway connected to the water is a SIN.

The Aquarium Executives at this point should be working with the developer trying to make plan to be incorporated into this development or possible raising funds to rebuild their own structure. MASS is the leading area to Life Sciences. Work with the Life Science communities, Biotech, Fishing Industries.

If Chiofaro reopens the entire ground floor foot traffic in that area would explode by 1000's.

The Developer would completely reinvent the area also the Aquarium could reinvent itself into something like a 1st class Aquarium with massive fundraising to rebuild the same time the developer is building.
Either these executives are lazy, stupid or inept-- something doesn't seem right on there logic.

THE GARAGE GOTTA GO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top