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

[TheRifleman]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

So Chiofaro also generates 20 Million in taxes a year. That has to be the most in the city?

 

[Shepard]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

I was also skeptical that he has $50 million to just hand over. If Menino was smaht, he would have called the bluff. But he isn't, thus handing Chio a great PR victory.

 

[stellarfun]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

I really want to scream if I hear the following two arguments one more time:


- Comparisons with Rowes Wharf. This plot of land is like a third the size of Rowes Wharf. It is impossible to recreate Rowes Wharf on this plot of land. Even if you were able to do it square foot for square foot, say the garage is 1/3 the size and Rowes Wharf. Given the design of the building, let's say that the average floor count on Rowes Wharf is 12 storeys (some is about 15, other parts 10). If you're going to triple that to get the same square footage, you'll still need a tower that's roughly 35-40 storeys.

Chiofaro's Environmental Notification Form states that existing garage is 418,000 sq ft, and the new building(s) will be 1,500,000 sq ft. (860,000 sq ft office, 350,000 sq ft hotel, 220,000 sq ft condo, and 70,000 sq ft retail, and an underground garage with 1200-1400 parking spaces, apparently not included in the sq footage).

The ENF gives the maximum height of the existing garage as 95 feet, and the building footprint as 47,700 sq ft., not counting an overhang. So the new building if it retained the same brutalist massing as the existing garage would be about 330 feet high. The new building also expands the building footprint by nearly 6,000 sq ft.

The ENF does note that the project requires a permit from the FAA, a "Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation", but does not discuss such further. Of course, the FAA has told Chiofaro they will not issue such a determination for the tower heights that he proposes.

Here is a tower configuration developed under BRA auspices in January 2010, which is about 400 feet high; 35 stories and 1 million sq ft.

So is Chiofaro promising $50 million only if the city gives him a 600-700 foor tower?

 

[stellarfun]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

So Chiofaro also generates 20 Million in taxes a year. That has to be the most in the city?

Probably not. The Pru likely generates more. As possibly does the Hancock Tower.

BTW, Chiofaro is not listed as the owner of International Place on the current tax rolls. The [Fort Hill] owners address is in NJ, and almost certainly is an address for Prudential. This is beginning to sound like Winn fronting for CalPers.

 

[stellarfun]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

I was also skeptical that he has $50 million to just hand over. If Menino was smaht, he would have called the bluff. But he isn't, thus handing Chio a great PR victory.

He needs to fill the 350,000 sq ft that Ropes and Gray is vacating at International Place this year, or he will be hurting.

Interesting that the assessment history for one of the three International Place parcels only starts with 2007. I suspect that this parcel may be the one that was impinged by the old Expressway and the ramp than ran off right in front of International Place.

 

[BostonYoureMyHome]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

The BRA and Menino are off their rocker on this one. That massing is the biggest POS insult to Boston. It represents nothing more than a suburban NYC co-op. I am just as mad at this as the rest.

To speak to the topic of losing libraries and schools, don't you know that's how you stay in an authoritative position? Keep the pubic masses stupid and uneducated because knowledge is power and if we had smarter people in the city, Menino would not have been re-elected.

 

[riffgo]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

^You could be right, but the problem with this argument is that Menino was not seriously challenged last November. Sometimes "the devil you know...", etc.

 

[blade_bltz]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Everyone should read this nicely written piece/diatribe/manifesto. Dude should be posting here.

...And for all of Menino's railing against the 'Manhattanization' of the waterfront, the fact remains that even the narrowest parks in Manhattan that fall within the shadows of adjacent buildings fairly hum with life, while our own glorified media strip remains vacant. They're alive and vibrant because of the surrounding skyscrapers, and the people they deliver. This is where the city can easily support density, and it should. As for the waterfront, I fully support preserving it for as many people as possible. But is a sixteen-story building really better than a sixty-story structure, as far as access is concerned? Height actually gives you advantages. Strict limits force developers to maximize space closer to the ground. There will be no glass-enclosed atrium providing pedestrian access through the building to the harbor in a sixteen-story building - no developer will be able to afford it. Build two profitable towers, though, and there's enough margin to provide some real amenities.

 

[BostonYoureMyHome]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

^Well said.

 

[ablarc]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Times have changed,
And we've often rewound the clock,
Since the Puritans got a shock,
When they landed on Plymouth Rock.

If today,
Any shock they should try to stem,
'Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock,
Plymouth Rock would land on them.

In olden days a glimpse of stocking
Was looked on as something shocking,
But now, God knows,
Anything Goes.

Good authors too who once knew better words,
Now only use four letter words
Writing prose, Anything Goes.

The world has gone mad today
And good's bad today,
And black's white today,
And day's night today,
When most guys today
That women prize today
Are just silly gigolos

And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that I'm bound to answer
When you propose,
Anything goes

--C.P.

 

[stick n move]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

The BRA and Menino are off their rocker on this one. That massing is the biggest POS insult to Boston. It represents nothing more than a suburban NYC co-op. I am just as mad at this as the rest.

Id be extremely happy if that was built seeing that the arch has no chance and its 100x better than the garage. So what if it has a nyc feel to it most boston skyscrapers look hideous and these would probally be some of the nicer ones not to mention theres two of em.

 

[Patriots_1228]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

True, they would somewhat block out the view of the Harbor Towers from the north. Thats always a plus.

But what if we get two 400 foot Fan Piers?

 

[bostonbred]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-qPHG4i3u8

 

[greenwayguy1982]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Hi all, I'm brand new to archboston and enjoy reading the greenway thread. There is so much misinformation going around that I signed up and wanted to set a few things straight:

1. Everyone seems to be forgetting that all of the sites along the Greenway are (and have been for decades) already zoned much lower than the Greenway District Planning Study is proposing. In that regard, the BRA and the mayor are actually promoting very tall towers at many places along the Greenway, like near Dewey Square, at Government Center, etc, where they are not permitted today. Even the Harbor Garage site is getting an upzoning so quit whining about how the BRA and Mayor are punishing Don Chiafaro. Besides, the state law (Chapter 91) on that site is so strict it practically doesn't matter what the city says. The state will have a field day with a coupe 600+ foot towers on that site. Never Happening. And it won't be the BRA's or the Mayor's fault. So please get your regulatory facts straight before you start opening fire on the city.

2. Chiafaro has stated publicly that he DOES NOT have the money to build the project. He stated at a recent public meeting that all he has is the "pre-development equity" for the project, which is a couple of million bucks from Prudential to go through the permitting process. Again - NO MONEY FOR CONSTRUCTION. So where's he gonna get he $50 million he pledged to the city? Total PR ploy.

3. Everyone here seems to be forgetting that the Greenway is already surrounded by tens of millions of square feet and thousands of residents. Even if Chiafaro were allowed to build his monstrosity, that would add what, less than a million more SF of office and 120 luxury condominiums. Like 120 more rich people are going to make a lick of difference to the Greenway. Why toss zoning out the window and set a terrible precedent for the entire waterfront just to get another 120 NIMBY snobs living down there?

4. Chiafaro decided he was going to pay $150+ mill for a site assessed at about half that (something like $80 mill). Why should the city reward that kind of overt real estate investment stupidity by bailing him out and allowing him to exceed the existing zoning by 400% and existing FAR regulations by 700%? Real Estate is a risky business, let those who make bad investment decisions suffer the consequences, just like any businessperson.

Just a few thoughts to set the record straight for all you who seem to think that the BRA's Greenway Study is a terrible planning document that will single-handedly set Boston back 50 years on the world stage. Please check your facts before you make such ridiculous and uninformed assertions.

 

[atlrvr]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Probably not. The Pru likely generates more. As possibly does the Hancock Tower.

BTW, Chiofaro is not listed as the owner of International Place on the current tax rolls. The [Fort Hill] owners address is in NJ, and almost certainly is an address for Prudential. This is beginning to sound like Winn fronting for CalPers.

Chiofaro = General Partner
Prudential = Limited Partner

Together they make up the partnership. Chiofaro calls the shots on a day today basis, and asks Prudential's permission for the big ticket items. Prudential collects their 12% ROI and threatens to sue Chiofaro whenever it dips below that amount. This game plays out all across the country on almost every significant property. Insurnace companies don't typically know how to development/manage properties, and single persons typically don't have hundreds of millions to risk in real estate.

To the Arch property...same set up. Yes, when Chiofaro says he will write a $50MM check, he means he will sign the check coming from Prudential's bank account. So what? This isn't exactly supposed to be a big secret, but when people like Ned read the fine print, they feel like they made some huge discovery in some sneaky real estate shennanigan.

As far as the developer not getting a "bailout" from the city on what was certainly overpaying on the garage at the time, the city should be blind to what the transaction price was. Either the project provides a positve or negative net benefit. Of course the developer is realistic, and won't proceed further in a money losing venture, but I've never viewed the BRA/Menino as an entity that looks to universally enrichen developers.

 

[ablarc]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Everyone here seems to be forgetting that the Greenway is already surrounded by tens of millions of square feet and thousands of residents.

? like the big void at Ground Zero.

Did you mean that as an argument for building small?

Even if Chiafaro were allowed to build his monstrosity, that would add what, less than a million more SF of office and 120 luxury condominiums. Like 120 more rich people are going to make a lick of difference to the Greenway.

So actually, in your opinion it?s insignificantly SMALL?

Why toss zoning out the window ?

That?s easy to answer: if something?s bad, it makes sense to discard it. And in the urban parts of Boston, the only place zoning doesn?t suck is in historic districts, like Beacon Hill, Back Bay and maybe the South End. Elsewhere, it reflects the prevailing dogma in planning schools of a couple of decades ago; and it does the city no favors. How could it? It?s shot through with suburban ideas.

and set a terrible precedent for the entire waterfront just to get another 120 NIMBY snobs living down there?

Don?t like those NIMBY snobs, huh? Say, just whose side are you on, anyway?

 

[stellarfun]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Chiofaro = General Partner
Prudential = Limited Partner

Together they make up the partnership. Chiofaro calls the shots on a day today basis, and asks Prudential's permission for the big ticket items. Prudential collects their 12% ROI and threatens to sue Chiofaro whenever it dips below that amount. This game plays out all across the country on almost every significant property. Insurnace companies don't typically know how to development/manage properties, and single persons typically don't have hundreds of millions to risk in real estate.

To the Arch property...same set up. Yes, when Chiofaro says he will write a $50MM check, he means he will sign the check coming from Prudential's bank account. So what? This isn't exactly supposed to be a big secret, but when people like Ned read the fine print, they feel like they made some huge discovery in some sneaky real estate shennanigan.

As far as the developer not getting a "bailout" from the city on what was certainly overpaying on the garage at the time, the city should be blind to what the transaction price was. Either the project provides a positve or negative net benefit. Of course the developer is realistic, and won't proceed further in a money losing venture, but I've never viewed the BRA/Menino as an entity that looks to universally enrichen developers.

atlrvr, what do you think the chances are that the garage purchase was financed in part, maybe even a large part, by the equity amount(s) in International Place as valued in 2007? My question stems from wondering why Chiofaro owed $600 million on a complex in 2004 that was built decades before?

On Chiofaro's bankruptcy filing. The 'mortgage' that Tishman Speyer bought from the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association had a face value of $595 million. TS paid $630 million for it, and that was the value of the secured claim it had against Chiofaro at the time of the filing. TS had outbid Blackstone and others, including Chiofaro, for the 'mortgage'. Chiofaro bid $550 million, though Chiofaro acknowledged in filings with the court that he could not service that amount of debt. In other words, he knowingly made a bogus, if not fraudulent, bid.

 

[ShawnA]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

The Mayor should really keep is mouth shut considering how many holes we have in our city right down. Longwood,Filenes,Allstons, and Kennisgton Place, just to name a few. I really think this city is one of the worst for major developments.I feel Boston has a "Providence state of mind" right now. The city doesnt reliaze after these sites are developed where are you going to build?

 

[KentXie]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

1. Everyone seems to be forgetting that all of the sites along the Greenway are (and have been for decades) already zoned much lower than the Greenway District Planning Study is proposing. In that regard, the BRA and the mayor are actually promoting very tall towers at many places along the Greenway, like near Dewey Square, at Government Center, etc, where they are not permitted today. Even the Harbor Garage site is getting an upzoning so quit whining about how the BRA and Mayor are punishing Don Chiafaro. Besides, the state law (Chapter 91) on that site is so strict it practically doesn't matter what the city says. The state will have a field day with a coupe 600+ foot towers on that site. Never Happening. And it won't be the BRA's or the Mayor's fault. So please get your regulatory facts straight before you start opening fire on the city.

That's not the point. What you are not understanding is that with the current zoning law, even though it is lower, developers can negotiate to change the zoning whereas the passing of the no shadow bill permanently sets the height limit to what it is propose without hope that any future development can negotiate a zone change.

 

[greenwayguy1982]

Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

That's not the point. What you are not understanding is that with the current zoning law, even though it is lower, developers can negotiate to change the zoning whereas the passing of the no shadow bill permanently sets the height limit to what it is propose without hope that any future development can negotiate a zone change.

I'm not talking about that ridiculous shadow bill, I'm talking about the BRA's Greenway District study. Besides, the state's Chapter 91 law would limit height on the Harbor Garage site to 155 feet anyway so I don't see why everyone is p'd at the BRA/Mayor. The BRA's own Greenway study identifies two or three other sites for 600 foot towers along the Greenway.

On and Rifleman, again - get the facts before you open your mouth. The Harbor Garage has been assessed around $80 million for years. So it's not as if the BRA's saying that Chiafaro overpaid is going to have any impact on the tax rolls. If anything, they should adjust the assessed value up to the $150 million that he actually paid and make the city some more money!