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

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

I like the orginal design Chiofaro proposed. If the Mayor was a real leader he would sitdown with Chiofaro, Harbor Tower residents with the BRA and create some compromise on the height.

Then let Chiofaro and Harbor Towers work out their issues.

Then move the project forward through the BRA.

Nobody wins if Chiofaro is forced to build some PIECE OF SHIT development.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

czsz said:
A wraparound proposal isn't nearly the cost-saver some think it is: Chiofaro would have to replace the spaces lost by modifying the garage somewhere - either underground or by extending the garage vertically and eating into the already-limited profits of his height-limited buildings.


But this site isn't CC or Filene's. Even if the project stalls, if built as desired the worst case scenario is that the garage is torn down, there's a better view of the harbor from the Greenway, and fewer people are able to drive into the city.
Click to expand...

Chiofaro in the initial concept proposal was already talking about cutting the 1380 current spaces to around 1200. At some point, the marginal cost of excavating, cofferdamming for the bulkheads, etc., at the lower levels exceeds the parking revenue one would ever get from those spaces. His only obligation is 600 spaces for HT; to that he can add spaces for hotel guests and condo residents. So his needs may be closer to 1,000 spaces than 1,400.

As Mintz notes, it was too expensive at the time to build underground parking proximate to the towers, and given the space then available, that probably would have been two levels at most, not six or seven.

Chiofaro's 'open to the sea' was always a bit of a conceit, IMO. And even that disappeared with concepts 2 and 3.

In the first concept, the sea was 'open' only if one walked through this glass-fronted galleria with mezzanines and boutiques for either Bulgari or souvenir tee shirts, depending on which kind of merchandise could pay the rent. (The current garage is only half the length of Rowes Wharf; and it looks as if the 57,000 sq ft. parcel is pretty square, so roughly 240' by 230'.)

Basically, instead of the current 240-250 feet of street wall, Concept 1 resulted in 105' of retail wall, 40' feet of glass front, 105' feet of retail wall. Concept 2 was roughly 40 feet of glass pavilion and 210 feet of street wall. Concept 3 looks to be 110 feet of street wall, 30 foot angled passageway with wall, 110 feet of street wall.

Interesting that the land beneath the trees on Fidelity Park is owned by the Aquarium. I am frankly surprised Don hasn't shown a concept that features an aquarium-related exhibit for that space, --one, of course, that he would pay for. Bring the sea right up to the Greenway!
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

stellarfun said:
Chiofaro in the initial concept proposal was already talking about cutting the 1380 current spaces to around 1200. At some point, the marginal cost of excavating, cofferdamming for the bulkheads, etc., at the lower levels exceeds the parking revenue one would ever get from those spaces. His only obligation is 600 spaces for HT; to that he can add spaces for hotel guests and condo residents. So his needs may be closer to 1,000 spaces than 1,400.

As Mintz notes, it was too expensive at the time to build underground parking proximate to the towers, and given the space then available, that probably would have been two levels at most, not six or seven.

Chiofaro's 'open to the sea' was always a bit of a conceit, IMO. And even that disappeared with concepts 2 and 3.

In the first concept, the sea was 'open' only if one walked through this glass-fronted galleria with mezzanines and boutiques for either Bulgari or souvenir tee shirts, depending on which kind of merchandise could pay the rent. (The current garage is only half the length of Rowes Wharf; and it looks as if the 57,000 sq ft. parcel is pretty square, so roughly 240' by 230'.)

Basically, instead of the current 240-250 feet of street wall, Concept 1 resulted in 105' of retail wall, 40' feet of glass front, 105' feet of retail wall. Concept 2 was roughly 40 feet of glass pavilion and 210 feet of street wall. Concept 3 looks to be 110 feet of street wall, 30 foot angled passageway with wall, 110 feet of street wall.

Interesting that the land beneath the trees on Fidelity Park is owned by the Aquarium. I am frankly surprised Don hasn't shown a concept that features an aquarium-related exhibit for that space, --one, of course, that he would pay for. Bring the sea right up to the Greenway!
Click to expand...

Why is everybody against height? It's not like anybody can see the harbor walking by right now. I say give the developer the height as long as the Groundlevel is acceptable to the majority of the people involved. I would rather this project get down right, than another backwards development in this city.

Take out the garage completely and bury it underground.

Build something Boston would be proud of. Make a statement.
I can't believe what I'm hearing leave the garage and build on top? You people are NUTS
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Departments: Statistically Significant

A ballpark assessment
BY: Bruce Mohl and Jack Sullivan
Issue: Fall 2010
October 19, 2010
can you believe it? Fenway Park, America?s most beloved ballpark, home to the Green Monster and Pesky?s Pole, and sacred ground to Red Sox Nation, is worth less than some Boston parking garages. Mercy!

The assessed value of Fenway Park has risen dramatically since John Henry?s ownership group bought the Red Sox in 2002 and began fixing up the ballpark. But even with a 52 percent increase in value, Fenway?s property tax bill is still less than what developer Don Chiofaro pays on his Harbor Garage near the New England Aquarium.

According to city records, Fenway?s assessed value was $26.5 million in 2002. Eight years and $200 million in improvements later (funded in part by federal and state historic rehabilitation tax credits), the value was $77 million. The property taxes are $2.26 million annually.

By contrast, the Harbor Garage, which is less than a fifth the size of Fenway, is assessed at $5 million more, or a total of $82.5 million. The garage?s property tax bill is nearly $200,000 more than what Henry and his group pay at Fenway.

Was someone at City Hall giving the Old Towne Team a break on its property taxes? Boston?s assessor, Ron Rakow, says nothing is amiss. He says property tax assessments are based strictly on the value of the real estate.

At Harbor Garage, that value is determined by analyzing the income from renting parking spaces and also reviewing what other garages in the area sell for. Fenway Park isn?t so easy. Rakow says it?s one of about a dozen properties in Boston that are unique and difficult to assess.

Rakow says his staff reviews confidential income data from the team and then decides what portion of each income stream is due to the business (the team itself) and what portion is due to the ballpark (the real estate). ?Take the Red Sox out and what?s [Fenway] worth,? he says, summing up the challenge.

Revenue from a TV contract, for example, would be attributable primarily to the team. But a significant chunk of the revenue from tours of the park, concerts, weddings, and billboards around the stadium can be attributed to Fenway.
Assessing the value of Fenway seems to be more art than science, but the Red Sox don?t seem to mind. According to Rakow, the team hasn?t challenged its assessment.

most professional sports venues around the country are either publicly owned or heavily subsidized, so their property tax assess*ments are nonexistent or skewed. But the Massachusetts facilities are all privately owned, so it?s easy to compare them. Surprisingly, they all pay about the same, either in taxes or in-lieu-of-tax payments.

The TD Garden, home to the Boston Celtics and the Boston Bruins, was exempt from property taxes until fiscal 2009 and instead made a smaller, alternative payment under a 121A exemption designed to encourage economic development. Since fiscal 2009, however, the property has been taxed like any other commercial property in the city. Its assessed value is currently $68 million and its annual tax bill is just under $2 million.

Gillette Stadium in Foxborough also pays about $2 million, but not in the form of property taxes. Randy Scollins, Fox*borough?s finance director, says the town owns the land underneath the stadium under an arrangement set up in the early 1970s to help lure the NFL team to the area. The town continued that arrangement by swapping the old stadium footprint for the land under Gillette Stadium when it was built earlier this decade.

Under the arrangement, the Patriots make in-lieu-of-tax payments to the town funded by ticket fees paid by fans. Foxborough receives $1.42 for every ticket sold to soccer and football games and $2.46 for every ticket sold to concerts and other special events.
Scollins says the ticket fees are likely less than what the town would receive if the stadium paid property taxes, but he says it?s an arrangement that has worked well, particularly since the Kraft family has opened Patriot Place near the stadium, adding significantly to the town?s tax base.

Fenway Park
Property tax ? $2.3 million
2010 assessment ? $77 million
Square feet ? 331,219
Building value ? $59.9 million
Land value ? $17.2 million

Harbor garage
Property tax ? $2.4 million
2010 assessment ? $82.4 million
Square feet ? 57,346
Building value ? $72.4 million
Land value ? $10 million

gillette stadium
Property tax ? Not applicable
In-lieu-of-tax payment ? $2 million

td garden
Property tax ? $1.99 million
2010 assessment ? $68 million
Square feet ? 166,550
Building value ? $61 million
Land value ? $6.98 million



http://www.commonwealthmagazine.org...nificant/2010/Fall/A-ballpark-assessment.aspx
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Why didn't the author bother to check the assessment of the other area garages?

Wouldn't that be relevant information?
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Arrested Development
Boston Magazine

DON CHIOFARO THE DEVELOPER has a big mustache and forearms like railroad ties and says he?s 5-foot-9 but is lying a little bit there.

Tommy Lee Jones, his teammate on the Harvard football team in the late ?60s, says Chiofaro is about as wide as he is tall. He seems to be in constant motion, even when he is sitting down, and when he is actually moving ? he likes to walk and talk ? Chiofaro often switches direction for emphasis. In midstride, he?ll stop and, as if the abrupt stop were not enough, smack the arm of his companion and say, ?The point I want to make is?? And then he?ll make his point.

He is known, he concedes, as something of a ?tough guy.? The son of a Belmont cop, he lifts weights and plays on a rugby team that recently competed in Argentina. He thinks of real estate development as a game ? ?Donnyball,? as one of his former Harvard Business School professors calls it ? and says everything he knows about development he learned as a linebacker: strategic force, applied quickly. His company logo is a ram. When he?s not talking, he is often adjusting his waistband and crotch, like an athlete between plays.

He?s said to be the basis for Charlie Croker, the main character in Tom Wolfe?s novel A Man in Full, who is a larger-than-life former football player and alpha-male real estate developer.

His critics say the problem with Chiofaro is that you never know what you?re going to get. Some days, he?s laying on his considerable charm and playing nice; on other days, he?s a steamroller. Every Friday morning, he does hot yoga. On Saturday mornings, he puts on old clothes and takes his ugly little boat out into Gloucester Harbor and pulls his seven lobster traps from the sea floor by hand. After that?s done, he often likes to motor 11 miles out to the edge of the Stellwagen Bank and sit alone and ?have a picnic with the whales.? He takes Italian classes. In the past he?s studied Latin dance and flying trapeze. He?s recently gotten into Zumba. He is pretty certain that he can still kick your ass, but his father taught him ?how and when to be tough.? He is now 64 years old and the most talked-about developer in Boston, even though he hasn?t built anything in the city in nearly two decades.
Click to expand...

Continued ... http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/arrested_development/
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

That's a fantastic article. Probably the best one yet on the whole debacle. I only wish the author had thrown in a bit about the Dainty Dot situation and the "more boring" directive for a little more perspective on how the BRA envisions development around the Greenway.

You have a board accountable to one person in the city saying "See those six lanes of traffic, highway ramps, cross-streets, grass and shrubs? Make your building seem less interesting than that."
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Any ex-linebacker who also tries flying trapeze is kind of cool in my book.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Great article. This is priceless

"Eventually I got around to asking a couple of questions Chiofaro encouraged me to ask. The first: What do you want on that site? Something not unlike Rowes Wharf, they said. The second: What?s a Boston building? Kairos Shen, the BRA?s chief planner, has said he wants a building that fits into Boston?s DNA, to which Bill Pedersen, Chiofaro?s architect, literally throws up his hands. ?I have a hard time understanding what a Boston building is,? he says.

Palmieri had difficulty answering that question. After giving a vague statement about size and scale and design and massing, he ultimately echoed former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart?s famous take on obscenity: ?We?ll know it when we see it,? he said.

When I asked about Chiofaro?s claim that they were giving him no option other than simply keeping the garage as is, an alternative no one wants, they stressed that after all these years working to open up that area, they were in no rush; that the area needs time to mature, to evolve on its own. ?On this particular site on this particular day, we can afford to wait,? said Gori"


Also when Chiofaro offered the city 50 Million to build higher. Menino's Boston Herald quote, "city is not for sale." Then the city pushs the Liberty Mutual project with 60 million in tax breaks. Go Figure. Unbelievable how much these people are hypocrites.


PRICELESS
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Too bad the reporter never asked where he was going to get the money to build this thing, after having to throw IP into bankruptcy to keep even a small position and after losing a 350,000 SF tenant to the Prudential Center...I know everyone on this board is gaga about this project, but there's a glaring lack of reality about this whole thing that is really striking. And plus, I don't see how spending time taking a reporter from Boston Magazine lobstering or to hot yoga is going to help bring this project any closer to reality. That's time not spent preparing a DPIR, talking with lenders, meeting with the BRA, or trying to fill the gaping hole in International Place.

Oh and Rifleman, where in god's name did you come up with your "$60 million" figure for Liberty Mutual that you keep citing? Know the facts. Hey, at least that project is in construction right now, doing a lot more good than the hollow promise of benefits associated with the Harbor Garage project, which has no financing, no tenants, no basis in reguatory reality, and thus no chance of actually ever generating the benefits that are being touted as justification for its development....it's just unfortunate that Boston Magazine didn't write that part of the story.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

So tell us, Greenway Guy, what is it that you hope gets built on the Harbor Towers Garage, and what makes that preferable to Chiofaro's proposal?
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Briv, it's not about me - though I'd like to see the thing get redeveloped as much as the next guy or everyone on this page - but I'd advocate for something more realistic and consistent with its context, like Rowes Wharf (which, by the way, if the actual value of the garage were more along the lines of its assessed value, would probably work fine economically). What makes that preferable is that it has even a snowball's chance in hell of actually getting built. But I also agree with the BRA that we'll have to be patient - sounds like there are too many legal issues that Chiofaro either won't or can't address for anything to happen in the forseeable future.

I also think that what matters most is what happens on the ground floor - if Chiofaro really wants to "activate the Greenway," anytime in the forseeable future, he should just blow out the ground floor of the existing garage and put in some more exciting and attractive retail/restaurant offerings or a Trader Joe's or something of that nature. After all, the most active edges of the Greenway are low-rise buidings with restaurants on the ground floor - all the towers (IP is the among worst offenders) have nothing at their respective bases to activate the Greenway. One of the nicest Greenway edges from a pedestrian POV is the Cafe Graffiti block in the North End. Nary a tower in sight in that neighborhood. And yet it's bustling.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Greenwayguy. I completely agree with you about the need for an active ground floor on whatever gets built on this site.

However your North End analogy is way off. That block of the North End is bustling because it is in the North End. The North End is one of the densest neighborhoods in Boston. It is that density that causes the bustle.

In order to achieve that type of density, you need to build in one of two ways. Lots of tightly packed buildings along narrow streets and very little open space (see: End, North) or up. Pick one.

Personally, I prefer the former but for some reason we can no longer build neighborhoods like that. Open Space, wide roads and property line setbacks are de rigueur and they are all enemies of true urban density.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

greenwayguy1982 said:
Oh and Rifleman, where in god's name did you come up with your "$60 million" figure for Liberty Mutual that you keep citing? Know the facts. Hey, at least that project is in construction right now, doing a lot more good than the hollow promise of benefits associated with the Harbor Garage project, which has no financing, no tenants, no basis in reguatory reality, and thus no chance of actually ever generating the benefits that are being touted as justification for its development....it's just unfortunate that Boston Magazine didn't write that part of the story.
Click to expand...

Was it 46.5 Million in state and city tax's for Liberty Mutual to build? Why doesn't the city just offer something similar to Chiofaro if they are so concerned about height on this location? This project creates jobs and much better area to view the harbor? I'm sure your going to say why should we give Chiofaro taxbreaks and my reply is WHY GIVE LIBERTY MUTUAL tax breaks but NOT CHIOFARO? Too much inconsistency with the BRA.

This is the way I see it. Chiofaro should make his case why we should give him the height. The majority of taxpayers in Mass would probably support Chiofaro's project. They don't care if he builds 1000ft tower to 100ft tower. Chiofaro's project benefits the taxpayers in so many ways and also helps with the burden of maintaining the Greenway for the future. I think he has the city by the balls. Either BRA needs to buyback the project or Chiofaro could ruin the area with more parking spaces. The city officials are trying to say there is no rush on this project? Have they seen the job market lately? You have a private developer who buys the sight with his own money to make something better and the city is strong arming him into saying you can only build 200ft max which is the law right now when their are two buildings next door at 400ft? Chiofaro needs to show the taxpayers why should we let him break the zoning law.

The benefits that I see for the height is
#1 Get rid of the garage, Open it up on ground level.
#2 50 Million dollars to the city
#3 Taxes that help maintain the Greenway and city for the future.
#4 Jobs

As a taxpayer I'm all for giving him the height and I'm sure most of Massachusetts residents would be too.

Not liking IP. I actually like IP but I'm sure some residents of Mass don't. The only difference between the people that like and don't like IP is that it generates blue chip tenants for the city. Much need tax base making this city strong. So Chiofaro must be doing something right.

I follow 6 projects on this board
#1 Harbor Garage
#2 Filenes
#3 Columbus Ave
#4 Fan Pier
#5 Seaport District
#6 Congress Garage

The process for these projects are a disaster. Very poor planning from the developers and the BRA. Nothing glorious will ever be built in this city because of politics. It?s sad that Chiofaro?s IP was last signature project ever built in this city in the 80?s 90?s. Lincoln was close but still does not compare to Hancock, Pru, or IP.

GreenwayGuy you might be right about 200ft for this location. I do disagree about 200ft. But the reality is the BRA is not working with Chiofaro at all. They sure helped Liberty Mutual an insurance company get their zoining lifted.

And your also going to say that he needs to file his proposal with the BRA. But Chiofaro knows the BRA will keep coming up with study's that will prolong the process. The system is gamed and Chiofaro knows it. He is doing the right thing taking this to the streets were the real people can make a difference. The Taxpayers.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

Folks who would buy and live in a $2,000+ a sq ft condo residence at the Arch are not going to animate/populate the Greenway. They will rarely, if ever, be seen on the Greenway by the more common folk who are using the space.

In fact, the Arch condo owners are more apt to start complaining about late hours, noise, etc produced by the common folk beneath their windows/balconies. They would much prefer a quiet, genteel Greenway, and for the price they would be paying for their 'cribs', they would expect such.

As for first floor retail, its more than likely to be high end tourist stuff; Chiofaro doesn't have enough space to create critical mass for upper end shops and boutiques, and having just one or two shops would never get the sales volume to justify the rents they would be paying.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

^^
Rifleman, you wrote:

"You have a private developer who buys the sight [sic] with his own money"

Oh really? Does anyone know what the actual ownership/investment split is between Chiofaro and Prudential? I'd be willing to bet that he has almost none of his own money in the deal and that it's almost 100% Prudential's teacher/police/union pension fund investors.

Also, the key difference between the Arch and the Liberty Mutual project is that Liberty Mutual has the money to build it, and will be occupying much of the new building with new people that it is hiring to work in Boston. The Arch's proponent doesn't have the money, has a huge hole in his existing buiding that he can't fill, and doesn't have any tenants or any guarantee of permanent job creation. Huge, huge differences so the comparison is completely off base IMHO.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

stellarfun said:
Folks who would buy and live in a $2,000+ a sq ft condo residence at the Arch are not going to animate/populate the Greenway. They will rarely, if ever, be seen on the Greenway by the more common folk who are using the space.
Click to expand...

Whocares if Chiofaro and Pru want 10,000+ a sqft? That is their problem and when they don't find the buyers they will be bankrupted. The space alone will be used mostly by Common Folks because Chiofaro will probably activate it towards the Aquarium.


greenwayguy1982 said:
^^
Rifleman, you wrote:

Also, the key difference between the Arch and the Liberty Mutual project is that Liberty Mutual has the money to build it,
Click to expand...

So why is the city and state giving them taxpayers handouts? Liberty Mutual is a billion dollar company. As a taxpayer I'm PISSED. They are basically robbing from the working class to build excessive wealth on the taxpayers back.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

^^
Rifleman, first of all, try to answer the question about whether Chiofaro bought the garage with "his own money" as you assert.

Second, if you had any idea the way a TIF works you'd recognize that the city isn't doing anything "on the taxpayers back." In fact, the TIF structure ensures that the city will collect MORE tax revenue if the project gets built - not less. Again, as I've said before - please know the facts before you take such outrageous positions.
 
Re: The Boston Arch (Aquarium parking garage)

greenwayguy1982 said:
^^
Rifleman, first of all, try to answer the question about whether Chiofaro bought the garage with "his own money" as you assert.

Second, if you had any idea the way a TIF works you'd recognize that the city isn't doing anything "on the taxpayers back." In fact, the TIF structure ensures that the city will collect MORE tax revenue if the project gets built - not less. Again, as I've said before - please know the facts before you take such outrageous positions.
Click to expand...


Chiofaro and Pru are private companies. I'm sure that Pru and Chiofaro have private investors. So what is wrong with that?
Is it his own money? Don't know, but it's money from the private sector that actually believes in Chiofaro and Pru. So tell me how that is bad?

The facts are the Backbay is almost under 10% commercial vacancies. There is no reason to give tax breaks to Liberty Mutual to build for expansion especially with the vacancy so low in the Backbay. The backbay is priceless.
The city is actually taken money away from the private commercial real estate sector especially downtown which the vacancy just hit 20%.
The city could give any company 46.5 million in tax breaks and of course it will grow city tax revenue in the future. That is no brainer. Are you serious with that statement? The question is WHY GIVE A BILLION DOLLAR INSURANCE COMPANY TAX BREAKS? I'm a taxpayer and I say tell them to FUCK OFF.
Liberty Mutual is creating wealth on the back of the taxpayers of Boston.
If they have the money to build then why would the politicans give them the opportunity to milk the taxpayers? This is not capitalism. This is buying political votes for the unions in Nov elections for the Democratic party.

This is the way I see how the city is being run.

So you tell me how this is not the facts?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top