BCEC expansion | Seaport

In September 2013, the state announced plans to run diesel multiple unit service between Back Bay and the Convention Center, beginning in 2015. Among other benefits, the link would allow convention center goers to more conveniently use the large cluster of hotels in the Back Bay area.[13] The connection will also create a new station next to the center.

This was the last paragraph in the Wiki article. Is this true about the state running diesel multiple unit service between the back bay and Convention Center? I had never heard of this before.
 
atlantaden said:
This was the last paragraph in the Wiki article. Is this true about the state running diesel multiple unit service between the back bay and Convention Center? I had never heard of this before.
Click to expand...

They've been doing work on the crossing signals on Cypher St, so seems it's still moving forward. It's too bad they aren't planning to extend down to Black Falcon terminal though.
 
Cliff Clavin said:
They've been doing work on the crossing signals on Cypher St, so seems it's still moving forward. It's too bad they aren't planning to extend down to Black Falcon terminal though.
Click to expand...
My guess is that the Cypher St work is related to freight (but might be site-prep for BCEC expansion) rather than for the Conventioneer shuttle, for which the real sticking point was/is crossing through and over Amtraks' yard (see
JohnAKeith's image from the other thread, re-linked below).
comparison_zps758456e1.png
 
Arlington said:
My guess is that the Cypher St work is related to freight (but might be site-prep for BCEC expansion) rather than for the Conventioneer shuttle, for which the real sticking point was/is crossing through and over Amtraks' yard.
Click to expand...

It is. Improved freight connections to the Seaport are in the MassDOT capital plan.
 
fattony said:
Next time try typing the same question into google and you'll get your answer faster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Convention_and_Exhibition_Center
Click to expand...

So this was built 10 years ago and cost 850Million.

Now after 10 years its already outdated. Great vision....and long-term thinking

Did the taxpayers get stuck with this bill? Now they want us to get stuck with billion dollar taxpayers expansion. Which will add more service on the Govt tab.

As a taxpayer FORGET IT.

A typical day on the Orange Line
Disabled Train at Haymarket Station Causes Severe Delays on Orange Line

Ask your politicans why they are not invested in a better MBTA grid but they continue to build on top of OLD infrastructure.
 
TheRifleman said:
Now after 10 years its already outdated. Great vision....and long-term thinking

Did the taxpayers get stuck with this bill? Now they want us to get stuck with billion dollar taxpayers expansion. Which will add more service on the Govt tab.

As a taxpayer FORGET IT.
Click to expand...

I know that responding to you with facts is functionally useless, but I have a minute to kill:

1) You will never pay a dime of tax on this facility unless you stay in hotels in your own hometown, take trolley tours, or rent cars at Logan. I grant that this is possible, but on the whole, you are not a taxpayer with respect to this project.

2) The expansion is not necessary because the facility is outdated. It is necessary because it is too small. It is too small because they built responsibly the first time around and left this extra space to Phase 2, which it is now necessary to build.

3) According to the Speaker of the Massachusetts House, the $850 million spent in Phase 1 has generated a $5.3 BILLION return on investment to date. The Wiki page quoted above also mentions that the economic impact of the project is currently about $900 million per year. I grant that the Speaker may be over-optimistic, but he'd have to be exaggerating ROI by over 500% to be wrong about the facility breaking even, ten years after it was built.

http://wwlp.com/2014/03/24/bcec-expansion-bill-inches-closer-to-house-vote/

4) If you read the article above, you will see that the reason the bill sailed through committee was because it requires no new revenue beyond what is already collected in hospitality taxes. The taxes which, remember, you do not pay.
 
Obviously expanding a business because it's successful doesn't apply when the orange line breaks down daily. Or something.


I can hate on the convention center for a lot of reasons, but despite LOOKING like a beached whale, it is far from its white whale cousins.

The interior, especially compared to the Javits, is awesome. I actually kind of like the front overhang, my main gripe is with the mass of asphalt between it and the Westin. The whole area will improve massively once the north side of Summer Street is built out.

Thinking about the much maligned blank walls running up both sides, they aren't as big of a deal as they would be elsewhere. On the north side, Channel Center is pretty inward facing, and the space between it and the BCEC is taken up by the haul road and an abandoned rail yard; nothing good happening there no matter what. On the south side, there is the block between Bullock and D street that can be developed. As long as D Street is developed well, I'm okay with Bullock serving as an alley. On the bright side, the expansion seems to have a main entrance facing out towards D, which should activate that corner a bit, and help knit old and new southie together. The real crime is what they are doing to Cypher, which is essentially nothing.
Innovating-Boston-Public-Spaces-The-BCEC-D-Street-Lot-Project-3.jpg
 
Equilibria said:
I know that responding to you with facts is functionally useless
Click to expand...

Moderators: please investigate feasibility of making this a mandatory preamble to any rebuttal of Rifleman's impulsive, knee-jerk rants.
 
Equilibria said:
I know that responding to you with facts is functionally useless, but I have a minute to kill:

1) You will never pay a dime of tax on this facility unless you stay in hotels in your own hometown, take trolley tours, or rent cars at Logan. I grant that this is possible, but on the whole, you are not a taxpayer with respect to this project.

2) The expansion is not necessary because the facility is outdated. It is necessary because it is too small. It is too small because they built responsibly the first time around and left this extra space to Phase 2, which it is now necessary to build.

3) According to the Speaker of the Massachusetts House, the $850 million spent in Phase 1 has generated a $5.3 BILLION return on investment to date. The Wiki page quoted above also mentions that the economic impact of the project is currently about $900 million per year. I grant that the Speaker may be over-optimistic, but he'd have to be exaggerating ROI by over 500% to be wrong about the facility breaking even, ten years after it was built.

http://wwlp.com/2014/03/24/bcec-expansion-bill-inches-closer-to-house-vote/

4) If you read the article above, you will see that the reason the bill sailed through committee was because it requires no new revenue beyond what is already collected in hospitality taxes. The taxes which, remember, you do not pay.
Click to expand...

To add to point 3, Fort Point Channel's restaurant boom, in my view, simply would not have happened to such a severe degree without the convention center and its pending expansion. Take Bastille Kitchen, an enormous french restaurant on Melcher Street opening in a few months. Or Smith and Wollensky at Atlantic Wharf. Or Liberty Wharf (granted this is in Seaport, not FPC). Who is going to fill these seats on Wednesday nights? Convention visitors on expense accounts. I would speculate that a big calculus in dropping seven figures to build these restaurants is grabbing a piece of that business.

This is a drop in the bucket to the $5.3B cited above, but restaurants and the like are quality of life adds that benefit locals. I'm not referring as much to the $85 steaks at Del Frisco's, which are basically unaffordable and to an extent, plain silly. But I am referring to the foot traffic, jobs created, open space and park land built, plus knock-on effects like emergence of more affordable places like Pastoral and related but different concepts like the coffee shops, markets (Bees Knees) and the like that have emerged are, I'd argue, "urban" network effects that were accelerated in great part by the BCEC.

The Back Bay is a residential/commercial district initially anchored by (an albeit less important) convention facility. Does anyone argue that it's a failure of a neighborhood? No, it is accepted that it is a showpiece of the city and region. Building aesthetics aside (e.g., Waterside Place), is that development playbook not what the Seaport and FPC are using? The BCEC is an integral part of everything going on in that area.
 
FortPointGuy said:
The Back Bay is a residential/commercial district initially anchored by (an albeit less important) convention facility. Does anyone argue that it's a failure of a neighborhood? No, it is accepted that it is a showpiece of the city and region. Building aesthetics aside (e.g., Waterside Place), is that development playbook not what the Seaport and FPC are using? The BCEC is an integral part of everything going on in that area.
Click to expand...

Going further back, I'm pretty sure if Rif lived in the 1880s he would be complaining about public funds being wasted building the Boston museum, the BPL, and subsidies/land given to all the churches, Harvard and MIT to move there. Because they totally didn't build a bunch of amenities back then to entice development in the wasteland that was the Back Bay. Nope.
 
I basically want my taxes to go to something that will benefit all of us.
Help traffic congestion in the city of Boston including the surrounding towns.

I don't like the billion dollar expansion plan for the BCEC which in general the Seaport was marketed towards an upcoming neighborhood.
Instead we had lower the construction costs for Fallon to help entice Vertex to relocate from Cambridge Ma to Boston.

First it was the
Seaport District, then
Innovation District, with all the taxpayer money being diverted maybe we should call it
Taxpayers district
 
TheRifleman said:
I basically want my taxes to go to something that will benefit all of us.
Help traffic congestion in the city of Boston including the surrounding towns.

I don't like the billion dollar expansion plan for the BCEC which in general the Seaport was marketed towards an upcoming neighborhood.
Instead we had lower the construction costs for Fallon to help entice Vertex to relocate from Cambridge Ma to Boston.

First it was the
Seaport District, then
Innovation District, with all the taxpayer money being diverted maybe we should call it
Taxpayers district
Click to expand...

You are wasting everyone's time here by continuing to carp about the BCEC expansion as somehow being paid for by your taxes, when it has been clearly pointed out to you by NUMEROUS posters here that it will not.

At this point, you are disrespecting this forum and all the posters with your trolling.
 
shmessy said:
You are wasting everyone's time here by continuing to carp about the BCEC expansion as somehow being paid for by your taxes, when it has been clearly pointed out to you by NUMEROUS posters here that it will not.

At this point, you are disrespecting this forum and all the posters with your trolling.
Click to expand...

Who the F*ck are you? Sorry I disapprove of the BCEC expansion I believe its a waste of money.

Your only wasting your own time for reading my posts. Get a life.
 
Convention centers are a ridiculous waste of money and only benefit the few who control the flow of money.
 
Equilibria said:
1) You will never pay a dime of tax on this facility unless you stay in hotels in your own hometown, take trolley tours, or rent cars at Logan. I grant that this is possible, but on the whole, you are not a taxpayer with respect to this project.
Click to expand...

Just because he isn't directly paying for it, doesn't mean he isn't indirectly paying for it.

Increasing taxes on tourists means they'll be less likely to come here or less likely to spend as much money here. Thus, there's less taxes being collected by other means -- essentially diverting potential general fund revenue and directing it to the BCEC revenue stream. So, naturally, the response would have to be to either cut expenditures on items which benefit everyone, OR increase taxes on the remainder of the population.

The main question is thus: does the increase in tourism as a result of the expansion cover the indirectly lost revenues AND pay for the debt from expansion?


I don't really have a side on this. I just remain skeptical that it is a simple decision on whether it should be expanded [with taxes of any sort].
 
TheRifleman said:
Who the F*ck are you? Sorry I disapprove of the BCEC expansion I believe its a waste of money.

Your only wasting your own time for reading my posts. Get a life.
Click to expand...

It very may well be a waste of money. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

However, when you keep repeating the very same miscomprehensions over the "taxpayer" statement you keep making with your eyes closed AFTER numerous posters have explained to you in plain English the actual truth, then you are simply trolling a web forum.

Your opinion is not the problem. Your mindless repitition of something you know is not true IS the problem.

You are simply trolling at this point.
 
Last edited:
JohnAKeith said:
Convention centers are a ridiculous waste of money and only benefit the few who control the flow of money.
Click to expand...

Very valid point. I feel the Commonwealth and city should first target rapid transit infrastructure. To me, THAT is fundamental to building a world class metropolis. The buildings will flow from that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top