BCEC expansion | Seaport

I think I agree with a lot of the above. Public subsidized convention centers make about as much sense as public subsidies for sports stadiums... meaning they don't make sense economically. At best they break even sometimes and can bring in a little money from outside the region, or at least prevent a little money from leaving.

Since there has already been a public investment, however, I don't think the state should be selling public property for pennies on the dollar just because it may have been a bad decision decades ago.

The state should be maximizing the benefits to the public of BCEC (and Hynes). That means short and long term economic impact, jobs, lowering taxation, trying for a net positive inflow of convention dollars. Or selling real estate if the math actually makes sense in the short and long term.

Tangent, neither your or Curcuas's comments really make any sense [although your comments are more logical] -- to some extent you are both trying to re-litigate the past decision to build the BCEC and to some extent you are using generic arguments when the situation is unique to Boston

Here are the issues and how the Convention Center Authority has analyzed them [my prioritization]:
  1. Hynes is going to be sold -- so there are likely to be more opportunities for the BCEC to be busy
  2. Hynes has surrounding it many hotel rooms in a cluster
    1. quite a few [2500+] connected by weather protected means: [Westin [700], Marriott [800], Sheraton [1200]
  3. If you can't easily get the people to/from the Back Bay except by fleets of buses -- then the BCEC needs hotels which are easily accessible -- and more rooms because of its much larger scale
  4. Hence the goal mentioned in the story of 5,000 easily accessible rooms
    1. so far the BCEC has the Westin [800]
    2. with Omni [1200 with underground tunnel under construction]
    3. + Seaport Hotel, Yotell and a couple of other smaller hotels within a 5 to 10 minute walk
    4. above -- collectively about 3,000 rooms
  5. Hence the need to create a way to get about 2,000 more hotel rooms within that magic circle
    1. D St is a good starting point
    2. That massive parking lot for the Post Office is another good target [not part of the Authority's argument]
  6. The only remaining questions
    1. how to do it in a reasonable time frame commensurate with the proposed BCEC expansion
    2. how much if any the public should contribute to the process
    3. here -- I completely agree with you and Charlie -- no more Net public money should be spent
Beyond the Authority's ideas for land it already owns on D St. -- I'd like to see a Big Deal -- package:
  1. Sell the Hynes -- that should be unloaded from the public assets to allow complete freedom of development to expand the Pru complex
    1. taking maximum advantage of the abundance of connected hotel rooms
    2. and thousands of connected parking spaces --
    3. perhaps a major performing arts center with an attached office / residence tower
  2. Buy the P.O. and the P.O.'s Parking Lot
  3. use the P.O. land to Develop the expanded South Station
    1. license the land not needed by South Station expansion to developers -- let it be developed aggressively over the next decade
    2. use some of the land to improve the public realm along the Boston proper side of the Fort Point Channel and a re-opened Dorchester Ave -- a major arterial connector along with A Street and D Street
  4. Most of the P.O's Parking lot can be licensed to developers to expand the soon to be booming extended Seaport on the other side of Summer St. into the GE / Gillette Area
  5. Finally as part of the deal acquire some new land for a compact and efficient P.O.
    1. perhaps in the old industrial area along Dorchester Ave. as there is no real benefit to having the P.O. next to a train station -- it does however need a good a quick access to Logan and local highways
Quite independently -- the comment to "Sell the land and connect D St. to Southie". Well which Southie are you talking about -- the times they be a chang'in. Dorchester Ave near Broadway is becoming more like the Seaport / Kendall as is the area near World Shaving HQ than it is old Southie below Broadway

My humble suggestion for ABf's interested in this topic --- that in addition to looking at Google Maps and an occasional read of the Boston Business Journal -- Perhaps even a walk-about -- such as circumnavigating the BCEC or walking from the BCEC down past GE and Gillette to Broadway T Station
 
Last edited:
I disagree completely nor am I relitigating past decisions.

There is no need to keep "planning" uses that require subsidy and throwing more money at the convention center. Sell the land at the (high!) market price it would fetch as the area is now, as you note, hot. Allow growth like in the rest of the Seaport. Better yet, divide the land into smaller lots and prescribe fewer uses to get a more interesting and varied urban fabric.
 
Tangent, neither your or Curcuas's comments really make any sense [although your comments are more logical] -- to some extent you are both trying to re-litigate the past decision to build the BCEC and to some extent you are using generic arguments when the situation is unique to Boston

Here are the issues and how the Convention Center Authority has analyzed them [my prioritization]:
  1. Hynes is going to be sold -- so there are likely to be more opportunities for the BCEC to be busy
  2. Hynes has surrounding it many hotel rooms in a cluster
    1. quite a few [2500+] connected by weather protected means: [Westin [700], Marriott [800], Sheraton [1200]
  3. If you can't easily get the people to/from the Back Bay except by fleets of buses -- then the BCEC needs hotels which are easily accessible -- and more rooms because of its much larger scale
  4. Hence the goal mentioned in the story of 5,000 easily accessible rooms
    1. so far the BCEC has the Westin [800]
    2. with Omni [1200 with underground tunnel under construction]
    3. + Seaport Hotel, Yotell and a couple of other smaller hotels within a 5 to 10 minute walk
    4. above -- collectively about 3,000 rooms
  5. Hence the need to create a way to get about 2,000 more hotel rooms within that magic circle
    1. D St is a good starting point
    2. That massive parking lot for the Post Office is another good target [not part of the Authority's argument]
  6. The only remaining questions
    1. how to do it in a reasonable time frame commensurate with the proposed BCEC expansion
    2. how much if any the public should contribute to the process
    3. here -- I completely agree with you and Charlie -- no more Net public money should be spent
Beyond the Authority's ideas for land it already owns on D St. -- I'd like to see a Big Deal -- package:
  1. Sell the Hynes -- that should be unloaded from the public assets to allow complete freedom of development to expand the Pru complex
    1. taking maximum advantage of the abundance of connected hotel rooms
    2. and thousands of connected parking spaces --
    3. perhaps a major performing arts center with an attached office / residence tower
  2. Buy the P.O. and the P.O.'s Parking Lot
  3. use the P.O. land to Develop the expanded South Station
    1. license the land not needed by South Station expansion to developers -- let it be developed aggressively over the next decade
    2. use some of the land to improve the public realm along the Boston proper side of the Fort Point Channel and a re-opened Dorchester Ave -- a major arterial connector along with A Street and D Street
  4. Most of the P.O's Parking lot can be licensed to developers to expand the soon to be booming extended Seaport on the other side of Summer St. into the GE / Gillette Area
  5. Finally as part of the deal acquire some new land for a compact and efficient P.O.
    1. perhaps in the old industrial area along Dorchester Ave. as there is no real benefit to having the P.O. next to a train station -- it does however need a good a quick access to Logan and local highways
Quite independently -- the comment to "Sell the land and connect D St. to Southie". Well which Southie are you talking about -- the times they be a chang'in. Dorchester Ave near Broadway is becoming more like the Seaport / Kendall as is the area near World Shaving HQ than it is old Southie below Broadway

My humble suggestion for ABf's interested in this topic --- that in addition to looking at Google Maps and an occasional read of the Boston Business Journal -- Perhaps even a walk-about -- such as circumnavigating the BCEC or walking from the BCEC down past GE and Gillette to Broadway T Station
Excellent analysis and suggestions....good to see them all in one place in order to make comparisons and a cogent argument. It would be nice if Boston could/would make a comprehensive plan for conventions/hotels. This is a niche market that goes far beyond tourism. Given the manic schedules of many conventions/meetings it's vital to have as easy access as possible from hotels to meeting sites.
 
The post office land deal has been years in the making between dozens of agencies, including (I'm probably forgetting some): US Army, Feds, MBTA, Massport, City of Boston

Last I heard the PO was to be rebuilt at 525 E Street, taking up a few acres of Army Corps of Engineers land and Massport owned land. In return a new maintenance facility would be built at Fort Devens for the army, and nothing has been sorted out for Massport. It's a good location, I'd say. Pretty easy access to Haul Road/S Boston Bypass
 
My humble suggestion for ABf's interested in this topic ---[]l -- Perhaps even a walk-about -- such as circumnavigating the BCEC or walking from the BCEC down past GE and Gillette to Broadway T Station
First off, whigh, thanks for using the term "Boston proper" correctly in your comment! (Boston Flower Exchange thread was derailed for a minute by this question, apparently by me)

Having walked your route recently, I come to the conclusion that the expansion should be bordered by residential units along Cypher. I think I know that the BCEC would find this somehow not in their mission statement. Turning that frontage into a blank wall, or even worse a loading dock, would really do a disservice. The res character of the area bordered by D and the Haul Rd. is so tenuous that even something that small will make a difference.
 
Separately, did it occur to anyone ever that the Hynes would be an unbelievable location for a casino? I know that ship has sailed, but man, that would of been a home run
 
Separately, did it occur to anyone ever that the Hynes would be an unbelievable location for a casino? I know that ship has sailed, but man, that would of been a home run
Perhaps surprisingly casino operators hate easy access locations with lots of options for things to do outside the casino. They like their patrons isolated, and busy dropping maximum cash on the casino floor -- without distractions.
 
Perhaps surprisingly casino operators hate easy access locations with lots of options for things to do outside the casino. They like their patrons isolated, and busy dropping maximum cash on the casino floor -- without distractions.

Perhaps I have thought too much about this. The real money for a casino in Boston was at the Hynes. Because the location was owned by the state. Because most of the real action would most certainly not have been "on the floor" if we had decided to make the location high rollers only. Like, say, the Chinese that we want to be owning a spot at One Dalton. Wynn essentially said that it was worth a billion to build their own, so as to say that 1000 Boylston would have been bought and paid for by now only is only the beginning of the rabbit hole.

Sorry, back to Cypher St.
 
Perhaps surprisingly casino operators hate easy access locations with lots of options for things to do outside the casino. They like their patrons isolated, and busy dropping maximum cash on the casino floor -- without distractions.
I'm not sure that is necessarily true. The Atlantic City boardwalk, Las Vegas strip, and Macau all rebut that.
 
I'm not sure that is necessarily true. The Atlantic City boardwalk, Las Vegas strip, and Macau all rebut that.
Actually Atlantic City was the specific place I was told this by a casino developer. I was pointing out all the empty, undeveloped land just inland from the boardwalk, asking why the cassinos weren't interested in supporting further commercial redevelopment. I was told point blank that the casino operators wanted to do everything possible to have your arrive and never leave the cassino. They had no interest in further development nearby.

In all the locations described, there are other amenities, but the vast majority are casino owned. So mostly you wander from spending money with one casino operator to another casino operator. This is very different than having the Pru and Copley Place and Back Bay/South End right outside your single casino door.
 
Interesting. I was told the reason Atlantic City has not expanded is because they could not convince the sparse homeowners still occupying that land to sell their land at a reasonable rate.
 
Perhaps I have thought too much about this. The real money for a casino in Boston was at the Hynes. Because the location was owned by the state. Because most of the real action would most certainly not have been "on the floor" if we had decided to make the location high rollers only. Like, say, the Chinese that we want to be owning a spot at One Dalton. Wynn essentially said that it was worth a billion to build their own, so as to say that 1000 Boylston would have been bought and paid for by now only is only the beginning of the rabbit hole.

Sorry, back to Cypher St.


My understanding is that the neighborhood was vehemently opposed to this. I recall some state politician making the same point, and then the next day immediately backtracking after apparently getting a talking to from his colleagues who represented the area.
 
Interesting. I was told the reason Atlantic City has not expanded is because they could not convince the sparse homeowners still occupying that land to sell their land at a reasonable rate.
I always had the impression that was the "public excuse" for the lack of expansion in commercial development (which the casino operators had committed to to get gambling legalized).
 
Per Steve Adams:

MCCA's David Gibbons says they've gotten estimates on how much sale of the 5.8 acre Hynes property will get from a private developer and it's less than $500M estimate for BCEC expansion... Gibbons declines to give specific estimates "so I'm not bidding against myself" but calls the Boylston Street property "one of the crown jewels to come on the market on the East Coast in a decade"

So... it's not one of the crown jewels, huh?
 
State can solve that problem real quick. Instead of marketing the property and then leave the development up to navigating a thicket of well funding Back Bay NIMBY's, the state should pass a law governing the sale of the property in which the terra firma part is zoned to reach as high as FAA limits allow. Even if that means, god forbid, a shadow gets cast on the turnpike in mid January between 7 and 8 am. If you had that certainly or the state contracted someone to build the building and then sold it, that would add a lot more certainty into the process and thus up the sale price.
 
I think it is silly to measure a convention center in square feet.

To me the question is: are the spaces we have conducive to the conventions we have, want, or will exist in the future?

I think these are going to be less about the "mass rally" and more about the "breakout session" (your pitch to the boss, as an attendee, is that you'll meet particular people of interest or learn specifically-useful skills...which results in smaller, targeted clusters)

How often are all 3 Halls filled. Or all 3 plus ballroom? compared to all breakout/meeting rooms being filled?

The huge "Inbound" conference (hosted by Cambridge-based HubSpot) only uses Hall A & B (and never C) because it is all about the breakout sessions (which have spilled across the Lawn on D food-truck court) to take the smaller spaces at the nearby hotels.

Hall A is the "exhibitor marketplace" and Hall B is for "the general session". The only time I've ever seen Hall C in use is for the Auto Show (and then the question is: do the breakout rooms get used at the Auto Show?)
 
Hall A is the "exhibitor marketplace" and Hall B is for "the general session". The only time I've ever seen Hall C in use is for the Auto Show (and then the question is: do the breakout rooms get used at the Auto Show?)
If C is the furthest section away from Summer St., that section was used for the RV show last weekend, while A and B were occupied by another event that was undergoing setup (Yankee Dental conference?). At the AFP conference back in October, we used A for exhibitors and B for a few events plus meals; all the interesting activity and meetings were as you said, in the breakout rooms upstairs, and the ballroom on the top floor. I would have preferred a venue that had a layout which located the rooms relatively close together; the layout at BCEC leads to a lot of walking.
There was one room used for seminars at the RV show, but it didn't fill up. Capacity was probably around 80 or so, but there were a few empty chairs in each of the sessions I attended.
 


In the Seaport, the MCCA wants a 600-room hotel connected to the expanded BCEC, and planned requests for proposals include an additional hotel across D Street, expansion at the Aloft/Element campus across from the Lawn on D and either an expansion to the Westin Waterfront or a separate boutique hotel.

Wow!!
 

Back
Top