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

Status
Not open for further replies.
And I'm telling you who are the fucking idiots running the Commonwealth since the property is already subject to Chap 91 restrictions vs Garage Wall that currently blocks the ocean.

Please tell me what these people are thinking at the Commonwealth?
So the Commonwealth has deemed it's better to have concrete wall on the greenway than a building. Because No developer would ever take the risk of burying this garage without sometype of incentive. Where is the LOGIC here?

That's my point. There are people in the Commonwealth who are either very stupid or there is sometype of political agenda to continue to keep this development suppressed.

There is no reason why this garage should not be primed for a major development. You need incentive to bury the garage: There is too much risk involved.

GIVE THE DEVELOPER INCENTIVE TO BUILD.

The commonwealth is not looking out for the interest of the Public or the taxpayers at this point concerning this development.
 
Last edited:
stellarfun said:
2.) The Haymarket garage has more frontage on the Greenway than does Harbor Garage. Perhaps you want to crusade for tearing that down as well. What about the truly ugly garage on Beach St in Chinatown, also on the Greenway?
Click to expand...



None of the other garages on the Greenway are blocking the waterfront though.

I would support a redev of the Beach st garage though. Yech.
 
TheRifleman said:
Height as much at the FAA allows.
I believe that's 700ft for this location.
(There are not many more sites downtown where they are going to be able to build anything of real substance.)
Click to expand...

600 to 625ft max according to the massport/faa height map. Which I believe is what the city approved.
 
Scalziand said:
None of the other garages on the Greenway are blocking the waterfront though.

I would support a redev of the Beach st garage though. Yech.
Click to expand...

And I don't think anyone disagrees that the garage should go, eventually. It is just what it takes to make a good attractive development feasible and it isn't going to happen any time soon, end of story for about 5 years or so.

As discussed previously, some of the parking agreements expire in the early 20s. That could reduce the need for parking by a level or two underground and bring something more into the range of feasibility.

Based on Chiofaro's ugly-as-ass original proposal I am very glad that the BRA is making sure that what is built there isn't some Walmart big box on its side. And yes, the garage is much more attractive than that original proposal.
 
DZH22 said:
It sounds more like this would be an additional, separate project. It does nothing to address the issue of the garage walling off the harbor from the greenway.
Click to expand...

The linkage I see is that it would address the aquarium's and the city's concerns about losing parking at the garage for a number of years and address the desire to put a nice new tower on the waterfront which is financially more feasible to construct.

The garage has been there for decades now and hasn't prevented the area from being improved greatly, I see no issue with getting more useful life out of it before it is retired. With a tower at Central Wharf you eliminate the need for a tall tower at the garage, so what you do there eventually is build something to 200' or 300' (when people just get dropped off by their autonomous cars rather than pay $40 for parking) and it provides better spacing between the existing towers. Probably better sight lines and less shadow on the Greenway.
 
Scalziand said:
None of the other garages on the Greenway are blocking the waterfront though.
Click to expand...

The waterfront is not blocked, as you can walk down East India Row, and there is fairly wide promenade to the east of the garage that leads to the Aquarium and Central Wharf.

towers-big.jpg


Can you see the Greenway from the harbor? Who was kidding who about what the view of the harbor would be, with no above-ground garage?

The stairs leading down to the water are a nice feature, except that Chiofaro doesn't own the land, and constructing them requires a Section 404 permit from the Corps of Engineers. About as much chance of his filling in the harbor as there is of his realizing his 'floating garage' proposal.
 
stellarfun said:
constructing them requires a Section 404 permit from the Corps of Engineers. About as much chance of his filling in the harbor as there is of his realizing his 'floating garage' proposal.
Click to expand...

Since we are in fantasy land with this proposal anyway,
The 404 is <5000 sqft. - self report, no big deal. Section 401 - meh. Section 10, perhaps more difficult. Chap. 91 unlikely. Order of Conditions impossible if Mayor not fully on board. See indy car as example of easy exit if the city doesn't like the finished proposal.
 
stellarfun said:
The waterfront is not blocked, as you can walk down East India Row, and there is fairly wide promenade to the east of the garage that leads to the Aquarium and Central Wharf.

towers-big.jpg


Can you see the Greenway from the harbor? Who was kidding who about what the view of the harbor would be, with no above-ground garage?

The stairs leading down to the water are a nice feature, except that Chiofaro doesn't own the land, and constructing them requires a Section 404 permit from the Corps of Engineers. About as much chance of his filling in the harbor as there is of his realizing his 'floating garage' proposal.
Click to expand...

Stellar -- da Don [not da Donald] can put all the grass and steps on a barge -- float it into position on a temporary mooring basis -- and then sink the barge until the steps go down to the water level

There is a precedent right nearby -- The Aquarium used to have a barge tied-up to Central Wharf for dolphin and sea lion shows
 
whighlander said:
Stellar -- da Don [not da Donald] can put all the grass and steps on a barge -- float it into position on a temporary mooring basis -- and then sink the barge until the steps go down to the water level

There is a precedent right nearby -- The Aquarium used to have a barge tied-up to Central Wharf for dolphin and sea lion shows
Click to expand...

Pie in the sky. Don't give Stellar any more ammo for his negative comments regarding this project.
 
This looked so good, Im really upset its not going to happen. This would have been huge for the public. Planned public market and an ice rink in the winter. When I saw this rendering against the skyline honestly if this was built as is along with 111 fed, 1 brom, govt center, sst, our skyline would be out of the this world. I already think when I look across the harbor that we have the greatest waterfront skyline in the world. Nyc's skyline in my opinion is not best when viewed from the staten island ferry. Too many crappy buildings on the waterfront. Our skyline is almost flawless from the east boston perspective and this would have put it over the top. Even without this the rest of the proposals and going to blow my mind.
 
stick n move said:
This looked so good, Im really upset its not going to happen. This would have been huge for the public. Planned public market and an ice rink in the winter. When I saw this rendering against the skyline honestly if this was built as is along with 111 fed, 1 brom, govt center, sst, our skyline would be out of the this world. I already think when I look across the harbor that we have the greatest waterfront skyline in the world. Nyc's skyline in my opinion is not best when viewed from the staten island ferry. Too many crappy buildings on the waterfront. Our skyline is almost flawless from the east boston perspective and this would have put it over the top. Even without this the rest of the proposals and going to blow my mind.
Click to expand...

Hum, a little over the top. Look at Shanghai or Hong Kong waterfront skylines.

Shanghai:

Shanghai_Skyline%2C_Dec2014.jpg


By Simon Desmarais [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Hong Kong:

Hong_Kong_skyline_night_lights.jpg


By Kent Wang [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
 
Just a reminder, Boston's skyline is now quantitatively rated 67th in the world and dropping every year. So to say that this or that project will put Boston "over the top" is completely ignoring all construction taking place outside our enclave.

http://tudl0867.home.xs4all.nl/skylines.html

Notable cities that recently passed Boston in the last 1-2 years include London, Calgary, Brisbane, and Seattle.
 
JeffDowntown said:
Hum, a little over the top. Look at Shanghai or Hong Kong waterfront skylines.

Shanghai:

Shanghai_Skyline%2C_Dec2014.jpg


By Simon Desmarais [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Hong Kong:

Hong_Kong_skyline_night_lights.jpg


By Kent Wang [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Click to expand...

Jeff - Sorry -- Bizarre does not make a skyline beautiful

I was joking about the Bakeball impaled on the Hockey Stick building on Guest Street -- because of the Celtics and Bruins being next to each other out at the NB ares

But in places such as Dubai, Shanghai and Hong Kong someone has already done it

:rolleyes:
 
stellarfun said:
I am not Amos Hostetter, nor do I have his net worth. But it would seem, from the Globe article, that Chiofaro's project has a previously unnoticed opponent.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business...nt-jeopardy/nXe1RISa6XWBPRfP92wEUM/story.html
Click to expand...

Stellar -- Now there's a Blast from the Past

Old Amos was one of the few who invented Cable TV -- but he must be about the same age as Ned Johnson

After looking him up he's listed at 79, while Ned is still cruising along at 86
 
Love this quote from the article
"Chapter 91, a state law that has been on the books since 1866 stipulating that the waterfront does not belong to any one person. "

Instead we had a bunch of fucking idiots that built a concrete wall barrier in the 70's along with 2 towers associated with it that looking post communist era. How did those proposals pass in the first place with our Chap 91 in place since 1866?

So basically not sure what this Billionaire from Modern Conintential agenda is. He is so worried about the corruption where the hell was he when the taxpayers are funding half the projects across the city from corruption? Now he is worried about the Waterfront property.

Where do you want us to build skyscrapers Cambridge Ma

What is the real agenda here?
 
TheRifleman said:
Love this quote from the article
"Chapter 91, a state law that has been on the books since 1866 stipulating that the waterfront does not belong to any one person. "

Instead we had a bunch of fucking idiots that built a concrete wall barrier in the 70's along with 2 towers associated with it that looking post communist era. How did those proposals pass in the first place with our Chap 91 in place since 1866?

So basically not sure what this Billionaire from Modern Conintential agenda is. He is so worried about the corruption where the hell was he when the taxpayers are funding half the projects across the city from corruption? Now he is worried about the Waterfront property.

Where do you want us to build skyscrapers Cambridge Ma

What is the real agenda here?
Click to expand...

I agree that his motives are suspect. Don't expect the Globe to unearth the true reasons behind his new found interest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top