Columbus Center: RIP | Back Bay

Status
Not open for further replies.
a-HA! So that's what's been going on with everything. It's about time things got going. And to think that pile driving will be starting in a month ... before we know it a stretch of the pike the length of that covered up by the Prudential Center will be decked over forever more.

and callahan, I never saw a crane on any site, so you're still crazy :wink:
 
looks like the project is about to start

I walked by the parking lot at Berkeley and Columbus yesterday and noticed it had been closed and surrounded by a chain link fence. This means work is actually about to begin. This is not the same site where the 'spite' park is going.

The city requires the decks to be covered no latter than a set number of months after construction starts, all decks must be built at once and there are limits as to how long before the actual buildings have to be started once the decks are finished.
My memory is hazy on this, does anyone know the actual details?
 
Yeah I took pics awhile ago, they have started the work on some sort of base along the edge closest to the highway. There is also rebar clearly exposed. I am guessing work has been going on for a little while. I will get more pics when I go into Boston later this week.
 
Bostonman that site that you took pictures of (next to the Hard Rock Cafe and Bertucci's) is the "spite" park/playground that PaulC mentioned. It's been in that state for somewhere around a year by now. Read the South End News link PaulC posted 5 posts up and all will be made clear.
 
Thanks for clearing that up for me. I had a funny feeling that wasn't the plot for the Columbus Center, but then I saw the base and rebar, and thought that it was the base. Oh well.
 
I went by the Frieda Garcia Park today, they have definitely started making notable progress. They have started the base for something, and they are digging and marking other places as well. Pics on my site, and I will post them here soon.

One question, the Columbus Center will be going into the area near that plot, right?
 
The tower component will go in the plot just to the south of the Garcia Park, extending over the turnpike to Columbus Ave, but the other low rise portions will extend to the east for a ways. It's a big project covering up nearly as much of the turnpike as the Prudential Center did.

Lol, I feel like the "make everything clear" fairy, but go to the link I posted, and everything will be made clear once again :)

http://www.boston.com/news/specials/columbus_center/flash_graphic/
 
Thanks for the link. That does make things a lot clearer.

Here are the pics I got today:
IMGP0470.jpg


IMGP0471.jpg


IMGP0472.jpg


IMGP0473.jpg


IMGP0474.jpg


IMGP0475.jpg
 
Is Columbus Center up in the air?
Major investor says the $650m project is at risk without more aid, new lease
By Chris Reidy, Globe Staff | August 25, 2006

A major investor in the proposed $650 million Columbus Center mixed-use development says the urban village to be built over Interstate 90 is ``at risk" unless the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority renegotiates more favorable terms for its air-rights lease and the state considers more public assistance.

``Our ability to proceed with this development without restructuring of lease payments and receipt of necessary state funding is at risk," the investor wrote in a letter to the authority obtained by the Globe.

The letter, which notes Columbus Center is facing cost overruns, came just as the developer was getting ready to begin construction on a huge project that proposes building housing, a hotel, and parks on a deck over the Massachusetts Turnpike. When completed, something once expected to happen in 2010, it would reconnect the Back Bay and South End neighborhoods, which are separated by the turnpike.

The investor saying the project is at risk is a joint venture of the California Public Employees' Retirement System and MacFarlane Urban Realty Co., a San Francisco real estate investment firm.

Because of soaring construction costs, Columbus Center's price tag has jumped $26 million since the spring to $650 million , said Roger Cassin , managing partner of WinnDevelopment of Boston, the project's developer; deck construction costs have increased to $118 million from $54 million in three years.

For the entire project, ``we're now looking at a shortfall of $17 million to $25 million," he said.

That must be addressed before Winn can close on a construction loan of more than $400 million, Cassin said.

One way to address the shortfall is to get more public assistance.

Critics contend Winn promised during the permitting process that it would not seek public assistance, something Cassin denies. The project is in line to receive about $22 million in various forms of public assistance, he said.

``Taxpayers should not be subsidizing developers' profits," said state Representative Martha M. Walz , a Boston Democrat.

A request to restructure the air-rights lease is ``code for saying we want cheaper rents," she said. ``If costs are going up, the developer should take smaller profits."

The joint venture's letter was addressed to John Cogliano, who recently became Turnpike Authority chairman after Matthew Amorello's departure.

A copy of the letter was sent to the Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency , which has earmarked a $15 million low-interest loan to Columbus Center. It made a copy of the letter available to the Globe.

Calls to Calpers were referred to MacFarlane, which declined to comment.

Dated Aug. 18 and signed by MacFarlane's chief operating officer, Thomas Klugherz , the letter criticizes the Turnpike Authority for repeatedly refusing to meet with the Columbus Center team. Klugherz argued the lease needs to be renegotiated because market conditions have changed. While construction costs escalated, the housing market softened, diminishing the money the project can make from selling its 450 condos.

``The authority's continuing lack of response has put project viability at risk," wrote Klugherz, requesting a meeting with Cogliano.

That meeting could happen as early as next week, said Jon Carlisle , Cogliano's spokesman.

``Whatever decision is made will reflect the best interests of toll payers and taxpayers," Carlisle said.

Klugherz's letter noted that Winn has invested $36.5 million in the project and that the joint venture has agreed to provide up to $140 million.

The long-term lease currently calls for Winn to pay $12.2 million , Cassin said. In addition, the Turnpike Authority would receive 1 percent of the proceeds of resales of the project's condos. According to Winn, that's worth $80 million to $100 million.

It took years to complete the permitting process for Columbus Center. Critics complained the project was too massive. They claimed Winn argued that the project needed to be big so it could attract investors who would pay for it with private financing.

``They said, `It must be gigantic, or we'll go broke,' " recalled Ned Flaherty , a project critic.

Critics were upset because they said that Winn sought public assistance without reducing the project's size.

According to Winn, Columbus Center will provide 2,500 union construction jobs and create 350 permanent jobs. Winn says it will provide $40 million in public benefits, including four public parks and 44 units of on-site affordable housing.

Councilor at Large Stephen J. Murphy, of Hyde Park, said Columbus Center is supported by many public officials. ``It would be a travesty if this falls through," he said.

Cassin said that won't happen.

``Nobody's going to let this fail," he said.

Chris Reidy can be reached at reidy@globe.com.

? Copyright 2006 Globe Newspaper Company.


I don't know about you guys, but I really hope that this doesn't impact the project too much. I would really like to see the pike covered and that immediate area spruced up a bit. I hope this is an issue that can be resolved quickly.
 
Critics: Don?t redo pike air-rights deal!
By Scott Van Voorhis
Boston Herald Business Reporter
Tuesday, August 29, 2006 - Updated: 07:29 AM EST


Development over the Massachusetts Turnpike through Boston?s heart was pitched as a potential gold mine for taxpayers weary of Big Dig cost overruns.

But the hope of extra revenue to offset tolls and highway construction costs may turn out to be a mirage, critics say, as rising construction prices and bitter controversy threaten to torpedo the flagship $650 million Columbus Center air-rights project.

The Turnpike earlier this year cut a $12 million lease deal with the Columbus Center development team, led by local builders Arthur Winn and Roger Cassin, for a seven-acre stretch of air rights between the Back Bay and South End. A cut of future condo sales is expected to bring in another $80 million to $100 million.

But faced with skyrocketing construction costs, Columbus Center?s lead investor now wants to restructure the rental payments and possibly seek additional public subsidies.

Rising prices have more than doubled the cost of building out the Turnpike deck to $118 million, noted Alan Eisner, a spokesman for the project.

?Unless the state comes to the table and helps us figure out a way to reduce or eliminate a shortfall of $17 to $25 million, this project could collapse,? Eisner said.

However, critics say the deal is too generous already - and could pose big problems for taxpayers if developers seek similar deals for big air-rights projects proposed near Fenway Park and Chinatown.

The $12 million rental deal is below the $26 million value an appraiser hired by the Turnpike came up with. In downtown Boston, available development sites can sell for as high as $30 million an acre, notes Ned Flaherty, co-founder of the Alliance of Boston Neighborhoods and a South End activist.

?The price of the first few parcels sets the price formula for all the others,? Flaherty said.

Meanwhile, union and community supporters of the big development are warning that 2,500 construction jobs are at stake. ?It?s a huge loss,? warns Jim Coyle, head of the Metropolitan Boston Building Trades Council.

But State Rep. Marty Walz (D-Back Bay) argued against further concessions, noting that the developer was given permission to build a large, 400-foot high-rise complex with the understanding it would be privately financed. ?The first rent reductions and subsidies were not justified and subsequent rent reductions and subsidies are also not justified,? Walz said.



Link
 
Lesson to be learned by those who oppose Boston development projects; drag out the approval process long enough for costs to skyrocket and wait for the developer to throw in the towel if incentives are not provided. Lesson for the city; allow the approval process to drag on long enough for costs to skyrocket and then give tax incentives to the developers or loose out on the whole deal. I sure hope the city has learned their lesson and does something to shorten the approval process from many years to several years. This is an awesome project for the city and it would be a shame to loose it.
 
I very much want to see ths project built, but by some other developer who doesn't believe that extortion is a proper way to do business. Winn and Cassin should be ashamed of themselves.
 
Boston needs growth this kind of growth, it really is hurting for jobs and housing plus the benfits of hiding the pike and reconnected the neighborhoods are immense. In just about any other city, the developers would be paid for their public service, here the state wants to make money on the erection of public amenities.

Boston was on a roll for a long time and people have gotten used to demanding money from developers. The atmosphere has changed, we lost Gilette, Fleet, John Hanconck, New Enland Life... the list goes on. Boston will begin to decline without new projects and the city doesn't have nearly the clout it once did. Obviously the city is having a lot of trouble getting big projects started.

The few neighbors who opposed this project for so many years did a great disservice to the rest of the city.
 
If extortion is a word to be applied here, it should be applied where it rightfully belongs, to the neighborhood groups who were given gazillions of concessions (neighborhood improvements) from Cassin/Winn. If this project wasn't dragged on over many years now we wouldn't even be having this discussion. The discussion would be, instead, about how awesome the rising steel of Columbus Center looks over the turnpike.
 
Ron Newman said:
I very much want to see ths project built, but by some other developer who doesn't believe that extortion is a proper way to do business. Winn and Cassin should be ashamed of themselves.

shut up
 
Couple things:

This first thing I doubt is something substantial. However, I saw a small parking lot that was filled with construction signs, a couple backhoes, and something that looks like it could be used as a construction headquarters. (Pics later). As I said, I doubt it is anything substantial, but I hadn't noticed it before. Another thing is that they are putting up road work signs on the pike below the bridges. Once again, probably just roadwork, but I hadn't noticed those either.

This next thing is more substantial. On the Frieda Garcia Park plot, some sort of structure is starting to go up, and other work looks to be progressing. Pics later on.
 
^ Go back a page to pg. 3 and read my post at the top of the page.. is that the site you're talking about?

DudeUrSistersHot said:

Come on Dude, are you trying to create enemies for yourself? Your views may clash with Ron and many others here, but at the least you can show some respect when you post. Instead you only chime in here and there when you seem to be most pissed off at other's political leanings (a great time to open your mouth by the way). Good for you that you're a libertarian 'til death do you part - now contribute something constructive to the conversation! sheesh
 
Yes that was the site. Just as I thought, really wasn't anything important.
 
This is ridiculous. Taxpayers are supposed to shell out money so that a developer can make a few extra bucks? Give me a break.

I want this project to get built as much as anyone and believe it should have been allowed to go higher. And -- yes -- this approval process was unnecessarily drawn out...Regardless, however, we should not be subsidizing this.
 
aws129 said:
This is ridiculous. Taxpayers are supposed to shell out money so that a developer can make a few extra bucks? Give me a break.

I want this project to get built as much as anyone and believe it should have been allowed to go higher. And -- yes -- this approval process was unnecessarily drawn out...Regardless, however, we should not be subsidizing this.

The developers are subsidizing the public by extorting millions of dollars in "public benefits". It's not even remotely wrong for the devloper to try to get his money back from this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top