Columbus Center: RIP | Back Bay

Status
Not open for further replies.
It doesn't sound like it means either....sounds like they had a site that they found difficult to develop or a market they weren't convinced of, and found a buyer willing to pay more than the net present value for the land.
 
I don't think the state gives out money to projects that are dead. Maybe the project should be renamed Phoenix at Columbus Center.

State awards $76m in development grants

By Thomas C. Palmer Jr., Globe Staff | June 29, 2007

The Massachusetts office of Economic Development is giving out $76 million in grants to 21 development projects, including $10 million to Columbus Center, a long-delayed hotel, residential, and retail project that is to straddle the Massachusetts Turnpike between the Back Bay and South End.

Columbus Center, which was disputed by some in the community but has received all of its city and state permits, has been in planning for more than 10 years, and its estimated cost has risen from about $300 million to more than $700 million.

"This state grant, requested by the city for Columbus Center, is a significant step toward reaching our mutual objective of a groundbreaking this summer," said a spokesman for Columbus Center developers Arthur Winn and Roger Cassin.
Click to expand...
 
from today's Globe
Democrats oppose Patrick on grant
Columbus Center $10m draws fire

By Andrea Estes, Globe Staff | July 7, 2007

Governor Deval Patrick's decision to steer $10 million in economic development funds to the private Columbus Center complex has angered House Democrats who have repeatedly refused to support the controversial and increasingly expensive development with taxpayer money.

The grant was championed by Senator Dianne Wilkerson, a strong Patrick ally and supporter of the project, who was rebuffed by the Legislature two years ago when she tried to include $4.3 million for the development in an economic stimulus package.

"The developer is asking the taxpayers to subsidize his profit margin," said Representative Martha M. Walz, a Democrat who represents the Back Bay. "That is offensive to me and not an appropriate use of our tax dollars. We don't pay taxes to make developers richer."

Patrick administration officials and Wilkerson defended public investment in a project that developers say will create thousands of jobs and rejoin two of the city's most vibrant neighborhoods, the Back Bay and South End.

"There are some folks who may take issue with this, but the fact is the Columbus Center is probably our best and biggest chance of new job creation for the city of Boston," Wilkerson said.

Legislative opponents also argued that the money, which was awarded last week, was inappropriately drawn from a pool of money that was designed to help create manufacturing jobs in Massachusetts, not to subsidize real estate developers.

"This wasn't supposed to be a grant program where we just blow the money out," said Representative Daniel E. Bosley of North Adams, House chairman of the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies, who helped craft the bill. "It was supposed to be money we held on to and could use when big players came here and said, 'We're interested [in locating in Massachusetts]. What can you do for us.' It was not to build condos or hotels."

Robert Coughlin, Patrick's undersecretary for business development, said the money will be used to create a deck and tunnel over the Massachusetts Turnpike. "The legislative intent was to make infrastructure improvements that will allow businesses to grow and create jobs," Coughlin said. "We're not investing in hotel rooms."

Wilkerson was unapologetic about doing whatever she can to support the project. "There is a difference of opinion here, she said. But "I'm going to do what every other legislator worth his or her weight will do when they have something they believe in, go through one door and if it's locked go through another door. . . . I've been looking at every pot and every pool of money for this project and any other project that provides the potential for job creation for the residents of my district."

According to administration officials, Mayor Thomas M. Menino also advocated funding for the 1.3 million-square-foot retail and residential development, which will rise above the turnpike between Arlington and Clarendon streets. It will include a 35-story tower on a 1,500-foot-long deck over the Turnpike, which will contain hotel rooms, condos, and retail space.

Bosley said the developers, Arthur Winn and Roger Cassin, had sought money from the Legislature more than once.

In rejecting these requests, several lawmakers, including House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, argued that the developers won approval for the project precisely because they pledged in many community meetings never to seek public financing for the sprawling complex, whose projected cost has mushroomed from $300 million to more than $700 million.

"We have objected," said Representative Byron Rushing of the South End, a member of DiMasi's leadership team. "My constituents did not feel it was a good use of public money. The whole idea was it would make so much money and be such a benefit to the community, we would not need to subsidize it."

An earlier attempt by Wilkerson to get the funds earmarked, or guaranteed as part of the economic stimulus package, was rejected by House leaders. Lawmakers, however, did set aside an unrestricted pool of $100 million to be allocated by the administration. Last week Housing and Economic Development Secretary Daniel O'Connell distributed more than $76 million of the unallotted money to a variety of projects, including Columbus Center.

The developers, according to spokesman Alan Eisner, had requested $20 million under the grant program.

Separately, the state last year had committed $20.6 million in low-interest MassHousing loans.

Eisner defended the state grant award, saying the project will deliver hundreds of jobs and millions of dollars in community benefits. "This project is an economic and social home run for the city of Boston," he said. "It's been over 10 years in the making, and it's weathered the storm of huge increases in construction costs, particularly for concrete and steel, which form the basis of the project's foundation over the Turnpike and the MBTA tracks."

He said the projects will provide more than $45 million in public benefits, including 2,600 construction jobs, 360 permanent jobs, three new state parks, and a new ground-water system. Fifteen percent of the units will be considered affordable housing, he said.

"These benefits far outweigh the public subsidies which have been sought and were deemed necessary from the beginning," Eisner said.

Eisner insisted the developers never promised to build the project without any public funds.

Shirley Kressel, a Boston neighborhood activist who has opposed the use of public funds for the project, called the grant award an outrage.

"They rammed this project down the community's throat swearing they would cover all possible costs and they would never get a penny of public subsidy," she said. "As soon as the approval process was over and nobody was looking they launched a treasure hunt in the pockets of the local state and federal government."
Click to expand...
 
Marty Walz and Shirley Kressel are whining, what else is new? I'm glad I voted for Patrick.
 
this columbus center is starting to piss me off.

instead of the state giving them more money, why dont they just allow it to be taller which equals more revenue. Throw the state's clout behind the thing see what the nimbys can do then. people want to bitch? the state tells em to go screw or else a new tax will be found for them. Raises the developers bottom line, increases tax revenues, city gets its new jobs, and only a few idiots who forget they're living in a city get hurt until its built and they get used to it and forget all about it.
 
time to right to the globe again. I think the problem with height is the FAA, not just Nimbys.

Of course, they wouldn't need a $10m grant, had it not taken 10 FUCKING YEARS planning to approval. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Anyone else find that absolutely ridiculous?
 
Bobby Digital said:
instead of the state giving them more money, why dont they just allow it to be taller which equals more revenue.
Click to expand...
Good idea.

only a few idiots who forget they're living in a city get hurt until it's built and they get used to it and forget all about it.
Click to expand...
Yup.
 
Shirley Kressel, a Boston neighborhood activist who has opposed the use of public funds for the project, called the grant award an outrage.

"They rammed this project down the community's throat swearing they would cover all possible costs and they would never get a penny of public subsidy," she said. "As soon as the approval process was over and nobody was looking they launched a treasure hunt in the pockets of the local state and federal government."
Click to expand...
If it didn't take so fucking long to approve it and get it started thanks to people like you and NIMBYs whining about the most outrageous issues, then maybe, just maybe it wouldn't have cost so much to build this and thus would not require taxpayer's money.
 
Shirley Kressel, a Boston neighborhood activist who has opposed the use of public funds for the project, called the grant award an outrage.

Looks like Shirley is the new Boston neighborhood activist/spokesperson that the papers go to for opinions concerning new development in the area. She was quoted the other day (her usual negative harping) in an article about North Point in Cambridge. Funny how an obscure harpy/gadfly has gained traction as a supposedly respected voice in the community.
 
This article made my day on so many levels. And you guys already nailed my thoughts and feelings!
 
I would like to see this built, but I'm still unconvinced that it is deserving of public (taxpayer) subsidy. 360 jobs is not much bang for the buck, and how will a condo building create even that many?
 
Shirley Kressel says:

"They rammed this project down the community's throat swearing they would cover all possible costs and they would never get a penny of public subsidy,"
Click to expand...

RIDICULOUS. "Rammed down the community's throat." It took 10 FUCKING YEARS to get it approved and she's still complaining after obnoxiously whining about anything new in Boston for ages.

"As soon as the approval process was over and nobody was looking they launched a treasure hunt in the pockets of the local state and federal government."
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah. Treasure hunt. It's not a "hunt" as it's well disclosed and where's the federal money that she says their getting?

This project is the best proposal in Boston in decades, connecting 2 neighborhoods and building another high-rise. And $10 million dollars, if it jump-starts this project, is well spent if it actually starts it. If Winn stalls some more and begs for more money, I say stop giving him more money because he had his chance.

(begin rant)But these NIMBYs, they FUCKING PISS ME OFF. All they do is obstruct, delay, block buildings for idiotic reasons. I can't find one real reason to stop Columbus Center. But obviously this bitch Kressel wants the Turnpike ditch rather than a beautiful skyscraper. THIS FUCKING BITCH DELAYED THE PROJECT FOR 10 YEARS AND NOW SHE'S STILL WHINING. Well it's what you fucking expect in Boston, the NIMBY capital of the world.(end rant)

And plus, thanks for this forum. It helps me check on the latest in Boston construction. I registered after reading about this forum in the Apple store Boston globe magazine article. I'm a thirteen year old Asian from Westford, if you want to know.
 
I think you are the new youngest person in the thread now, congrats!
And good rant, couldn't have said it better myself
 
ADRIAN WALKER
Snow job creation

By Adrian Walker, Globe Columnist | July 10, 2007

As a neighborhood-eating monstrosity in the making, the Columbus Center project in the South End has never lacked opponents.

Though the condo/retail/hotel project has been in the works for at least a decade, it stirred its largest controversy in just the last few days. As the Globe's Andrea Estes reported Saturday, the state has steered $10 million in taxpayer money to the project in the name of job creation.

Versions of this deal were rejected by the Legislature at least twice in recent years, but developer Arthur Winn's persistent ally, Senator Dianne Wilkerson of Roxbury, found a way to get it done that didn't require a vote. A $100 million piggybank created last year for infrastructure improvements statewide was tapped.

The state's economic development officials were anxious yesterday to point out that none of the money in the grant goes to Winn and his partner Roger Cassin. Technically, they are correct. The project requires that a 1,500- foot- long deck be built over the Massachusetts Turnpike. Instead of the developers building it themselves, as they promised for years to do, you and I are building it. The developers don't get a $10 million check, but they just saved that amount on their $700 million project.

Representative Martha Walz of the Back Bay has lived with the Columbus Center controversy for years, first as a neighborhood activist and now as an elected official. She strongly opposes the subsidy.

Walz said she personally attended meetings in which the developers pledged not to seek public money. She was not consulted on the funding; neither, incredibly, was Speaker Salvatore F . DiMasi, even though the project is partly in his district. DiMasi complained to Governor Deval Patrick about the deal early yesterday.

Walz pointed out that the developers long ago struck a deal with the Turnpike Authority to pay reduced rent on the parcels they are building on, because the expense of the deck was factored in. "We've already paid for this deck three times over," she told me yesterday.

Wilkerson is a longtime ally of Winn, a campaign contributor. She has supported this project since her first term and passionately defended it yesterday. Wilkerson's case, summarized: We do worse things in the Legislature all the time.

When that wasn't going over, she told me that the Patrick administration's job creation was too focused on upscale fields such as biotech that don't employ her constituents. She even suggested that this deal might be a blueprint for future development over the Turnpike.

"We passed a bill that gave almost $150 million to harbor and waterfront development, because there was a determination that developers needed it to make their deals work," Wilkerson said. She added that lawmakers signed off on $9 million for a Best Western Hotel in Roxbury's Crosstown Center project a few years ago, when the developers hadn't even asked for it.

"We use public money for leverage," she explained, and said the legislators won a pledge for a grand total of six jobs.

Wilkerson's comments illustrate just how the administration got rolled on Columbus Center. First, she played the class-warfare card. Then, she argued that her constituents are shut out of the jobs the administration is trying to create.

It isn't clear whether Patrick had any direct involvement in this mess, but this administration can't stand to have anyone say it isn't doing enough for working-class people or African-Americans. Some critics, including Wilkerson, have privately been saying just that for months. To make her go away, she and Winn get a victory, and the state puts out a press release touting its job creation.

It is outrageous that Wilkerson thinks terrible decisions justify more terrible decisions, but that's what 14 years of cutting deals at the State House can do to your judgment. Patrick has no such excuse. He once pledged to take on the culture of Beacon Hill. That promise feels as if it were made a very long time ago.

Adrian Walker is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at walker@globe.com.
? Copyright 2007 Globe Newspaper Company.
Click to expand...

This isn't a useless grant though, like the other ones that only made 6 jobs. This will make at least hundreds of jobs, and the "Beacon Hill culture" is giving to favored developers only, and still giving them money even after they don't build anything. They have economic development grants in every state, this isn't anything different or "Beacon Hill culture".
 
The other day i was hearing a little bit about the union culture, and how they go about business. Learning about it in school and learning about the actual goings on can be very different.

If the developers are using union labor, these labor unions will sometimes subsidize the project by granting the developers a loan at very low rates, for the sole purpose of giving union laborers work. Point being, why couldnt this happen here? Both parties would benefit, and it would save taxpayers' money. Of course free taxpayer money is always better for the developer. Aside from the obvious permanent janitor jobs spoken of earlier, for 3 years or however long it takes to build it, hundreds more jobs are created on a semi-permanent basis during construction.

I don't know if this is a union job or not, but the legislature could be feeling pressure from union lobbyists as well to get this project off the ground. Unions give politicians money, and there's always the good ol' boy system still in existence. I dont think that culture is ever going away, even though union membership has been declining for decades.
 
I'm wondering what the issue is exactly here. Are opponents of this project angry because of the subsidy or because of the development?

If it's the subsidy, here's a thought. The money from the state is going to cover up the Turnpike, which right now is an ugly hole in the ground. Previously, they seem to have given money in rent discounts in return for the pre-development promise that the Pike would ultimately be covered.

Besides the obvious: the only reason the deck has been delayed this long and thus paid for "several times over" is because of people like this columnist whining incessantly, all projects, especially public ones, chew considerable amounts of money before the first spade is turned. Environmental Impact Statements, Assessments, Renderings (which we so love), legal fees, architect's fees, and so on eat up millions of dollars, especially on something as impressive as covering a highway.

If we consider the rent discounts to be equivalent to these advance fees, and we consider the state to be funding what is essentially a highway project, $10 million is actually quite reasonable, especially considering what it cost to hide the other highway across town.

If this is a neighborhood issue, then I don't know the neighborhood enough to make a judgment, but it just doesn't seem to me like the wrong place for this thing. It's in line with the Pru height-wise, not to mention 360 down the street, and it will be a boon to future development in the area. This is one of those rare projects that seems to make a winner of everyone.

Since it's gotten delayed so long, can someone more informed enlighten me on any reasonable issues people have with this thing?
 
Now that you mention it ... what future development? With some very rare exceptions, this area is built out. Once you cover the Turnpike and fill in a couple empty spaces at the Prudential Center, there's no place to build a new building unless you take an old one down first.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top