DOT Parcels | 25-28 Kneeland Street | Chinatown

DZH22 said:
Use part of that money on an updated airport radar. Then the air rights parcels could get the height they need to be profitable enough to build.
Click to expand...
The airport radar issue applies to a project on a thread that was exiled to Siberia.

The FAA limit here is based on one engine out during ascent.
 
odurandina said:
20% affordable + the extreme conservative buildout plan + the extreme complexities + Wu and Tito & the endless Chinatown bullshit... ~35-$45M? Didn't someone suggest 'the better you can afford to build, the more you can tax it.' ??
Click to expand...

How about even less? GE paid $25.6 million for 244-284 A Street. 9 acres of contiguous flat parking lot on the water and about as far from the headhouse of SS as these parcels are.

No challenging construction at all, no ugly highway ramps, no neighborhood that's going to argue with you over what you build, not a single issue other than the 300ft height limit.

--------

I don't see these lots as much more desirable. Maybe $10-15m might get someone interested.
 
^^Great! but since they're allowing like, 2m sq ft Then, i'll drop 'er another $10m

$25~35M it is!
 
millerm277 said:
How about even less? GE paid $25.6 million for 244-284 A Street. 9 acres of contiguous flat parking lot on the water and about as far from the headhouse of SS as these parcels are.

No challenging construction at all, no ugly highway ramps, no neighborhood that's going to argue with you over what you build, not a single issue other than the 300ft height limit.

--------

I don't see these lots as much more desirable. Maybe $10-15m might get someone interested.
Click to expand...

In the end there were no constraints on the bid price. They all no bid. Goose egg.
 
JeffDowntown said:
In the end there were no constraints on the bid price. They all no bid. Goose egg.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine no one expected the state would actually accept a tiny fraction of their original minimum bid price as an offer and didn't want to put in the effort for something they expected to have rejected.
 
JeffDowntown said:
In the end there were no constraints on the bid price. They all no bid. Goose egg.
Click to expand...

Pretty much given the complexity of the site (including the abatement needed, steam plant, limited height, various community groups, complexity of building around/over the the 93 ramps, etc), why would developers bid anything on it when there are still other easier lots to build on. Even the various Pike air right parcels are probably easier. On the bright side, at least the Reggie Wong Memorial Park will stay put for now.
 
Regarding the issue about replacing Reggie Wong park, I wonder if they could deck over the open air portion of 93 South just east of Albany St., and just put new bball/volleyball courts over that. Seems like it would'nt cost much in decking if you only needed to support these courts, and that would then open the existing REggie Wong park to development. The land immediately next to this open air portion could be built on without the need for decking.
 
Deetroyt said:
Regarding the issue about replacing Reggie Wong park, I wonder if they could deck over the open air portion of 93 South just east of Albany St., and just put new bball/volleyball courts over that. Seems like it would'nt cost much in decking if you only needed to support these courts, and that would then open the existing REggie Wong park to development. The land immediately next to this open air portion could be built on without the need for decking.
Click to expand...

Actually this approach would be a good use for Parcel 27, which is lousy for other development. Need to deck it to interface it with the South Station Bus Terminal Connector (to give it decent access), but probably a better use than development. That could open up more of Parcels 25 and 26 for development (and provide a larger park!).

Maybe even a bit of parking underneath plus park on top (limited parking for the Parcel 25, 26 development)
 
Reggie Wong wasnt the issue.
There were/are too many unknown costs, mostly around remediation of the existing site for many different reasons. the teams were given very limited access to the existing veolia plant for one.
 
Deetroyt said:
Regarding the issue about replacing Reggie Wong park, I wonder if they could deck over the open air portion of 93 South just east of Albany St., and just put new bball/volleyball courts over that. Seems like it would'nt cost much in decking if you only needed to support these courts, and that would then open the existing REggie Wong park to development. The land immediately next to this open air portion could be built on without the need for decking.
Click to expand...

That would have been a smart way to handle the relocation of Reggie Wong.

I don't believe it'd be possible to easily support a large building on that part of the site without some sort of cantilevered structure, because there's a travel lane/tunnel underneath Albany St as well with only a fairly narrow wall between. It supports a roadway lane fine, but I don't see it being enough to build a large building on top of.
 
Globe: Developers cool to downtown Boston sites the state sees as hot properties

Jon Chesto said:
The two largely empty parcels at the eastern end of Kneeland Street seem like prime targets for redevelopment: next to South Station, near the Financial District, and positioned squarely over the two interstate highways into Boston.

They cover more than five acres, with a 10-story state office building, a small park, and plenty of empty space just steps from a downtown business district that’s bursting at the seams.

Apparently, no one wants them.

After being unable to sell the properties over the years, the state Department of Transportation appears to be giving up on them for now, with no plans to market either parcel anytime soon.

[...]
Click to expand...
 
Since they haven't been able to sell it, and we have a housing shortage. I feel like this is something the city and state should focus on derisking and developing around the concerns it mentions. I don't know how big the housing mitigation funds are that developer pay into, but the city should upzone it to be tall, relatively affordable and have a ton of different unit types. Have a partially cost controlled affordable (say 60%) at different income levels (low & middle) and part market rate. Have the fund be the city's equity, get a development partner to do the EPC, and sell it off at the end to a private investor where we would recoup a decent portion of the funds. Deed restrict the affordable units to have annual rent increases in line with inflation for say 40 years.

The city has to upzone broadly, and also facilitate more affordable housing in different ways, and get away from creating the 'projects' of the past that just isolate poor people. I'd like to see some creativity here.
 
Blackdog said:
I believe there is a height restriction on these parcels due to the airport.
Click to expand...

About 325 feet.

tysmith95 said:
30k4nki.png
Click to expand...
 
Sounds like:

- The steam plant was a huge complication
- The highway decking and parks etc. were also complications
- The process the state ran didn't work great for the potential buyers

"No bid" rather than low bids is the tell that the state set this up in a non-workable way
 
choo said:
I don't know how big the housing mitigation funds are that developer pay into, but the city should upzone it to be tall, relatively affordable and have a ton of different unit types. Have a partially cost controlled affordable (say 60%) at different income levels (low & middle) and part market rate. Have the fund be the city's equity, get a development partner to do the EPC, and sell it off at the end to a private investor where we would recoup a decent portion of the funds. Deed restrict the affordable units to have annual rent increases in line with inflation for say 40 years.

The city has to upzone broadly, and also facilitate more affordable housing in different ways....
Click to expand...

They upzoned it to 2 300' towers w/ Massport/FAA 'ok.'
 
CSTH said:
Sounds like:

- The steam plant was a huge complication
- The highway decking and parks etc. were also complications
- The process the state ran didn't work great for the potential buyers

"No bid" rather than low bids is the tell that the state set this up in a non-workable way
Click to expand...

Those issues were rather minor. (The Globe article missed the big one).

The State wants potential developers to take on the responsibility for any hazardous waste mitigation at the Veolia plant site, without allowing significant due diligence to the cost. There is almost certainly hazardous contamination around an 80+ year old power plant!
 
JeffDowntown said:
Those issues were rather minor. (The Globe article missed the big one).

The State wants potential developers to take on the responsibility for any hazardous waste mitigation at the Veolia plant site, without allowing significant due diligence to the cost. There is almost certainly hazardous contamination around an 80+ year old power plant!
Click to expand...

I thought I have read that another parcel is basically a landfill (that was grassed over) that most likely contains a bunch of asbestos, too. Actually probably read it up thread here ;)
 
Drop the price and these will fly off the shelf...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top