Fenway Center (One Kenmore) | Turnpike Parcel 7, Beacon Street | Fenway

F-Line to Dudley said:
We may need the extra 5 years to perform the exorcism on the Pike air rights that have been cursed for almost 50 years.

But I think in this case you have to look at the trending more than the value of trying to salvage something from nothing. It's getting worse at a steady and seemingly irreversible rate, and the developer's demands for a freebie getting more outlandish. The odds of it imploding into nothing or netting something we truly regret being built are very high, and that's going to waste more time and more years of blight than cutting ties and starting over with this as an utmost priority. Unless the trend reverses...not just slows its nosedive...there's little practical to save. It's chasing a moving object that's going to decay a lot more in the process of trying to save it, so it's not all that useful to have a picture in one's head of an acceptable "stop-loss" compromise development when we're nowhere near achieving stop-loss.
Click to expand...

The scary part is that while this development is trending negative very quickly, the new Mayor is trending very positive towards it. Those quotes from Walsh in the article about Rosenthal and this development make me want to yell "NO!!!!" The Mayor should not be in such a rush to dive down this rabbit hole in order to create more temporary work for his union brothers. If that is what we are in for, then the next few years may be very bad.

There are alot of good development proposals out there that need the Mayor's backing. This ain't one of them. This is like watching a loved one marry a degenerative drinker.
 
It seems to me that if you didn't want to build the tower at a later phase you would extend the parking garage all the way over the pike... so maybe phases?
 
DZH22 said:
I wanted to bring these both over to this page. Are they really completely cutting out the taller tower, or is this just going to be built in phases and the taller tower is still expected down the road?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that it has always been planned as a phased development, but it certainly has at least since the change in design.
 
Just spitballing: Rosenthal gets tax breaks after agreeing to also build Charles River Skatepark.
 
meddlepal said:
It seems to me that if you didn't want to build the tower at a later phase you would extend the parking garage all the way over the pike... so maybe phases?
Click to expand...

Rosenthal has no expertise in doing anything with the Pike except for that stupid sign of his

This one is gone --- Dead as a proverbial door nail!
 
Though his request was rebuffed by former mayor Thomas M. Menino, Rosenthal submitted a new application to Walsh, and so far his pitch is getting a warmer reception.
Click to expand...

If he's getting a warmer reception, then why all the cynicism? I don't see any evidence (other than anecdotal) that this is going to be the next Columbus Center. What it is, is that you all just don't like Rosenthal for his anti-gun billboard. Not implicating my politcal views. I'm just saying.
 
^Hey, I never knew he had an anti-gun billboard!!! That really doesn't matter to me anyway since I don't own any guns!!!!!

Anyway, we're all skeptical because Rosenthal hasn't secured the financing for this project.
 
I think this project isn't necessarily out yet, particularly if Walsh is eager to prove himself or something. If they're not putting up the only landmark piece of the development-- the tower-- i do hope they at least put decking in where a future taller building might go.
 
I bet Walsh endorses this as a way to separate himself from Menino.

Whigh, you're smarter than to make a comment about the sign. Who cares.
 
I really want to see this done, but not in it's current form. I think it's time to send this one back to the drawing board, and promote building on the parking lots around it.
 
kingofsheeba said:
If he's getting a warmer reception, then why all the cynicism? I don't see any evidence (other than anecdotal) that this is going to be the next Columbus Center. What it is, is that you all just don't like Rosenthal for his anti-gun billboard. Not implicating my politcal views. I'm just saying.
Click to expand...

Absolutley not. Personally, I fully agree with his billboard, but unlike some others, do not think it is appropriate HERE to bring it up.

This is all about business. Rosenthal has repeatedly shown that he does not have the wherewithal to do this project.

Let me ask you this: You are nonplussed by a developer saying he cannot build a $500+ million project if he cannot get a $7.8 million tax credit???? His words that it is "do or die". That is like me saying a cannot buy a $25 tie because the store won't give me 38 cents off. You don't see the complete BS in that?

So now it is obvious that Rosenthal doesn't have the money to do this and he cuts out a tower from this (but leaves another tower and two ugly landscrapers).

Marty Walsh's positive comments (because he just wants more union jobs) is the classic desperate sister dating the psychotic drunken boyfriend.

I agree, some people are kneejerk cynics, and I have gone after this type of automatic negativity here many times. However, sometimes cynicism comes from actually looking at the situation.
 
shmessy said:
Absolutley not. Personally, I fully agree with his billboard, but unlike some others, do not think it is appropriate HERE to bring it up.

This is all about business. Rosenthal has repeatedly shown that he does not have the wherewithal to do this project.

Let me ask you this: You are nonplussed by a developer saying he cannot build a $500+ million project if he cannot get a $7.8 million tax credit???? His words that it is "do or die". That is like me saying a cannot buy a $25 tie because the store won't give me 38 cents off. You don't see the complete BS in that?

So now it is obvious that Rosenthal doesn't have the money to do this and he cuts out a tower from this (but leaves another tower and two ugly landscrapers).

Marty Walsh's positive comments (because he just wants more union jobs) is the classic desperate sister dating the psychotic drunken boyfriend.

I agree, some people are kneejerk cynics, and I have gone after this type of automatic negativity here many times. However, sometimes cynicism comes from actually looking at the situation.
Click to expand...

This basically summarizes how I feel about Rosenthal and this whole project.

On a sort of related note. I basically felt the same way about Don Chiofaro and the Aquarium garage towers, which is why I never jumped on the bandwagon of hammering Menino on his non-support. I don't think he had/has a snowballs chance in hell of pulling that project off and city hall knew it. After Vornado at Downtown Xing, The Columbus Center group, and Rosenthal, the last thing they wanted was to spend political capital on fighting for another shaky developer with a pie-in-the-sky proposal.
 
I've been following air rights projects for about ten years now and always get way too excited about them. Which area do folks think is, of any parcels, the most important for knitting city neighborhoods? I used to think Columbus Center, but really both neighborhoods have their backs to those parcels so no amount of building will really make the area feel seamless. The Fenway parcels are far more valuable for neighborhood integration as more people likely cross this overpass by foot than any other in Boston.

Then you have the Boylston/Mass Ave parcels, which filled in will be a great boon to their area.

The real tragedy though is some of the greenway parcels. Particularly at the Government Center garage, the pedestrian accessibility problems here are relatively new, making it all the more frustrating.
 
jdrinboston said:
This basically summarizes how I feel about Rosenthal and this whole project.

On a sort of related note. I basically felt the same way about Don Chiofaro and the Aquarium garage towers, which is why I never jumped on the bandwagon of hammering Menino on his non-support. I don't think he had/has a snowballs chance in hell of pulling that project off and city hall knew it. After Vornado at Downtown Xing, The Columbus Center group, and Rosenthal, the last thing they wanted was to spend political capital on fighting for another shaky developer with a pie-in-the-sky proposal.
Click to expand...

Don Chiofaro offered the city 50-Million dollars to help increase the height to make his project work over the long-term instead of taking 8 Million in tax dollars. There is a big difference.

I don't know how you compare the complexities of the Pike compared to Harbor Garage development.

Getting rid of that Wall of concrete off the Greenway would be nothing more than positive for the city of Boston along with a 50 Million dollar pay day from the development. It seems most of the developments in the city can't be built without sometype of taxpayer incentive these days.

The real problem was that the 50 Million was for the city of Boston not Mayor Menino pockets. Like Fan Pier deal
 
TheRifleman said:
Don Chiofaro offered the city 50-Million dollars to help increase the height to make his project work over the long-term
Click to expand...

And you believed him?? :)

All kidding aside, there were tremendous legal and financial pitfalls/warning signs with the Harbor garage.

1. Ciofaro declared bankruptcy in 2004
2. His last development in the city was roughly 25 years ago. That development's vacancy rate has hovered around 40 percent over the past few years and carries a huge debt load. So financially, I think he's very similar to Rosenthal.
3. There are some serious legal/engineering pitfalls regarding the garage site including parking leases and mechanical systems serving the Harbor Towers condos. Not to mention the roughly 1,200 residents who would likely sue to protect their views based on the 155-foot zoning for the site when they purchased their units. You can't completely discount the possibiity of a court siding with them. The whole thing is a litgation trap.

I do think a Rowe's Wharf/Millennium Place type development would do wonders for that site and would stand a much better chance of pleasing most of the surrounding constituencies. It's low-hanging fruit that would be relatively easy to pull off and would do wonders for the surrounding streetscape just like promoting the infilling of the parking lots on Brookline Avenue with reputable developers would do for that area. (See, brought it back on topic!)
 
shmessy said:
Absolutley not. Personally, I fully agree with his billboard, but unlike some others, do not think it is appropriate HERE to bring it up.

This is all about business. Rosenthal has repeatedly shown that he does not have the wherewithal to do this project.

Let me ask you this: You are nonplussed by a developer saying he cannot build a $500+ million project if he cannot get a $7.8 million tax credit???? His words that it is "do or die". That is like me saying a cannot buy a $25 tie because the store won't give me 38 cents off. You don't see the complete BS in that?

So now it is obvious that Rosenthal doesn't have the money to do this and he cuts out a tower from this (but leaves another tower and two ugly landscrapers).

Marty Walsh's positive comments (because he just wants more union jobs) is the classic desperate sister dating the psychotic drunken boyfriend.

I agree, some people are kneejerk cynics, and I have gone after this type of automatic negativity here many times. However, sometimes cynicism comes from actually looking at the situation.
Click to expand...
So Don Chifaro didn't receive tax breaks for One International Place? And I'm sure that the city didn't pitch in for any of Steve Samuels's projects in the Fenway. Whether or not it's because he wants to give his Union Brothers work, Marty is trying to make sure that this happens.
 
kingofsheeba said:
So Don Chifaro didn't receive tax breaks for One International Place? And I'm sure that the city didn't pitch in for any of Steve Samuels's projects in the Fenway. Whether or not it's because he wants to give his Union Brothers work, Marty is trying to make sure that this happens.
Click to expand...

Sheeba, this is 2014. Boston is in very high demand. The Mayor of Boston does not have to be the easy girl lying on his back with his legs splayed open for developers who claim that a tax credits equaling 1.5% the cost of their proposals are "do or die".

Let me tell you something about the business world, Sheeba. Someone claiming his proposal will die if he does not get a 1.5% concession (after he has scaled down his project - - NOT because of city or neighborhood opposition, mind you, but because of his OWN economics) is not fit to deal with.

That is for desperate sisters like Detroit or Cleveland.
 
Totally agree, $7.8 million is paltry for the size of this project. What gives? Indeed, Boston has the upper hand with it's current prosperity and popularity with developers, tax concessions shouldn't be necessary at this point in time. If there is an argument against this, I wouldn't understand it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top