General Electric HQ (Necco Buildings Reno) | 5 Necco Street | Fort Point

[JeffDowntown]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

One reason why the heliport might be at ground level is that what is desired is a full service refueling and maintenance heliport. That is much easier to implement at ground level rather than on top of a building (per the notes by F-Line about fire suppression, etc.)

There are refueling services at the Logan heliport, but it is apparently a real pain to get in and out of (Air Traffic Control) and very slow refueling (lowest priority on the field). There are also refueling services at the Boston Medical Center heliport, but for MedFlight helicopters only.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

Because, from the signed agreement between the State, City, and GE:

The agreement clearly calls for "a new public helipad in Boston". There's another earlier reference to "public helicopter landing facilities" as well.

Note that this agreement does not say these things will be provided to GE free of charge. All the agreement offers is "access" and "coordination... in facilitating" while stating that "The Company [GE] will be responsible for negotiating lease rates and other commercial terms...". In other words, the State and City are promising to help GE get this stuff set up, not promising to pay for it.

GE will want the helipad on its roof to be most convenient for them. Wherever it is, however, it'll have to be public if the State and City are to help.

How public is it if the "company" is running point on developing the helipad. That is not the same as the Massport/MassDOT helipad proposal which was a publicly-owned facility to be explicitly bid out to operators of open commercial air service as its primary source of revenue and flight volume, with the corporate exec set served as a niche. Straight-up typical Massport facility.

This is the inverse. GE can choose who goes in its walled garden. Will there be a few token "public" services to meet the letter of the "public" requirement? Sure. They have to do that much for appearance's sake. Will 80% of it be for anything other than private executive shuttles? You game the odds that the spirit of "public" service is going to manifest itself at useful levels. Take that company's reputation for giving back on the public largesse it feeds off of like pigs in a trough, and their position as gatekeeper for who gets to use the helipad. I highly doubt you're ever going to get a useful or meaningful opportunity to book a flight to P'town for the weekend or take an aerial Harbor tour out of that thing. If that were the intent, this would be worded more like the original "public" proposal with Massport large and in charge...not handing the keys over to GE.

 

[FenwayResident]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

This is the inverse. GE can choose who goes in its walled garden. Will there be a few token "public" services to meet the letter of the "public" requirement? Sure. They have to do that much for appearance's sake. Will 80% of it be for anything other than private executive shuttles? You game the odds that the spirit of "public" service is going to manifest itself at useful levels. Take that company's reputation for giving back on the public largesse it feeds off of like pigs in a trough, and their position as gatekeeper for who gets to use the helipad. I highly doubt you're ever going to get a useful or meaningful opportunity to book a flight to P'town for the weekend or take an aerial Harbor tour out of that thing. If that were the intent, this would be worded more like the original "public" proposal with Massport large and in charge...not handing the keys over to GE.

Do you have a source for this, or is this just cynicism?

 

[Semass]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

Also, I am no expert but "helipad" and "heliport" are not the same thing.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

How public is it if the "company" is running point on developing the helipad. That is not the same as the Massport/MassDOT helipad proposal which was a publicly-owned facility to be explicitly bid out to operators of open commercial air service as its primary source of revenue and flight volume, with the corporate exec set served as a niche. Straight-up typical Massport facility.

This is the inverse. GE can choose who goes in its walled garden. Will there be a few token "public" services to meet the letter of the "public" requirement? Sure. They have to do that much for appearance's sake. Will 80% of it be for anything other than private executive shuttles? You game the odds that the spirit of "public" service is going to manifest itself at useful levels. Take that company's reputation for giving back on the public largesse it feeds off of like pigs in a trough, and their position as gatekeeper for who gets to use the helipad. I highly doubt you're ever going to get a useful or meaningful opportunity to book a flight to P'town for the weekend or take an aerial Harbor tour out of that thing. If that were the intent, this would be worded more like the original "public" proposal with Massport large and in charge...not handing the keys over to GE.

F-Line, unless you have sources, I do not see anything in the agreement that says this is not in fact the Massport/MassDOT/Mass Aeronautical Commission/BRA planned public heliport in the Seaport area. There is no language in the agreement (that I have found) that makes this a walled garden. "Coordination with the City and Commonwealth" is hardly ownership.

By the way, having a public access heliport right next door to (or on top of) your building is a two edged sword. They are really noisy. Convenience comes at a price.

 

[Equilibria]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

The GE deal leaves me questioning if we really want these mega corporations HQ'ing here if it costs us hundreds of millions of dollars in bribes for each company.

There's no trade-off here. The MBTA is funded from dedicated Sales Tax and bond cap sources, which the state contribution to GE won't be touching. Likewise, Night Owl would have to be funded out of those sources without a corporate donor, and the MBTA decided that the subsidy rate was so high that its own money could be better spent elsewhere.

Now, I don't think the Baker Administration has shown well when you compare their GE enthusiasm with their MBTA indignation (as I said in the other thread), but unless you think they should have demanded GE contribute to keep Night Owl open (which is a reasonable point), this isn't an either-or thing. They're completely different budgets, revenue streams, and decision-makers.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

Do you have a source for this, or is this just cynicism?

http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...could_yield_a_public_helipad_and_more_ferries

GE's agreement gives them control over site selection and management of the helipad. The FAA's and MassDOT Aeronautics' only role will be regulatory. The exact nature of "public" use is not defined anywhere in Boston's Memorandum of Understanding presented to GE (that blurb quoted above is about the extent of it).

To the cynicism...it's that last part that sticks in my craw. Public institutions like City Hall and the BRA are letting private--notoriously so--GE define the terms of what "public" use is, with no attempt of their own at setting parameters. Way to give away your leverage, Marty. How often to you think carte blanche like that ends up netting a useful public asset instead of some token touristy thing 1 flight out of every dozen reserved for corporate execs?

Also, I am no expert but "helipad" and "heliport" are not the same thing.

Yes, acknowledged. It's a significant degree of difference in operating scale. But not size. Check out the slim profile of NYC's 3 main heliports: Manhattan, E. 34th, W. 30th. Physical site is little more than "a" helipad in the case of Manhattan, 5 in the case of E. 34th, and 11 in the case of W. 30th. Generally shivved into tight confines between ugly-ass highways and little-used waterfront. With Manhattan being off-land entirely as a pad on a jetty (*cough* Ft. Point Channel! Ft. Point Channel! Ft. Point Channel!).

The only thing that really makes them a "-port" rather than a -pad is the explicit public administration and use for public services. They don't really have any requirements for customer facilities such as a terminal or customs office unless that's explicitly needed. They even live inside a loophole of TSA enforcement with generally minimalist security (loophole that probably should be closed). Facilities scale as needed, but in the age of online ticketing a lot of them are show-up-and-go with onsite staffers working remote doing the usual boarding duties. Helps the cost recovery of such low-margin transport to keep it lean.

You can see red flags in the wording of this GE agreement by sticking so explicitly to -pad, not -port. All it conceivably takes for Boston to have a public-access heliport is a jetty with a pad across from South Station on the Channel--or, hell, on the roof of the SS bus terminal if that doesn't foul any Logan flight paths--, a one-room staff office, and fire suppression equipment. Massport wanted something with bigger facilities and presumably more than one helipad years ago, but downsized or room-to-grow would work too.

Why are they not asking for a public heliport when that's all it entails? Why is it a privately-owned, privately-administered "helipad" gobbling up the same sites Massport once evaluated, and why is no attempt made to establish standards for what "public" access actually is.

They're giving away the fucking farm and leaving it in GE's hands what crumbs we get for "public" bread-and-circuses. On real estate that was supposed to be the real publicly-administered "heliport".

Why? Is there even a money reason that justifies giving up that leverage when a dictionary-definition "heliport" in the public trust is so elastic in potential scale that it literally can be as minimalist as a slab of pavement with Home Depot toolshed and fire suppression equipment. Given that elasticity I can't make sense of the purely economic argument for pursuing "public" helicopter service with a giveaway to private control.

Other than there's nothing "public" about the giveaway.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

^ You are reading a lot between the lines, but you could certainly be right. I am not sure though how this can both be public and GE private. Seems somebody will balk at that.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

^ You are reading a lot between the lines, but you could certainly be right. I am not sure though how this can both be public and GE private. Seems somebody will balk at that.

All documents related to the city's deal have been FOIA'd and released, so that Memorandum of Understanding blurb is literally the only definition given to it. If they've discussed further, it's off-books and non-binding unless there's a follow-on agreement defining the public use. Which is a really odd way to proceed, leaving a flank so totally unprotected when that much money is committed up-front.

Yes...it's reading between the lines. But not just you and me and AB reading them...City Hall, the BRA, the state, and GE too. It's left totally open to interpretation by everyone, and leverage has been ceded to GE to define what "public" means.

That is not sound negotiating policy. Maybe it ends up working out happily for all parties, but...Jesus, that is ever a questionable negotiating tactic by our public institutions.

 

[Mongo]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

Put some pilings in the channel right behind the post office building, put a pad or two and a small support building on it. The sides of the channel will help keep the downwash from bothering anybody.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

Put some pilings in the channel right behind the post office building, put a pad or two and a small support building on it. The sides of the channel will help keep the downwash from bothering anybody.

I like the SS bus station roof idea, personally, since you can just make your Grand Heliport Terminal another tix window at the bus station and have all the transit transfers in the world downstairs. Zero thought as to whether that would get approved for flight paths or impacts to Kneeland St. abutters (the only ones you'd ever have to worry about)...so, not a serious proposal beyond "if the stars happen to align perfectly" re: that site.

Otherwise...yeah, sounds spot-on ideal for the Rolling Bridge Park end of the Channel where the Pike vent stacks and Gilette are the only direct abutters conveniently providing sound muffling for the rest of the neighborhood. Just cordon off with buoys that end of the water to keep the rec boats safe distance from the landing jetty and associated 'surf' thrown off by the choppers. Perfect way to anchor that end of reconnected Dot Ave. when the Post Office gets knocked down.

 

[JumboBuc]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

I like the SS bus station roof idea, personally, since you can just make your Grand Heliport Terminal another tix window at the bus station and have all the transit transfers in the world downstairs. Zero thought as to whether that would get approved for flight paths or impacts to Kneeland St. abutters (the only ones you'd ever have to worry about)...so, not a serious proposal beyond "if the stars happen to align perfectly" re: that site.

Otherwise...yeah, sounds spot-on ideal for the Rolling Bridge Park end of the Channel where the Pike vent stacks and Gilette are the only direct abutters conveniently providing sound muffling for the rest of the neighborhood. Just cordon off with buoys that end of the water to keep the rec boats safe distance from the landing jetty and associated 'surf' thrown off by the choppers. Perfect way to anchor that end of reconnected Dot Ave. when the Post Office gets knocked down.

As has been written in other threads: Fort Point Channel is already an FAA-designated helicopter route.


One the separate issue of "we're giving all this money to GE while other issues go unfunded! Where are our priorities?": the City and Commonwealth providing assistance to GE does not preclude GE from paying for other public goods outside of their agreement. It would be perfectly logical for the City and Commonwealth to help GE out with tax breaks and infrastructure improvements and then have GE turn around and sponsor a park or late night service or some other amenity. This sort of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" happens all the time and it allows both parties to smile for the camera and generate good publicity for themselves. Fidelity gets tax breaks and then they sponsor the Boston Pops. Liberty Mutual gets public perks and then they pay for the 4th of July celebration. The Red Sox get Yawkey Way for a song and then support local charities. The list could go on.

Even if GE is known as a tax dodger, that doesn't mean they won't sponsor local causes. Paying corporate taxes yields zero marginal benefit to a company. Sponsoring public amenities in your community (especially ones that you can write off of your taxes and that get your name in the paper and logo plastered all over) yields significant marginal benefit.

I'm by no means saying that each penny given to GE in incentives will be directly paid back one-to-one, nor am I saying that corporate acts of charity justify the perks given to the corporations in the first place. It would also absolutely be preferable for the Commonwealth and City to just pay for the public stuff themselves. I will, however, be shocked if GE doesn't celebrate their arrival in Boston with some public offering of financial good will. A "GE Lawn on D", for example, would make so much sense for them. So would "MBTA Late Night Service provided by GE". The Commonwealth pays for the boring stuff and gets to show how business friendly they are and GE pays for the fun stuff and gets to show how neighborly and hip to millennials they are.

 

[whighlander]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

How public is it if the "company" is running point on developing the helipad. That is not the same as the Massport/MassDOT helipad proposal which was a publicly-owned facility to be explicitly bid out to operators of open commercial air service as its primary source of revenue and flight volume, with the corporate exec set served as a niche. Straight-up typical Massport facility.

This is the inverse. GE can choose who goes in its walled garden. Will there be a few token "public" services to meet the letter of the "public" requirement? Sure. They have to do that much for appearance's sake. Will 80% of it be for anything other than private executive shuttles? You game the odds that the spirit of "public" service is going to manifest itself at useful levels. Take that company's reputation for giving back on the public largesse it feeds off of like pigs in a trough, and their position as gatekeeper for who gets to use the helipad. I highly doubt you're ever going to get a useful or meaningful opportunity to book a flight to P'town for the weekend or take an aerial Harbor tour out of that thing. If that were the intent, this would be worded more like the original "public" proposal with Massport large and in charge...not handing the keys over to GE.

F-Line you sound like you've been feeling the Berrrn tooo ttooooo much

We don't know any terms associated with the Helipad --other than it will be a Public Helipad and hence a publically accessible facility -- However I think all would prefer it to be developed and operated by a private entity-- without tax payers involvement

 

[whighlander]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

All documents related to the city's deal have been FOIA'd and released, so that Memorandum of Understanding blurb is literally the only definition given to it. If they've discussed further, it's off-books and non-binding unless there's a follow-on agreement defining the public use. Which is a really odd way to proceed, leaving a flank so totally unprotected when that much money is committed up-front.

Yes...it's reading between the lines. But not just you and me and AB reading them...City Hall, the BRA, the state, and GE too. It's left totally open to interpretation by everyone, and leverage has been ceded to GE to define what "public" means.

That is not sound negotiating policy. Maybe it ends up working out happily for all parties, but...Jesus, that is ever a questionable negotiating tactic by our public institutions.

FLine -- if you read what is in the MOU -- it clearly says the Commonwealth [that is DOT] and Massport will coordinate with the City and the company in securing a Public Helipad subject to FAA regs

It also says that the company is responsible for negotiating with the operator the price of the service

That sounds so unlike your interpretation as to be ???

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

FLine -- if you read what is in the MOU -- it clearly says the Commonwealth [that is DOT] and Massport will coordinate with the City and the company in securing a Public Helipad subject to FAA regs

It also says that the company is responsible for negotiating with the operator the price of the service

That sounds so unlike your interpretation as to be ???

Oh, gee. To the casual observer who might've actually been reading the thread, we might've already covered all this with language from the MOU and everything!


Don't you have a Wiki colon dump full of bullet points to deliver about how PRT drones that pick you up right from your driveway in Lexington will make all other forms of rotorized transit obsolete?

 

[cden4]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

http://commonwealthmagazine.org/economy/a-tale-of-two-companies/

 

[whighlander]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

Oh, gee. To the casual observer who might've actually been reading the thread, we might've already covered all this with language from the MOU and everything!


Don't you have a Wiki colon dump full of bullet points to deliver about how PRT drones that pick you up right from your driveway in Lexington will make all other forms of rotorized transit obsolete?

Fline -- give it a rest

Stick to something with which you have some knowledge and expertise

 

[citylover94]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

And you have so much more experience in this field?

 

[whighlander]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

And you have so much more experience in this field?

city -- Well I have written MOU's with a Fortune 25ish company on a joint venture

But the relevant point is that all we have to go on at this point is one formal document signed by the CEO's of Commonwealth -- Gov Baker, CEO of Boston -- Mayor Walsh and the CEO of GE -- Jeff Immelt

In my book -- anytime that you get to that level -- there is a lot of underlying agreement amongst the principals, with the details to be left to the "deputies" -- so let's wait to see how things evolve

 

[citylover94]

Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District

The point still stands that if it isn't written in a legal document it is not legally binding and any "underlying agreement" can be thrown out the window at any point.

I am not saying you are wrong. But I think there is some merit to what FLine is saying. Without a legally binding document stating what you said there is no reason to believe that is any more likely than any of the other outcomes possible based on the documents that have been released.