Marine Industrial Park | Seaport

One transportation option for the area could be converting the SL tunnel to LRV and extending the LRV line on the surface as shown here to South Boston. A station could be located where the red rectangle is:

51084356367_052eff34d1_o.jpg
 
sidewalks said:
Oh I 100% agree that the transportation issue would have to be addressed before any mixed use development were considered in that area. That said, at least that might provide an impetus to create a transportation solution for the ENTIRE seaport which is already choking on traffic. You could probably fund the transportation improvements with a TIF approach.
Click to expand...

Or...you could see where the Haul Road and Track 61 are in relation to Marine T. and conclude "Oh, cool...they've got the transportation solutions all sorted when the cold storage warehouses come in." It's quite literally planned that way.

Why does every last morsel of land have to be mixed-use because arbitrary reasons???
 
The thing that may be lost on people who are advocating for mixed use is that Boston is still one of 3 major US hubs for seafood- its Seattle for west coast species, Miami for warm water species and Boston for northern atlantic/european species with NY obviously its own major center as well. Why would you kill not only a historic industry in the city but also still a very viable and thriving industry? Its nice to advocate for housing but its not the best use in every single case
 
Suffolk 83 said:
The thing that may be lost on people who are advocating for mixed use is that Boston is still one of 3 major US hubs for seafood- its Seattle for west coast species, Miami for warm water species and Boston for northern atlantic/european species with NY obviously its own major center as well. Why would you kill not only a historic industry in the city but also still a very viable and thriving industry? Its nice to advocate for housing but its not the best use in every single case
Click to expand...

New Bedford has a much larger fleet than Boston and it's not close.

I advocate for mixed use and housing because Boston's downtown is woefully small. It needs more life and it need (MUCH) more housing. Housing affordability is a far more critical issue than the location of light industrial space.
 
sidewalks said:
The Port of New Bedford has been the nation’s number one most valuable fishing port since 2001.
Click to expand...
So? Not 100% of MA's seafood industry is self-contained in not-Boston. You're not going to end-run your way with argumentative gotchas into changing the zoning of Marine T. to mixed or residential. This is tilting at windmills.
 
sidewalks said:
The Port of New Bedford has been the nation’s number one most valuable fishing port since 2001.
Click to expand...
Honestly man, you don't know what you're talking about. I was trying to be nicer but its the truth.

New Bedford is the local fisheries, Boston is where local and international seafood is collected and then shipped out to the rest of the country. One of the biggest plusses of the seaport is its proximity to Logan. Think of the seaport as Kendall Square or Silicon Valley, Talent begets more talent.

You dont just unseat an entire industry just because we need more housing. There are better and more creative ideas
 
Suffolk 83 said:
Honestly man, you don't know what you're talking about. I was trying to be nicer but its the truth.

New Bedford is the local fisheries, Boston is where local and international seafood is collected and then shipped out to the rest of the country. One of the biggest plusses of the seaport is its proximity to Logan.
Click to expand...

In Tokyo sushi restaurants, one of the most prized cuts on the menu is "Boston Tuna"--fish that's caught here, flash-frozen, and then immediately flown out of Logan to Japan.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
So? Not 100% of MA's seafood industry is self-contained in not-Boston. You're not going to end-run your way with argumentative gotchas into changing the zoning of Marine T. to mixed or residential. This is tilting at windmills.
Click to expand...

The point was made above that Boston was the largest fishing port in the Northeast. It is not. My point is that the vacant wasteland that is the marine industrial park has not been instrumental to the preservation of Boston's fleet and the size of that fleet is not as large as the previous post would have you believe.

It doesn't matter...we prioritize different things. I think that resource has a better use and you think it's best utilized as it is.

Suffolk, save the pedantic, arrogant attitude. If you want to show off your expansive knowledge on the subject, have at it. But your information thus far has been misleading.
 
Last edited:
sidewalks said:
The point was made above that Boston was the largest fishing port in the Northeast. It is not. My point is that the vacant wasteland that is the marine industrial park has not been instrumental to the preservation of Boston's fleet and the size of that fleet is not as large as the previous post would have you believe.

It doesn't matter...we prioritize different things. I think that resource has a better use and you think it's best utilized as it is.

Suffolk, save the pedantic, arrogant attitude. If you want to show off your expansive knowledge on the subject, have at it. But your information thus far has been misleading.
Click to expand...
"I think..."
"You think..."

Nope...not playing this game. This is not a question reducible to equally balanced see-saw of one individual shouting their individual personal opinion louder than some one else's individual personal opinion.

The Massachusetts PORT AUTHORITY controls the land, has documented-to-the-nines long-range planning studies for the land with well articulated needs cases, and the counterpoint argument that specialty land usage has overwhelming need to overturn that need case and generify the zoning is absent in both evidence AND the authority to make it happen.

If you want to keep picking nits, you better read up on Massport's studies and come with direct corroborating evidence that they need to change course. You're not doing that. You're plying argumentative fallacies that this is a battle of purely personal opinioneering. It's not...and we are fully capable of telling the difference.
 
The point was made above that Boston was the largest fishing port in the Northeast...I was making the point that was inaccurate. My point is that the vacant wasteland that is the marine industrial park has not been instrumental to the preservation of Boston's fleet and the size of that fleet is not quite as large as the previous post would have you believe.
Click to expand...

New Bedford is the local fisheries, Boston is where local and international seafood is collected and then shipped out to the rest of the country. One of the biggest plusses of the seaport is its proximity to Logan. Think of the seaport as Kendall Square or Silicon Valley, Talent begets more talent.
Click to expand...

I hesitate to jump into this, but the doc linked below, despite being from 2000 or so, has far more information, but it's possible that you're both right. In terms of vessels and landing catches, Boston is small potatoes. However, in terms of processing fish, it's become (remained?) a bit of a nexus.

 
This entire discussion is belied by the fact that much of the development that has occurred in the industrial park isn't dedicated to the fishing industry (or Industry) at all. Look at Innovation Square...it is a massive new LAB complex. There's Au Bon Pain's corporate headquarters, a giant Kohler showroom, Reebok's new headquarters. And now we will have a big salt pile. Fantastic. Can't wait. The vast majority of this land has lay fallow for over a generation because demand for marine related industry simply hasn't been sufficient, which is precisely why we have salt piles, shoe companies, faucet showrooms and a bakery headquarters.
 
sidewalks said:
The point was made above that Boston was the largest fishing port in the Northeast. It is not. My point is that the vacant wasteland that is the marine industrial park has not been instrumental to the preservation of Boston's fleet and the size of that fleet is not as large as the previous post would have you believe.

It doesn't matter...we prioritize different things. I think that resource has a better use and you think it's best utilized as it is.
Click to expand...

There’s so much vacant and legitimately underutilized space in this city(with transit access) that Boston could probably house well in excess of a million people before there would be a real need to 86 one of the few remaining blue collar job centers.
 
sidewalks said:
The point was made above that Boston was the largest fishing port in the Northeast.
Click to expand...
I never said Boston was the largest fishing port of anything, you drew that conclusion. I said Boston was the top three biggest seafood hubs in the entire country, and its 100% accurate. You're exposing your rudimentary understanding of the seafood industry by thinking boats need to pull up to piers here in order for it to be a bustling center of industry. That's wrong sorry.
 
Or take JC Canistraro's 157k square foot blank warehouse that is dedicated to HVAC and fire protection fabrication and employs....100 (?!!?) people who were moved from Wilmington and Watertown. Another non marine related use that could just as easily be located anywhere. It's simply an inefficient and impractical use of incredibly valuable land.
 
Suffolk 83 said:
I never said Boston was the largest fishing port of anything, you drew that conclusion. I said Boston was the top three biggest seafood hubs in the entire country, and its 100% accurate. You're exposing your rudimentary understanding of the seafood industry by thinking boats need to pull up to piers here in order for it to be a bustling center of industry. That's wrong sorry.
Click to expand...
If the ships don't need to pull up to the dock then the facilities don't need to be on the water do they? If the fish are coming from New Bedford and Gloucester and only a fraction are even being processed in Boston then they need not be immediately on the pier.
 
sidewalks said:
This entire discussion is belied by the fact that much of the development that has occurred in the industrial park isn't dedicated to the fishing industry (or Industry) at all. Look at Innovation Square...it is a massive new LAB complex. There's Au Bon Pain's corporate headquarters, a giant Kohler showroom, Reebok's new headquarters. And now we will have a big salt pile. Fantastic. Can't wait. The vast majority of this land has lay fallow for over a generation because demand for marine related industry simply hasn't been sufficient, which is precisely why we have salt piles, shoe companies, faucet showrooms and a bakery headquarters.
Click to expand...

Who pigeonoled port-related activities as fishing-exclusive? Massport didn't. Perishables warehousing is a *big* future-ID'd need for Marine T. It's not the only one.

Sooooo many bad-faith arguments being thrown about fallaciously here. You've even been explicitly directed to sources of data about port usage to use for coming up with an *evidence-backed* counterpoint for changing the zoning, and refuse to use it. This discussion is going nowhere as a result.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Who pigeonoled port-related activities as fishing-exclusive? Massport didn't. Perishables warehousing is a *big* future-ID'd need for Marine T. It's not the only one.

Sooooo many bad-faith arguments being thrown about fallaciously here. You've even been explicitly directed to sources of data about port usage to use for coming up with an *evidence-backed* counterpoint for changing the zoning, and refuse to use it. This discussion is going nowhere as a result.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about getting rid of the Conley marine terminal??? I was explicitly talking about the Flynn Marine Industrial Park which is not controlled by Massport but rather the BPDA.

The BPDA itself says the following in its recent masterplan update: "As the economic analysis of the RLFMP has determined that water dependent industrial uses are in decline with no existing or near-term market opportunities for over the dock activity"

READ: there just isn't much demand for marine industrial space so we are going to backfill wherever we can with uses that have no true maritime connection (Kohler, Au Bon Pain, Lab Space, Breweries) whomever will commit to anything vaguely commercial.
 
sidewalks said:
Who said anything about getting rid of the Conley marine terminal??? I was explicitly talking about the Flynn Marine Industrial Park which is not controlled by Massport but rather the BPDA.

The BPDA itself says the following in its recent masterplan update: "As the economic analysis of the RLFMP has determined that water dependent industrial uses are in decline with no existing or near-term market opportunities for over the dock activity"

READ: there just isn't much demand for marine industrial space so we are going to backfill wherever we can with uses that have no true maritime connection (Kohler, Au Bon Pain, Lab Space, Breweries) whomever will commit to anything vaguely commercial.
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ...MASSPORT Marine Terminal ≠ Flynn Industrial Park. Marine T. is a subset of the Industrial Park, encompassing nearly all of the undeveloped land at-stake. The Industrial Park officially encompasses the whole peninsula east of Haul Rd., out of which only a fraction is non-Massport. The BDPA does not have carte blanche control over the Massport properties inside. Most of the non-Massport land here is already spoken for by mixed-use. The Massport land is what's left. 330 acres inside the "official" Marine Terminal designation area. All that warehouse stuff facing Fid Kennedy Ave....that's Massport. All that already-developed stuff on Drydock that's very much already mixed-use...that's BDPA.

You could literally find this out by going to the Real Estate sub-page of the Massport website. And yet here we are on the second page of screaming at the whole board.
 
Last edited:
My mistake on the control of the undeveloped land that is controlled by Massport in the Industrial park. That said, the BPDA's own report identifies the declining viability of marine related industrial uses. That Massport would commission studies that suggest long term prospects for port related activity in the area is hardly surprising. I wouldn't put much stock in a report commission by an entity whose very mission is port activity...they and their consultants are incentivized to justify their existence. Either way, the proof is in the pudding...Kohler, Au Bon Pain, Reebok, Lab space, breweries, hvac fabrication...all these could be located anywhere. They could be located in an industrial park in Canton rather than on some of the most valuable real estate on the east coast. At the end of the day, there are higher and better uses for the land. I'll leave it at that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top