Millennium Tower (Filene's) | 426 Washington Street | Downtown

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Filene's

Suffolk is going to have to offer what something like 8 points on its fixed bond issue? Combine that with so little cash on hand and a would-be neutral property...they are going to have to sell some property just to maintain operations in the future if revenue slips.

Knowing how the city bends over for colleges; if I had the cash I'd buy some of the new bonds knowing they are probably secure.
 
Last edited:
Re: Filene's

Suffolk is going to have to offer what something like 8 points on its fixed bond issue? Combine that with so little cash on hand and a would-be neutral property...they are going to have to sell some property just to maintain operations in the future if revenue slips.

Knowing how the city bends over for colleges; if I had the cash I'd buy some of the new bonds knowing they are probably secure.

Some pretty strong rhetoric on colleges. Any particular reason, or do you just loathe that they've helped keep Boston relevant over the years?
 
Re: Filene's

I don't see this coming under suffolk ownership/development.

What if Suffolk was to just lease some of the floors for student housing though? It could potentially be cash neutral for Suffolk, while providing more housing for students, and a major tenant for the developer.

Surely the building could be designed in a way that the office/condo/hotel/whatever is insulated from the students.


Are renters really going to fork over thousands of dollars a month in rent to live in a building that houses a dorm with college freshmen? You can say all you want that the building can be designed to insulate the renters from the students but that won't get over the stigma that potential renters have about living in a building that is part college dorm. "Don't worry Mr. and Mrs. Jones, if you rent this apartment you will have a separate entrance from the dorm and we took special care to make sure you will not be disturbed by the college kids." Yeah right. Maybe if this building was going to be affordable rental units that plan might work but they are going to need to charge moderately high rents if this property ever gets developed.
 
Re: Filene's

Are renters really going to fork over thousands of dollars a month in rent to live in a building that houses a dorm with college freshmen? You can say all you want that the building can be designed to insulate the renters from the students but that won't get over the stigma that potential renters have about living in a building that is part college dorm. "Don't worry Mr. and Mrs. Jones, if you rent this apartment you will have a separate entrance from the dorm and we took special care to make sure you will not be disturbed by the college kids." Yeah right. Maybe if this building was going to be affordable rental units that plan might work but they are going to need to charge moderately high rents if this property ever gets developed.

It works with Harvard at Trilogy, albeit grad students.

I was saying completely replace the condo's (i don't think apartments were ever part of the plan) with dorms (would it have to be freshman?). The office aspect wouldn't be that disturbed just because it would be primarily a 9-5 operation and students are relatively quiet during the day. The hotel would be a valid point, but again, i don't see why it couldn't be designed with some sort of buffer.

It was just an idea anyways....
 
Re: Filene's

Rest in peace.

5060612656_240b6bc521_b.jpg


5060000517_e05098faa9_b.jpg


5060001011_12e1d38043_b.jpg


5060614136_6b007447cc_b.jpg


5060614612_3972864a1e_b.jpg




Or should I say rest in pieces.

5059998211_cc872dceb6_b.jpg


5059997291_9454b652c7_b.jpg


5059996869_2c43af94ab_b.jpg


5060616540_58dbb4baf9_b.jpg


5060616052_a21490d0e6_b.jpg


5060002929_0303771f1e_b.jpg


5060611280_210a90a72b_b.jpg


5060611728_a34406eef1_b.jpg
 
Re: Filene's

Filene?s site has buyers lining up
But developers are counting on a discounted price
By Casey Ross
Globe Staff / October 17, 2010


More than a half-dozen developers, including some of the biggest names in the region, are vying to buy the Filene?s building site in Downtown Crossing, an eyesore that has become one of the hottest properties on the Boston market.

Since the current owner put it up for sale two weeks ago, the property has drawn interest from some major players in the real estate business. Among them: a former owner of the John Hancock Tower, a New York firm that built the Clarendon residences in the Back Bay, and luxury builder Ronald Druker.

The recent rush of interest is the strongest sign yet of a possible turnaround for the boarded-up site. City officials said an array of retailers are considering leasing space there, among them Target, Whole Foods, Au Bon Pain, and Nordstrom Rack, the department store?s discount chain. The district?s longtime magnet, Filene?s Basement, also continues to pursue a return to the location. No deals have been signed.

Meanwhile, several developers are scrambling to devise new building plans that include mul tiple levels of stores and hundreds of apartments.

?It?s an incredible location,?? said Jack Englert, principal of Criterion Development Partners, a Dallas home builder that wants to redevelop the property, which sits above Boston?s busiest transit stop. ?With the rental market strong, and construction pricing still down a bit, it?s hard to imagine a better time to build.??

Several potential buyers said their projects would be smaller than what had been proposed by the site?s current owners, a team led by Vornado Realty Trust and developer John B. Hynes III. They won approval in 2007 for a 39-story tower containing offices, 166 condominiums, stores and restaurants, and a hotel. The project fell apart in the spring of 2008, when the economic downturn decimated demand for new condominiums and offices.

Since June 2008, the Filene?s site has been a blight on Downtown Crossing, with the skeleton of the department store looming over an empty construction crater. Vornado and Hynes began seeking buyers last month after the city moved to revoke its permits, citing a two-year delay in construction. Now, many would-be buyers are talking up possibilities for rental housing and stores, which are seen as most likely to attract funding from lenders.

?Our concept for the site would be to develop a luxury apartment tower with retail on the lower floors,?? said Curtis Kemeny, a principal of Boston Residential, a developer of homes and retail stores that is weighing a bid for the site.

Others who confirmed interest declined to discuss their plans, except to say that the project represents a rare opportunity in the city?s densely packed downtown.

?It?s interesting,?? Druker said of the chance to redevelop the site. He declined to elaborate. Druker owns several nearby properties and has successfully developed large mixed-use projects across the city, including Heritage on the Garden and Atelier 505 in the South End.

Also pursuing the property is Normandy Real Estate Partners, according to two sources with knowledge of the sale process. The firm is coming off a string of real estate successes in the city, including its sale of the Hancock Tower for $930 million to Boston Properties. Normandy bought the signature skyscraper at a 2009 foreclosure auction that valued it at $660 million. It also developed the Ames Hotel near Boston City Hall.

Other interested firms include Houston residential builder The Hanover Co., which has developed luxury housing complexes in cities in California and along the East Coast; and the Related Cos., which developed the recently completed Clarendon condominium complex in the Back Bay and is currently building a 60-story, mixed-use tower in Manhattan.

Even with all the buzz over the Filene?s property, several interested developers said a deal could prove elusive, especially if Vornado and its partners insist on selling the property for anything close to the more than $150 million they have put into it.

Some said it is not worth half that today after a sharp decline in real estate values, putting its value between $60 million and $80 million. Vornado and its partners have not publicly stated an asking price, but two people with knowledge of the sale process said the group is seeking as much as $100 million.

Vornado and Hynes declined to comment for this article.

In order to jump-start construction at Filene?s, a new developer would have to buy the property at a price low enough to justify the cost of building stores and homes that probably will generate less income than was projected for the development before the recession.

Vornado could choose to sell the property outright or unload only part of it; for example, it could seek to retain ownership of the retail portion ? which stands to be the most profitable ? while selling the rights to build apartments and offices. The effort to sell the property will likely take several months and multiple rounds of bidding.

In addition to the economic challenges, any developer would also have to deal with the project?s controversial history. During the past year, Mayor Thomas M. Menino has repeatedly accused Vornado of dragging its feet and subordinating the city?s needs to its desire to turn a profit. Vornado and Hynes have said they tried everything in their power to resume construction on the site and that they could not restart work on a project that would have lost money in the down economy.

Menino?s office did not respond to a request for comment on the renewed interest in the property.

After the city?s move to revoke permits for the development, any new builder would have to get fresh approvals from the city and secure signed deals with new retail tenants. Executives with Cushman & Wakefield, the firm handling the sale for Vornado and Hynes, said retailers are lining up for a chance to open on the historic site, but they would not release any names.

City officials involved in recruiting businesses to Downtown Crossing did identify some retailers with potential interest. Representatives of Target and Whole Foods declined to comment, while a representative of Nordstrom Rack said the retailer has no current plan to open a new store on the site. An executive with Au Bon Pain, which previously operated a store there, said it is interested in returning, but that no deal has been signed.



Link
 
Re: Filene's

I call bravo sierra...do you really think that developers are 'lining up' with a man who doesn't want...um...ANYTHING...built in Boston? No. They're avoiding Menino like the plague.

Bottom line is this: Tom got played by "those investors in China." He spit on Voranado, and they had every right to stand their ground. This was all about his ego. Plain and simple. You got a hole in the ground for a reason.
 
Re: Filene's

I think all this whining over Filene's is wrong. If Vorano had waited to demolish the building and Filene's Basement was still open Downtown Crossing would pretty much be the same as it is now. The problems are much bigger than the lack on one store. I worked in downtown Boston from the 70's - 90's and cut through dtc frequently. It was always bad at night. A few years ago, after a government center garage project meeting, I cut through dtc on the way home. It was much much better than in the past. I know dtc has a long way to go but Filene's is not the problem, just an easy excuse.

Many of the building are owned by investors, many from overseas with no interest except selling when the price is right. Boston is just a line item on their portfolio. For the first time the is a BID and landlords with a vested interest(Emerson & Suffolk and condo owners). I think we may see improvements soon.
 
Re: Filene's

The only problem with all these buyers...........Is Vornado is not selling for loss.
 
Re: Filene's

It might have already been talked about, but is it possible for the city to charage a blight penalty to this developer and make it hefty?
 
Re: Filene's

It might have already been talked about, but is it possible for the city to charage a blight penalty to this developer and make it hefty?

...and watch how many additional decades the site sits unsold. part of the problem here is that this developer has had enough. Any more, and they may decide to "play rough".
 
Re: Filene's

^^How would hefty fines not be an incentive to sell/build the lot?

The longer they leave the lot vacant, the more fines they pay.
 
Re: Filene's

^^How would hefty fines not be an incentive to sell/build the lot?

The longer they leave the lot vacant, the more fines they pay.
The problem, IMO, is a court might see it as selective enforcement. You have two big sites along Washington St. within a good four iron shot of Filene's, that have sat undeveloped for many months longer than the Filene's site. And the city has done nothing about them.

And who put up the money to keep the brand going after Filene's Basement went belly-up? You guessed it: Vornado.

http://www.stylelist.com/2009/06/15/filenes-basement-sold-but-not-to-the-highest-bidder/
 
Re: Filene's

Yeah, it would need to be a broad, tax-based law. But it they were to come up with a way to get it through the courts I think it would be a very effective tool.
 
Re: Filene's

I hate for the city to get into the development game, but couldn't they have raised the money for eminent domain by issuing bonds against the property. Or even getting a commercial mortgage until they had time to flip it.
 
Re: Filene's

The problem, IMO, is a court might see it as selective enforcement. You have two big sites along Washington St. within a good four iron shot of Filene's, that have sat undeveloped for many months longer than the Filene's site. And the city has done nothing about them.

But can't you easily distinguish undeveloped vacant lots (I assume you are referring to Hayward Place) and lots where developers have destroyed prominent tourist attractions and halted construction mid-project only to leave dangerous gaping holes in the city center? Didn't Filene's Basement have some kind of landmark status? I don't think a court would have a problem distinguishing between what is going on at Filene's and what has not gone on at a parking lot.
 
Re: Filene's

But can't you easily distinguish undeveloped vacant lots (I assume you are referring to Hayward Place) and lots where developers have destroyed prominent tourist attractions and halted construction mid-project only to leave dangerous gaping holes in the city center? Didn't Filene's Basement have some kind of landmark status? I don't think a court would have a problem distinguishing between what is going on at Filene's and what has not gone on at a parking lot.

Vornado would come into court and state that if it wasn't for Vornado's financing of Filene's Basement, there would be no Basement, and no tourist attraction, permanent or otherwise.

I think you can get landmark status for interiors, but not for the occupant. And Filene's Basement as an interior, was no landmark.

Part of the city's problem is Vornado could probably easily show any court that this is simply a vindictive action by a petulant mayor, having a hissy fit. IMO, the city would be on sounder footing if it took such an action against any number of other parcels where approvals have been given, and nothing has happened, and Vornado and Filene's get caught in the sweep.

You don't see the city telling Harvard we're going to lift the approvals for the science complex because you've stopped at the empty concrete slab level. And one could argue, given the example of Novartis building a $1,500 a sq ft building on Mass Ave in Cambridge that the Science Complex is probably of greater long-term benefit to the city than Filene's Basement returning to its origin, even if that origin was four or five owners ago.

And as far as I know, there are no enforceable provisions in the approvals and permitting the city gave Filene's that would allow the city to shout 'breach!' because the development has not gone forward.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top