Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
From Boston Business Journal, May 9, 2008, page 63
From Boston Business Journal, May 9, 2008, page 63
News ONLY Columbus Center Thread
- Thread starter philip
- Start date
kz1000ps
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2006
- Messages
- 8,827
- Reaction score
- 10,331
Re: Columbus Center
a bit old, but I think it's worth posting..
Night Work Continues at Columbus Center
May 3, 2008
by Alison Lapp
The Boston Courant
A delay on the construction of the proposed Columbus Center would not give neighbors relief from the inconveniences of an active worksite, according to the developers.
An April 18 posting on the project's website states that "construction will proceed at a reduced level until full scale construction resumes," including night work occurring "intermittently on the Turnpike for the next 24 months."
The construction will happen despite the fact that WinnDevelopment, the developer of the proposed seven-acre project that would straddle the Mass Pike from Clarendon Street to Tremont Street, asked the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (MTA) for a continuance on such labor in March.
Turnpike spokesman Mac Daniel confirmed that the authority is negotiating the terms of the continuance with the developers. The MTA has said it will not grant the postponement unless developers secure the site, which they have committed to do.
"To minimize inconvenience to the neighborhood during this period, we'll be restoring parking and sidewalks," said WinnDevelopment spokesperson Alan Eisner.
The company requested the delay after the Commonwealth failed to approve $10 million in grants that developers were expecting.
The loss of the state money was the latest setback in a series of harships for the proposed condominium, hotel and retail project, which lost a major financier last year.
The $800 million complex, more than a decade in the making, has yet to find a new lender in today's depressed real estate market. Mayor Thomas Menino has said Gov. Deval Patrick indicated in a private conversation that he could restore state funding if developers secure the rest of their financing.
While looking for a backer, developers will slow construction, but, "We're not going to abandon the site because of the ability to potentially restate it," Eisner said.
The purpose of the work will be to "maintain the integrity of the site for future construction," he said, though could not describe the specific tasks engineers will need to perform.
Steps will "for sure" be taken to reduce disturbances from night work, he said, adding that he was uncertain of how that alleviation would be accomplished.
Negotiations for a new air rights lease from the MTA are ongoing, he said, stressing that developers still hope to see the project through to completion.
"We'll have a continuance on our current lease for 18 months, during which time we are going to rethink our capital structure with an eye towards continuing the project," Eisner said, "which will be a function of market conditions and the ability to receive funds that have already been committed at the state level for the project."
a bit old, but I think it's worth posting..
Night Work Continues at Columbus Center
May 3, 2008
by Alison Lapp
The Boston Courant
A delay on the construction of the proposed Columbus Center would not give neighbors relief from the inconveniences of an active worksite, according to the developers.
An April 18 posting on the project's website states that "construction will proceed at a reduced level until full scale construction resumes," including night work occurring "intermittently on the Turnpike for the next 24 months."
The construction will happen despite the fact that WinnDevelopment, the developer of the proposed seven-acre project that would straddle the Mass Pike from Clarendon Street to Tremont Street, asked the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (MTA) for a continuance on such labor in March.
Turnpike spokesman Mac Daniel confirmed that the authority is negotiating the terms of the continuance with the developers. The MTA has said it will not grant the postponement unless developers secure the site, which they have committed to do.
"To minimize inconvenience to the neighborhood during this period, we'll be restoring parking and sidewalks," said WinnDevelopment spokesperson Alan Eisner.
The company requested the delay after the Commonwealth failed to approve $10 million in grants that developers were expecting.
The loss of the state money was the latest setback in a series of harships for the proposed condominium, hotel and retail project, which lost a major financier last year.
The $800 million complex, more than a decade in the making, has yet to find a new lender in today's depressed real estate market. Mayor Thomas Menino has said Gov. Deval Patrick indicated in a private conversation that he could restore state funding if developers secure the rest of their financing.
While looking for a backer, developers will slow construction, but, "We're not going to abandon the site because of the ability to potentially restate it," Eisner said.
The purpose of the work will be to "maintain the integrity of the site for future construction," he said, though could not describe the specific tasks engineers will need to perform.
Steps will "for sure" be taken to reduce disturbances from night work, he said, adding that he was uncertain of how that alleviation would be accomplished.
Negotiations for a new air rights lease from the MTA are ongoing, he said, stressing that developers still hope to see the project through to completion.
"We'll have a continuance on our current lease for 18 months, during which time we are going to rethink our capital structure with an eye towards continuing the project," Eisner said, "which will be a function of market conditions and the ability to receive funds that have already been committed at the state level for the project."
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
Columbus Center countdown
South End News ● May 29, 2008 ● by Scott Kearnan
The Columbus Center construction site, which started work in November 2007, remains largely abandoned. Photo: SEN staff
At a meeting of the Bay Village Neighborhood Association on May 27, Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (MTA) executive director Alan LeBovidge told the nearly two dozen residents in attendance that the agency would be in talks with the developers of the Columbus Center for project for just one more month.
LeBovidge said that the MTA, which is currently leasing the land to developers of the luxury condo/retail project, would entertain conversation for one more month to determine whether to grant an 18-month "continuance on any further construction" the developers requested in March. He also said that if the developers, a union between the local Winn Development and partners CalPERS (California Public Employees? Retirement System) and MacFarlane Partners, indicate construction will resume as planned at the end of that continuance, the request will be granted and interim measures will be taken to clean up the messy construction eyesore for local residents.
But if the developer is unable to provide assurance of continued progress, said LeBovidge, the MTA will assume that "this [construction] is not going to happen" and will press for full rehabilitation of the razed construction area.
LeBovidge?s reassurances were met with a mixture of hope and skepticism from the residents in attendance, many of whom live on Cortes Street. That street directly abuts the construction site and residents have been given postponed promises of progress in the past. With construction halted while Columbus Center developers look for new funding, these residents have been vocal about the practical and aesthetic consequences resulting from the long hiatus on work: eliminated parking spots, felled trees, and trash dumping, to name a few.
LeBovidge acknowledged their concerns about the stalled construction, and cut the tension with humor as the meeting commenced in a conference room in the South Cove Plaza apartment building. "I got nervous when I saw this," began LeBovidge, indicating a rectangular, cardboard box sitting on a table. "I thought you might put me inside and saw me in two."
The Columbus Center project has long been beset with problems in its development, most specifically ballooning construction costs - more than a decade a go, developers said the seven-acre project could be built for around $300 million. Now, that?s grown to an estimated $800 million.
Construction, which began in November 2007, came to a total standstill, however, when the developers said they were unable to move forward without anticipated state funding for the project. In March, developers requested the 18-month continuance from the MTA because, they said, around $35 million in state grants and loans they felt essential to the project?s "capital structure" remained in limbo. In early April, two weeks after the moratorium was requested, the Patrick administration denied the project a $10 million MORE grant, in part because the developers had stopped construction. The next day, MassHousing announced that it would no longer be closing on $20.6 million in loans it had previously approved for the project. As of now, the project?s future is uncertain, although the developers did say in late April that they?d continue "minimal work" on the site in order to keep it "in play" ("Columbus Center Still in Limbo," May 1).
The back and forth has frustrated local residents, some of whom support the ultimate goal of the project but who are all left with the ramifications of a seemingly inactive, seven-acre construction zone on their front steps.
Clarendon Street resident and longtime critic of the project Ned Flaherty recently authored a petition to circulate among Bay Village and South End residents, outlining the impact of the Columbus Center construction zone on locals. The petition urges the decision makers to whom it is addressed - including LeBovidge and Mayor Thomas M. Menino, among others - to "ensure that the project owners - not the tollpayers or taxpayers - immediately finish and pay for all work to secure and restore the turnpike, sidewalks, streets and neighborhoods to their pre-construction conditions."
"When the [developers] halted construction in March... [decision-makers] promised they?d secure and restore the seven-acre construction site to the condition it was in summer 2007," said Flaherty via email. "But here it is the start of June 2008, and nothing?s been done."
Something may be done soon - interim clean-up measures are already underway. Jessica Shumaker, spokesperson for the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA), confirmed that developers are paying Project Place, a South End nonprofit that provides employment opportunities for city homeless, to conduct cleanup of the sidewalks and construction zone while residents wait on the verdict of the project?s future. She said the Project Place efforts should be helpful in addressing resident concerns while respecting that the project?s future remains uncertain. "We are very concerned that the sidewalks are restored and some of the parking restored," said Shumaker.
Clean up will begin within the week and workers will visit the site three times a week to maintain it, Suzanne Kenney, executive director of Project Place, said.
Despite the frustration, many Cortes Street residents are excited to finally see some movement on the cleanup front. "I have to say, the BRA was really responsive. I?m very happy with it," said Lynn Andrews, a resident who emailed the city department about trash dumping she had observed at the site. Andrews reported, corroborated by several other Cortes Street residents, that a mattress, chair, and old television were among objects she saw disposed on the sidewalk outside the construction zone. While they were quickly removed, she said that she feared the inactive site might be viewed as a free-for-all dumping zone and worried the situation would escalate.
But critics like Flaherty wonder how much cleanup work the Project Place team can reasonably accomplish, and whether it is appropriate for them to be the crew in use. Flaherty noted that the developers, in the initial proposal, had promised that all project labor would be paid at union-scale wages with benefits. "The BRA is responsible for enforcing that union-scale promise for all the project?s workers, including workers from Project Place ... The Mayor?s redevelopment staff should enforce the promises that these developers made to get his approval," Flaherty said in his email.
The individuals working with Project Place do not receive union scale; according to Kenney, they are paid an hourly minimum wage with potential for bonuses and incentives. Alan Eisner, spokesperson for the Columbus Center project, responded to Flaherty?s concern by saying, "Yes, we are using Project Place personnel, and that was part of an agreement that the developers made with the City of Boston during the permitting process. It?s the only non-union activity that?s been contemplated."
Speaking more generally to the point of the Columbus Center?s future, however, Eisner said that there has been "no change" in determining how the project will move forward.
END
"Things are as they were last time," said Eisner, referring to a May 1 meeting with the BRA where the developers did not provide any information regarding newly secured funding.
Columbus Center countdown
South End News ● May 29, 2008 ● by Scott Kearnan
The Columbus Center construction site, which started work in November 2007, remains largely abandoned. Photo: SEN staff
At a meeting of the Bay Village Neighborhood Association on May 27, Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (MTA) executive director Alan LeBovidge told the nearly two dozen residents in attendance that the agency would be in talks with the developers of the Columbus Center for project for just one more month.
LeBovidge said that the MTA, which is currently leasing the land to developers of the luxury condo/retail project, would entertain conversation for one more month to determine whether to grant an 18-month "continuance on any further construction" the developers requested in March. He also said that if the developers, a union between the local Winn Development and partners CalPERS (California Public Employees? Retirement System) and MacFarlane Partners, indicate construction will resume as planned at the end of that continuance, the request will be granted and interim measures will be taken to clean up the messy construction eyesore for local residents.
But if the developer is unable to provide assurance of continued progress, said LeBovidge, the MTA will assume that "this [construction] is not going to happen" and will press for full rehabilitation of the razed construction area.
LeBovidge?s reassurances were met with a mixture of hope and skepticism from the residents in attendance, many of whom live on Cortes Street. That street directly abuts the construction site and residents have been given postponed promises of progress in the past. With construction halted while Columbus Center developers look for new funding, these residents have been vocal about the practical and aesthetic consequences resulting from the long hiatus on work: eliminated parking spots, felled trees, and trash dumping, to name a few.
LeBovidge acknowledged their concerns about the stalled construction, and cut the tension with humor as the meeting commenced in a conference room in the South Cove Plaza apartment building. "I got nervous when I saw this," began LeBovidge, indicating a rectangular, cardboard box sitting on a table. "I thought you might put me inside and saw me in two."
The Columbus Center project has long been beset with problems in its development, most specifically ballooning construction costs - more than a decade a go, developers said the seven-acre project could be built for around $300 million. Now, that?s grown to an estimated $800 million.
Construction, which began in November 2007, came to a total standstill, however, when the developers said they were unable to move forward without anticipated state funding for the project. In March, developers requested the 18-month continuance from the MTA because, they said, around $35 million in state grants and loans they felt essential to the project?s "capital structure" remained in limbo. In early April, two weeks after the moratorium was requested, the Patrick administration denied the project a $10 million MORE grant, in part because the developers had stopped construction. The next day, MassHousing announced that it would no longer be closing on $20.6 million in loans it had previously approved for the project. As of now, the project?s future is uncertain, although the developers did say in late April that they?d continue "minimal work" on the site in order to keep it "in play" ("Columbus Center Still in Limbo," May 1).
The back and forth has frustrated local residents, some of whom support the ultimate goal of the project but who are all left with the ramifications of a seemingly inactive, seven-acre construction zone on their front steps.
Clarendon Street resident and longtime critic of the project Ned Flaherty recently authored a petition to circulate among Bay Village and South End residents, outlining the impact of the Columbus Center construction zone on locals. The petition urges the decision makers to whom it is addressed - including LeBovidge and Mayor Thomas M. Menino, among others - to "ensure that the project owners - not the tollpayers or taxpayers - immediately finish and pay for all work to secure and restore the turnpike, sidewalks, streets and neighborhoods to their pre-construction conditions."
"When the [developers] halted construction in March... [decision-makers] promised they?d secure and restore the seven-acre construction site to the condition it was in summer 2007," said Flaherty via email. "But here it is the start of June 2008, and nothing?s been done."
Something may be done soon - interim clean-up measures are already underway. Jessica Shumaker, spokesperson for the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA), confirmed that developers are paying Project Place, a South End nonprofit that provides employment opportunities for city homeless, to conduct cleanup of the sidewalks and construction zone while residents wait on the verdict of the project?s future. She said the Project Place efforts should be helpful in addressing resident concerns while respecting that the project?s future remains uncertain. "We are very concerned that the sidewalks are restored and some of the parking restored," said Shumaker.
Clean up will begin within the week and workers will visit the site three times a week to maintain it, Suzanne Kenney, executive director of Project Place, said.
Despite the frustration, many Cortes Street residents are excited to finally see some movement on the cleanup front. "I have to say, the BRA was really responsive. I?m very happy with it," said Lynn Andrews, a resident who emailed the city department about trash dumping she had observed at the site. Andrews reported, corroborated by several other Cortes Street residents, that a mattress, chair, and old television were among objects she saw disposed on the sidewalk outside the construction zone. While they were quickly removed, she said that she feared the inactive site might be viewed as a free-for-all dumping zone and worried the situation would escalate.
But critics like Flaherty wonder how much cleanup work the Project Place team can reasonably accomplish, and whether it is appropriate for them to be the crew in use. Flaherty noted that the developers, in the initial proposal, had promised that all project labor would be paid at union-scale wages with benefits. "The BRA is responsible for enforcing that union-scale promise for all the project?s workers, including workers from Project Place ... The Mayor?s redevelopment staff should enforce the promises that these developers made to get his approval," Flaherty said in his email.
The individuals working with Project Place do not receive union scale; according to Kenney, they are paid an hourly minimum wage with potential for bonuses and incentives. Alan Eisner, spokesperson for the Columbus Center project, responded to Flaherty?s concern by saying, "Yes, we are using Project Place personnel, and that was part of an agreement that the developers made with the City of Boston during the permitting process. It?s the only non-union activity that?s been contemplated."
Speaking more generally to the point of the Columbus Center?s future, however, Eisner said that there has been "no change" in determining how the project will move forward.
END
"Things are as they were last time," said Eisner, referring to a May 1 meeting with the BRA where the developers did not provide any information regarding newly secured funding.
briv
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,083
- Reaction score
- 3
Re: Columbus Center
Ned, I don know if you were trying to be funny, or cute, or if you were just being a douche, but obviously I overlooked that original post. I realize that you may not be able to see this through your all-consuming obsession with Columbus Center, but it's pretty easy for posts to be lost in the overwhelming volume of your incessantly-posted screeds.
I can only assume that you were trying to be ironic when you questioned the efficiency of my use of "site resources" soon after you yourself had just posted three discreet comments in a row, one after the other, separated by only minutes. In fact, I see you've posted six times today alone, bringing your total, all in this single thread, to a whopping 158 posts. I think it's pretty clear to everyone but yourself that you're not only posting excessively, but also in a very inefficient way.
Up to this point, I think that I've been more than tolerant of your kooky preoccupation with the procedural minutia--real or imagined--concerning this project; but enough is enough. The constant posting is becoming something of a nuisance. So consider yourself warned: either learn some restraint, or you can drag your soapbox elsewhere.
Ned, I don know if you were trying to be funny, or cute, or if you were just being a douche, but obviously I overlooked that original post. I realize that you may not be able to see this through your all-consuming obsession with Columbus Center, but it's pretty easy for posts to be lost in the overwhelming volume of your incessantly-posted screeds.
I can only assume that you were trying to be ironic when you questioned the efficiency of my use of "site resources" soon after you yourself had just posted three discreet comments in a row, one after the other, separated by only minutes. In fact, I see you've posted six times today alone, bringing your total, all in this single thread, to a whopping 158 posts. I think it's pretty clear to everyone but yourself that you're not only posting excessively, but also in a very inefficient way.
Up to this point, I think that I've been more than tolerant of your kooky preoccupation with the procedural minutia--real or imagined--concerning this project; but enough is enough. The constant posting is becoming something of a nuisance. So consider yourself warned: either learn some restraint, or you can drag your soapbox elsewhere.
Re: Columbus Center
Another delay for Columbus Center?
South End News ? Thursday, June 5, 2008 ? by Managing Editor Linda Rodriguez ? www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=75467
Even as the site of the massive Columbus Center remains a local eyesore, there?s another concern circulating the neighborhood: that the lease negotiated between the developers of the project and the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority may allow for a 10-year delay in the construction of the luxury condominium project.
According to a proposed amendment to the lease that was approved by the MTA Board on Feb. 19, the developers of the project would be required to pay an escalating fee for each year that they don?t complete the rest of the project beyond the building of the deck over the turnpike. Though the amendment stipulates that the entire project must be completed by Dec. 21, 2012, a clause under section 6.2 indicates that ?if Tenant elects to delay commencement of the Vertical Portion of the Project ... Tenant shall make the following payments.? Those payments are listed as $52,000 in the first year and grow to $598,000 in the 10th year.
?The question is, how many more exceptions would there be?? asked South End State Representative Byron Rushing. ?[The developers] would be able to have a vacant deck for ten years, if they?re willing to pay for it.?
Mac Daniel, spokesman for the MTA, said that the MTA is more concerned about the developer?s recent request for an 18-month moratorium on construction. ?That?s simply a provision that?s in that lease that addresses a situation that we?re nowhere near right now and don?t expect to be near,? he said. ?Our concern is negotiating the next 18 months and everything else is secondary.?
Though construction on the Columbus Center project began in November 2007, the developers asked for an 18-month moratorium on construction, citing concerns about their finances and ?capital structure? in late March. At that point, the lease amendments that included the 10-year payment schedule clause were withdrawn from the consideration of the Metropolitan Highway System Advisory Board, an advisory committee to the MTA that reviews the agency?s lease and land use agreements. They were also never given to the Patrick administration for the necessary approval by the governor.
Since March, the construction site has seen minimal activity as the developers scramble to find funding in harsh economic times.
At a May 27 meeting with Bay Village residents facilitated by Speaker of the House Sal DiMasi, MTA director Alan LeBovidge said that the MTA would be in talks with the developer around the 18-month moratorium request for another month. As yet, however, he said there had been no new developments with the project. During a June 4 meeting of the Metropolitan Highway System Advisory Board, Stephen Hines of the MTA said that the agency was in discussions with the developers about the proposed moratorium and that they are ?open to granting that period, as long as certain conditions are met.?
On the question of a 10-year delay in the completion of the project, Daniel said that small section is not high on the MTA?s list of concerns. ?It hasn?t been adopted and it?s a very small part of a much larger agreement. Why this would be discussed or even a topic of concern when we?re negotiating this 18 month delay - it seems superfluous right now,? he said. ?We?ll deal with it once we get past these current negotiations.?
Still, some critics of the behemoth project say the clause raises a red flag. Said Rushing, ?There is nothing from our experience with this developer that would make us think that we?re not going to have an eyesore for another 10 years.?
Another delay for Columbus Center?
South End News ? Thursday, June 5, 2008 ? by Managing Editor Linda Rodriguez ? www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=75467
Even as the site of the massive Columbus Center remains a local eyesore, there?s another concern circulating the neighborhood: that the lease negotiated between the developers of the project and the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority may allow for a 10-year delay in the construction of the luxury condominium project.
According to a proposed amendment to the lease that was approved by the MTA Board on Feb. 19, the developers of the project would be required to pay an escalating fee for each year that they don?t complete the rest of the project beyond the building of the deck over the turnpike. Though the amendment stipulates that the entire project must be completed by Dec. 21, 2012, a clause under section 6.2 indicates that ?if Tenant elects to delay commencement of the Vertical Portion of the Project ... Tenant shall make the following payments.? Those payments are listed as $52,000 in the first year and grow to $598,000 in the 10th year.
?The question is, how many more exceptions would there be?? asked South End State Representative Byron Rushing. ?[The developers] would be able to have a vacant deck for ten years, if they?re willing to pay for it.?
Mac Daniel, spokesman for the MTA, said that the MTA is more concerned about the developer?s recent request for an 18-month moratorium on construction. ?That?s simply a provision that?s in that lease that addresses a situation that we?re nowhere near right now and don?t expect to be near,? he said. ?Our concern is negotiating the next 18 months and everything else is secondary.?
Though construction on the Columbus Center project began in November 2007, the developers asked for an 18-month moratorium on construction, citing concerns about their finances and ?capital structure? in late March. At that point, the lease amendments that included the 10-year payment schedule clause were withdrawn from the consideration of the Metropolitan Highway System Advisory Board, an advisory committee to the MTA that reviews the agency?s lease and land use agreements. They were also never given to the Patrick administration for the necessary approval by the governor.
Since March, the construction site has seen minimal activity as the developers scramble to find funding in harsh economic times.
At a May 27 meeting with Bay Village residents facilitated by Speaker of the House Sal DiMasi, MTA director Alan LeBovidge said that the MTA would be in talks with the developer around the 18-month moratorium request for another month. As yet, however, he said there had been no new developments with the project. During a June 4 meeting of the Metropolitan Highway System Advisory Board, Stephen Hines of the MTA said that the agency was in discussions with the developers about the proposed moratorium and that they are ?open to granting that period, as long as certain conditions are met.?
On the question of a 10-year delay in the completion of the project, Daniel said that small section is not high on the MTA?s list of concerns. ?It hasn?t been adopted and it?s a very small part of a much larger agreement. Why this would be discussed or even a topic of concern when we?re negotiating this 18 month delay - it seems superfluous right now,? he said. ?We?ll deal with it once we get past these current negotiations.?
Still, some critics of the behemoth project say the clause raises a red flag. Said Rushing, ?There is nothing from our experience with this developer that would make us think that we?re not going to have an eyesore for another 10 years.?
Re: Columbus Center
Columbus builders seek delay
Boston Sunday Globe ? June 8, 2008 ? by Globe Correspondent Christina Pazzanese ? http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/06/08/columbus_builders_seek_delay/
Residents of Cortes Street say they have lost trees, parking, and use of a sidewalk as a result of the stalled project in the Back Bay and South End. (Christina Pazzanese for the Boston Globe)
Massachusetts Turnpike Authority officials say they expect to decide in the next few weeks whether to grant the developers of the Columbus Center project an 18-month construction delay.
The $800 million condominium, hotel, and retail complex, slated to be built on four parcels along the Mass. Pike in the South End and Back Bay, has been beset by development troubles since planning began in 1996.
?At this point, it?s totally a matter of financing,? said Alan Eisner, a spokesman for the Center?s development team of WinnDevelopment and MacFarlane Partners/CalPERS. The recent downturn in the economy, the state?s decision not to contribute millions in loans and grants, and ?issues? with the Turnpike Authority over the lease led to the developer?s request in March for a hiatus, said Eisner. ?Since then, all sides have been working diligently to try and piece this back together. The goal is to keep the door open,? he said.
On Wednesday, Stephen Hines, the turnpike?s chief development officer, told the Mass. Highway System Advisory Board that the project ?is not proceeding at this moment in any significant way.? He said the authority is still in discussions with the developers over their request to delay the construction and was ?hopeful? something could be worked out soon.
Hines said the authority was open to granting WinnDevelopment a delay provided certain conditions are met, such as making the streets and sidewalks around the 7-acre property safe and accessible to the public and freeing up parking spaces lost during construction.
?In the event they don?t proceed? with the project, the developer would be asked to restore the site to its prior condition, said Hines.
The board, which reviews and makes recommendations about the authority?s real estate deals, has asked to be kept informed about the terms of any delay agreement with the developers before it is signed.
Turnpike spokesman Mac Daniel said executive director Alan LeBovidge delivered a similar message to the Bay Village Neighborhood Association on May 27, but cautioned residents that talks could go on beyond the end of June.
?As far as financing and the project moving forward, we are waiting to hear back from the developers,? said Jessica Shumaker, a spokeswoman for the Boston Redevelopment Authority, in an e-mail. ?They told us they needed a few more weeks to work through project details and financing sources and that they would come back to us with an update as soon as they had more info.?
After dozens of residents implored Mayor Thomas M. Menino in April to require the developer to secure the idle construction site and to clean up abutting streets during any project delay, the developers agreed to pay for workers from Project Place to regularly neaten the area surrounding the property.
Two weeks ago, the South End nonprofit, which helps homeless people find jobs and does similar street tidying in 13 Boston neighborhoods, began sending teams of between five and a dozen workers armed with brooms and dustbins to pick up debris and cigarette butts, and remove posters for two hours each weekday, said Suzanne Kenney, Project Place?s executive director.
Kenney said that although the arrangement is only temporary while the long-term fate of the project is hashed out, she hopes eventually they'll be hired on a permanent basis. ?We don?t know how long this is going to happen,? said Kenney. ?We?re just going to continue until we hear otherwise.?
The BRA plans to repair a hole in the fence on Cortes Street and has put up signs along Stanhope Street alerting passersby that local businesses are indeed open, said Shumaker.
? Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.
Columbus builders seek delay
Boston Sunday Globe ? June 8, 2008 ? by Globe Correspondent Christina Pazzanese ? http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/06/08/columbus_builders_seek_delay/
Residents of Cortes Street say they have lost trees, parking, and use of a sidewalk as a result of the stalled project in the Back Bay and South End. (Christina Pazzanese for the Boston Globe)
Massachusetts Turnpike Authority officials say they expect to decide in the next few weeks whether to grant the developers of the Columbus Center project an 18-month construction delay.
The $800 million condominium, hotel, and retail complex, slated to be built on four parcels along the Mass. Pike in the South End and Back Bay, has been beset by development troubles since planning began in 1996.
?At this point, it?s totally a matter of financing,? said Alan Eisner, a spokesman for the Center?s development team of WinnDevelopment and MacFarlane Partners/CalPERS. The recent downturn in the economy, the state?s decision not to contribute millions in loans and grants, and ?issues? with the Turnpike Authority over the lease led to the developer?s request in March for a hiatus, said Eisner. ?Since then, all sides have been working diligently to try and piece this back together. The goal is to keep the door open,? he said.
On Wednesday, Stephen Hines, the turnpike?s chief development officer, told the Mass. Highway System Advisory Board that the project ?is not proceeding at this moment in any significant way.? He said the authority is still in discussions with the developers over their request to delay the construction and was ?hopeful? something could be worked out soon.
Hines said the authority was open to granting WinnDevelopment a delay provided certain conditions are met, such as making the streets and sidewalks around the 7-acre property safe and accessible to the public and freeing up parking spaces lost during construction.
?In the event they don?t proceed? with the project, the developer would be asked to restore the site to its prior condition, said Hines.
The board, which reviews and makes recommendations about the authority?s real estate deals, has asked to be kept informed about the terms of any delay agreement with the developers before it is signed.
Turnpike spokesman Mac Daniel said executive director Alan LeBovidge delivered a similar message to the Bay Village Neighborhood Association on May 27, but cautioned residents that talks could go on beyond the end of June.
?As far as financing and the project moving forward, we are waiting to hear back from the developers,? said Jessica Shumaker, a spokeswoman for the Boston Redevelopment Authority, in an e-mail. ?They told us they needed a few more weeks to work through project details and financing sources and that they would come back to us with an update as soon as they had more info.?
After dozens of residents implored Mayor Thomas M. Menino in April to require the developer to secure the idle construction site and to clean up abutting streets during any project delay, the developers agreed to pay for workers from Project Place to regularly neaten the area surrounding the property.
Two weeks ago, the South End nonprofit, which helps homeless people find jobs and does similar street tidying in 13 Boston neighborhoods, began sending teams of between five and a dozen workers armed with brooms and dustbins to pick up debris and cigarette butts, and remove posters for two hours each weekday, said Suzanne Kenney, Project Place?s executive director.
Kenney said that although the arrangement is only temporary while the long-term fate of the project is hashed out, she hopes eventually they'll be hired on a permanent basis. ?We don?t know how long this is going to happen,? said Kenney. ?We?re just going to continue until we hear otherwise.?
The BRA plans to repair a hole in the fence on Cortes Street and has put up signs along Stanhope Street alerting passersby that local businesses are indeed open, said Shumaker.
? Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.
stellarfun
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2006
- Messages
- 5,690
- Reaction score
- 1,506
Re: Columbus Center
Columbus Center looks to be a different kettle of fish than LandSource.
http://www.bigbuilderonline.com/industry-news-print.asp?sectionID=363&articleID=696870
A question is why, in 2007, would anyone think that was a golden time for building large residential communities in Southern California?
Columbus Center looks to be a different kettle of fish than LandSource.
http://www.bigbuilderonline.com/industry-news-print.asp?sectionID=363&articleID=696870
A question is why, in 2007, would anyone think that was a golden time for building large residential communities in Southern California?
Re: Columbus Center
No news on Columbus Center
South End News ? Thursday, June 26, 2008 ? by Managing Editor Linda Rodriguez ? http://www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=76457
While the official word is that there is no news on the beleaguered Columbus Center project, residents around the now-stalled construction site are becoming increasingly frustrated.
?We feel like we?re running into a brick wall and no one really cares, no one really cares about what happens to Cortes Street,? said Artie Rice, a resident of the street and a member of the Bay Village Neighborhood Association. Cortes Street, a small street of brownstones, has overlooked the vast, empty site of the Columbus Center project since March of this year, when the project?s developers (a complicated partnership between the local Winn Development, investment group CalPERS and MacFarlane Partners) requested an 18-month moratorium on its construction.
Though various officials, from Mayor Thomas Menino to the head of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, have promised the residents that the Columbus Center situation will be sorted out shortly, Rice says he?s getting frustrated that nothing seems to be happening. Said Rice, ?They think there are people here that really don?t count for much.?
In April, following the developers? request for the construction moratorium, residents of Bay Village and Cortes Street played host to visits from Menino, District 2 City Councilor Bill Linehan, John Palmieri, director of the Boston Redevelopment Authority, and other city officials, who all promised to rectify the situation. At a May 27 meeting with residents, Alan LeBovidge, director of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, which leases the land to the developers, said that the MTA would make a decision on the moratorium request in about a month. During a June 4 meeting of the Metropolitan Highway System Advisory Board, Stephen Hines of the MTA said that the agency was in discussions with the developers about the proposed moratorium and that they are ?open to granting that period, as long as certain conditions are met.?
But MTA spokesman Mac Daniel said that there is nothing new to report on the situation. And residents of the street say that there has been little to no communication from any official sources about the giant construction pit, which is surrounded by green hurricane fencing, in their front yards.
?It?s been a month. Time keeps going along now. We?re getting the feeling that no one really cares about us now. There was the big show with the Mayor and Linehan ... [but] the site is still a pit,? said Rice. ?No one?s responding to it at all and we just get a feeling here that?s the way its going to be. We?re just a handful of people.?
Though construction on the Columbus Center project began in November 2007, the developers asked for the 18-month moratorium on construction, citing concerns about their finances and ?capital structure,? in late March. Since then, the construction site has seen minimal activity as the developers have scrambled to find funding for the $800 million project in harsh economic times. George Regan, acting spokesman for Winn Development, described the loss of funding as a ?perfect storm of financing,? and said that the developer is still working on finding funding.
?It?s not going to be done overnight,? he said. Regan also said that he had no idea when the MTA may be issuing a decision on the requested moratorium. As far as the plight of the residents whose homes overlook the dormant construction site, he said, ?We?re working on some plans right now. We?re very cognizant of the neighborhood concerns.?
Regan declined to provide details about what those plans might be, saying, ?Obviously, we don?t want to speak without thinking, so, we?re working very hard on some ideas.?
In the meantime, the developers hired Project Place, a South End-based nonprofit that works with homeless and formerly homeless individuals, to do minimal clean up on the site. Councilor Linehan?s office has also been involved in trying to get resident parking signs put back on the street, but as yet, the signs have not gone up. While residents say that?s all a step in the right direction, it?s not enough.
?What are they going to do here to clean this place up and make it livable?? asked Rice. Moreover, he says, given the recent mismanagement around the project, he?s concerned that it is permanently stalled.
?Theoretically, there?s a chance it?ll never get built, it?ll just be sitting there and sitting there,? said Rice.
No news on Columbus Center
South End News ? Thursday, June 26, 2008 ? by Managing Editor Linda Rodriguez ? http://www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=76457
While the official word is that there is no news on the beleaguered Columbus Center project, residents around the now-stalled construction site are becoming increasingly frustrated.
?We feel like we?re running into a brick wall and no one really cares, no one really cares about what happens to Cortes Street,? said Artie Rice, a resident of the street and a member of the Bay Village Neighborhood Association. Cortes Street, a small street of brownstones, has overlooked the vast, empty site of the Columbus Center project since March of this year, when the project?s developers (a complicated partnership between the local Winn Development, investment group CalPERS and MacFarlane Partners) requested an 18-month moratorium on its construction.
Though various officials, from Mayor Thomas Menino to the head of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, have promised the residents that the Columbus Center situation will be sorted out shortly, Rice says he?s getting frustrated that nothing seems to be happening. Said Rice, ?They think there are people here that really don?t count for much.?
In April, following the developers? request for the construction moratorium, residents of Bay Village and Cortes Street played host to visits from Menino, District 2 City Councilor Bill Linehan, John Palmieri, director of the Boston Redevelopment Authority, and other city officials, who all promised to rectify the situation. At a May 27 meeting with residents, Alan LeBovidge, director of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, which leases the land to the developers, said that the MTA would make a decision on the moratorium request in about a month. During a June 4 meeting of the Metropolitan Highway System Advisory Board, Stephen Hines of the MTA said that the agency was in discussions with the developers about the proposed moratorium and that they are ?open to granting that period, as long as certain conditions are met.?
But MTA spokesman Mac Daniel said that there is nothing new to report on the situation. And residents of the street say that there has been little to no communication from any official sources about the giant construction pit, which is surrounded by green hurricane fencing, in their front yards.
?It?s been a month. Time keeps going along now. We?re getting the feeling that no one really cares about us now. There was the big show with the Mayor and Linehan ... [but] the site is still a pit,? said Rice. ?No one?s responding to it at all and we just get a feeling here that?s the way its going to be. We?re just a handful of people.?
Though construction on the Columbus Center project began in November 2007, the developers asked for the 18-month moratorium on construction, citing concerns about their finances and ?capital structure,? in late March. Since then, the construction site has seen minimal activity as the developers have scrambled to find funding for the $800 million project in harsh economic times. George Regan, acting spokesman for Winn Development, described the loss of funding as a ?perfect storm of financing,? and said that the developer is still working on finding funding.
?It?s not going to be done overnight,? he said. Regan also said that he had no idea when the MTA may be issuing a decision on the requested moratorium. As far as the plight of the residents whose homes overlook the dormant construction site, he said, ?We?re working on some plans right now. We?re very cognizant of the neighborhood concerns.?
Regan declined to provide details about what those plans might be, saying, ?Obviously, we don?t want to speak without thinking, so, we?re working very hard on some ideas.?
In the meantime, the developers hired Project Place, a South End-based nonprofit that works with homeless and formerly homeless individuals, to do minimal clean up on the site. Councilor Linehan?s office has also been involved in trying to get resident parking signs put back on the street, but as yet, the signs have not gone up. While residents say that?s all a step in the right direction, it?s not enough.
?What are they going to do here to clean this place up and make it livable?? asked Rice. Moreover, he says, given the recent mismanagement around the project, he?s concerned that it is permanently stalled.
?Theoretically, there?s a chance it?ll never get built, it?ll just be sitting there and sitting there,? said Rice.
stellarfun
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2006
- Messages
- 5,690
- Reaction score
- 1,506
Re: Columbus Center
Oh my goodness. This seems like more grasping at straws, or the same tired record. If they have most of the financing again in hand, they ought to say so. That would make the discussions about tax relief more meaningful.
The producers of American Pie are shooting a movie in Cambridge early next year titled The Harvard Zombie Massacre. Perhaps they ought to consider Columbus & Clarendon as a locale, given the living dead feel to this most recent supplication for help.
Oh my goodness. This seems like more grasping at straws, or the same tired record. If they have most of the financing again in hand, they ought to say so. That would make the discussions about tax relief more meaningful.
The producers of American Pie are shooting a movie in Cambridge early next year titled The Harvard Zombie Massacre. Perhaps they ought to consider Columbus & Clarendon as a locale, given the living dead feel to this most recent supplication for help.
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/07/03/columbus_center_asks_for_boost_of_40m/
Re: Columbus Center
Back again for more
Boston Globe ? July 4, 2008 ? by Globe Columnist Adrian Walker ? http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/07/04/back_again_for_more/
Real estate developers are a persistent lot. Especially when it comes to public money.
The Columbus Center project is a proposed $800 million hotel, retail, and condominium development at the border of the Back Bay and the South End.
It happens to be stalled. That is partly because the construction business is not so hot, and the market for high-end condos could be better, too.
But there?s another reason: The Patrick Administration backed off $20 million in public subsidies that had been promised by its predecessors.
That decision did not represent some big, brave stand. A piece of the project is in Sal DiMasi's district, and the speaker was not a fan. The project?s staunchest legislative advocate was state Senator Dianne Wilkerson, who, at that moment, the Patrick people happened to be mad at. It was easy to say no.
But the developers, Arthur Winn and Roger Cassin, have resurfaced. They?re back asking for the same money that was taken away less than a year ago.
To be fair, the project has its merits. It would be built in an area that certainly has room for improvement. It would create jobs, though, as with all projects of this type, just how many jobs is disputed. And, in developer?s parlance, it would ?knit together? the South End and the Back Bay. That rationale was also used to sell Copley Place in the 1970s, and before that, the Prudential Center. Apparently, we are anxious as a city not to leave any holes between neighbors.
The developers are under considerable pressure. When their public subsidies were withdrawn, the project?s financing collapsed. The land for Columbus Center is leased from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority - it is to be built over the Pike - and those leases require action within a given time frame. But nothing is happening, and nothing is on the horizon.
Ah, but help could be on the way. The exact amount the developers are seeking is unknown, though it is definitely north of the $20 million they would have settled for previously. You don't get to be a big developer like Winn without an extra helping of chutzpah.
I have been critical in the past of pouring tens of millions of dollars of public money into what is, essentially, a project for rich people. But the developers, of course, don't see it that way.
One person close to the project explained that even though market conditions are plainly unfavorable now, it isn?t surprising that the developers are trying to make a deal.
?Even if there were a plan in place, they wouldn?t move forward now, because the market wouldn?t justify that,? he said. ?The idea is to get some kind of workable agreement with the state, something that both sides can live with, so when the market turns around, instead of beginning the process, you can be ahead of the curve.?
The official also pointed out, correctly, that public subsidies for big-ticket developments are far from unheard of. The arguments are always the same in those instances, that the public still benefits and that, over time, the project will be worth it in jobs and tax revenue.
But what about all the other things government can do with $20 million or more?
Columbus Center is not a bad project. But it is a terrible choice for spending massive amounts of public money that could go to so many more valid uses. Boston is not exactly short of pricey condominiums or hotels. Why should the public subsidize building a few more? If the developers have a good answer to that question, they?ve kept it to themselves, and people have been asking for more than a decade.
The state should stick to its guns and say no to a big handout for Columbus Center. If Columbus Center is the godsend it is cracked up to be, it will eventually get built anyway.
Even if state officials refuse to kick in public money now, they should brace themselves for more requests in the future. These guys keep asking until someone says yes.
Back again for more
Boston Globe ? July 4, 2008 ? by Globe Columnist Adrian Walker ? http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/07/04/back_again_for_more/
Real estate developers are a persistent lot. Especially when it comes to public money.
The Columbus Center project is a proposed $800 million hotel, retail, and condominium development at the border of the Back Bay and the South End.
It happens to be stalled. That is partly because the construction business is not so hot, and the market for high-end condos could be better, too.
But there?s another reason: The Patrick Administration backed off $20 million in public subsidies that had been promised by its predecessors.
That decision did not represent some big, brave stand. A piece of the project is in Sal DiMasi's district, and the speaker was not a fan. The project?s staunchest legislative advocate was state Senator Dianne Wilkerson, who, at that moment, the Patrick people happened to be mad at. It was easy to say no.
But the developers, Arthur Winn and Roger Cassin, have resurfaced. They?re back asking for the same money that was taken away less than a year ago.
To be fair, the project has its merits. It would be built in an area that certainly has room for improvement. It would create jobs, though, as with all projects of this type, just how many jobs is disputed. And, in developer?s parlance, it would ?knit together? the South End and the Back Bay. That rationale was also used to sell Copley Place in the 1970s, and before that, the Prudential Center. Apparently, we are anxious as a city not to leave any holes between neighbors.
The developers are under considerable pressure. When their public subsidies were withdrawn, the project?s financing collapsed. The land for Columbus Center is leased from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority - it is to be built over the Pike - and those leases require action within a given time frame. But nothing is happening, and nothing is on the horizon.
Ah, but help could be on the way. The exact amount the developers are seeking is unknown, though it is definitely north of the $20 million they would have settled for previously. You don't get to be a big developer like Winn without an extra helping of chutzpah.
I have been critical in the past of pouring tens of millions of dollars of public money into what is, essentially, a project for rich people. But the developers, of course, don't see it that way.
One person close to the project explained that even though market conditions are plainly unfavorable now, it isn?t surprising that the developers are trying to make a deal.
?Even if there were a plan in place, they wouldn?t move forward now, because the market wouldn?t justify that,? he said. ?The idea is to get some kind of workable agreement with the state, something that both sides can live with, so when the market turns around, instead of beginning the process, you can be ahead of the curve.?
The official also pointed out, correctly, that public subsidies for big-ticket developments are far from unheard of. The arguments are always the same in those instances, that the public still benefits and that, over time, the project will be worth it in jobs and tax revenue.
But what about all the other things government can do with $20 million or more?
Columbus Center is not a bad project. But it is a terrible choice for spending massive amounts of public money that could go to so many more valid uses. Boston is not exactly short of pricey condominiums or hotels. Why should the public subsidize building a few more? If the developers have a good answer to that question, they?ve kept it to themselves, and people have been asking for more than a decade.
The state should stick to its guns and say no to a big handout for Columbus Center. If Columbus Center is the godsend it is cracked up to be, it will eventually get built anyway.
Even if state officials refuse to kick in public money now, they should brace themselves for more requests in the future. These guys keep asking until someone says yes.
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
[size=+2]Wilkerson says she's
not seeking public funds for stalled project[/size]
Banker & Tradesman, 07 July 2008
http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/pub/5_345/commercial/200266-1.html
[size=+2]Wilkerson says she's
not seeking public funds for stalled project[/size]
Banker & Tradesman, 07 July 2008
http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/pub/5_345/commercial/200266-1.html
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
[size=+1]Wilkerson: Columbus Center not seeking public subsidy[/size]
by Linda Rodriguez ● managing editor ● Thursday Jul 10, 2008
http://www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=77215
The developers of the Columbus Center are not seeking public subsidy to jumpstart the stalled project, State Sen. Dianne Wilkerson told South End News July 9.
Wilkerson said that she?s been meeting with the developers of the massive project since they requested an 18-month moratorium construction from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, the holders of the land lease, in March. At no point have they discussed additional public subsidy for the project, she said. ?My considerations have been ?What are we going to? Is there a remedy? Is there an answer? Is there a way to get back on track??? she said. ?If there is, we should know soon and if there isn?t, we should know sooner.?
On July 2, the Boston Globe published an article indicating that the developers of the Columbus Center were in meetings with Wilkerson to ?push for additional taxpayer assistance? for the project. Alan Eisner, longtime spokesman for the developers, confirmed to the Globe that developers were meeting with Wilkerson to discuss public subsidy; the reporter was unable to reach Wilkerson. However, a July 7 Banker & Tradesman article quoted Wilkerson, who said that the developers were not discussing possible public subsidies with her. In that article, Eisner is quoted as saying that meetings with Wilkerson did not focus on any more taxpayer assistance.
Contacted on July 8, Eisner said that in the wake of the two recent articles, the developers are no longer commenting. ?What?s happened because of all these articles, I think the developers at this point really aren?t going to comment in the press any more,? he said. ?There?s been a lot of distortion of our positions; for the time being our standard response is going to be, ?No comment.??
Wilkerson, speaking to the South End News, said that discussions with the developers have been about how the developers can ?shore up? and how they can move forward in a way that doesn?t require the city or the state ?to write a big check.? ?There has been what I think an aggressive series of discussions on both the city and state level, but it hasn?t been about how we can get more money,? she said.
The Columbus Center project was proposed more than a decade ago, as a way to reunite the South End and Back Bay. At that time, the cost of the luxury condominium-hotel high-rise complex, to be built on a deck constructed over the Turnpike was an estimated $300 million; since then, the rising cost of construction has inflated the cost to more than $800 million. Wilkerson lays some of the blame for the delay - and therefore continually increasing price - with the Turnpike Authority. As of now, the Turnpike?s lease with the Columbus Center developers remains in limbo after the moratorium caused several amendments to it to be withdrawn from consideration. Over the course of the project?s lifetime, the Turnpike Authority also saw three different directors overseeing lease negotiations.
?This dramatic increase in the project cost over the last few years has come as a result of the musical chairs at Mass Turnpike. They are all critical players, but we?ve gone through three directors,? she said. ?There?s been little focus at the helm.?
Wilkerson said that she believes the focus right now is figuring out whether or not the project will be able to take off, adding that she thinks developers are close to an answer. ?I think this limbo ... is just unfair,? she said, especially to the residents of the streets surrounding the project. ?I think [the residents have] been incredibly patient for the duration of this project, but I think they?re growing increasingly anxious while we try to figure out what?s going on.?
Residents have been anxious about the seeming inaction on the site; in a June 26 South End News article, one resident said that he felt as if the city and state didn?t care about the people on his street (see ?No News on Columbus Center,? June 26). Though construction on the Columbus Center project began in November 2007, the developers asked for the 18-month moratorium on construction in late March, citing concerns about their finances and ?capital structure.? Since then, the construction site, swathed in green hurricane fencing, has been virtually abandoned, as the developers have scrambled to find funding for the $800 million project in harsh economic times.
At a May 27 meeting with the Bay Village Neighborhood Association, Turnpike Authority director Alan LeBovidge told residents that the Turnpike would be making a decision on whether or not to grant the construction moratorium within a month. Mac Daniel, spokesman for the Turnpike Authority, said that the Turnpike is still in talks with the developers over the terms of the moratorium.
?Alan LeBovidge said he hoped to get back to [the Bay Village residents] within a month with an answer and obviously, negotiations have not allowed us to do that yet,? he said, adding that the Turnpike is hopeful that the project will recover.
In the mean time, a few clean up efforts on the street have already been realized, although Cortes Street residents have reported recently that the site is becoming a de facto dump for local trash. The developers are still employing Project Place, the South End-based nonprofit that provides jobs for homeless and formerly homeless individuals, to keep the site clean. A resident parking only sign, another concern of the residents, will also be restored to the street this week, according to the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
Eisner declined to comment on any clean up or mitigation efforts the developers may be undertaking for the residents of Cortes and Isabella streets, adding that they won?t comment ?until there?s something constructive to say.?
[size=+1]Wilkerson: Columbus Center not seeking public subsidy[/size]
by Linda Rodriguez ● managing editor ● Thursday Jul 10, 2008
http://www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=77215
The developers of the Columbus Center are not seeking public subsidy to jumpstart the stalled project, State Sen. Dianne Wilkerson told South End News July 9.
Wilkerson said that she?s been meeting with the developers of the massive project since they requested an 18-month moratorium construction from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, the holders of the land lease, in March. At no point have they discussed additional public subsidy for the project, she said. ?My considerations have been ?What are we going to? Is there a remedy? Is there an answer? Is there a way to get back on track??? she said. ?If there is, we should know soon and if there isn?t, we should know sooner.?
On July 2, the Boston Globe published an article indicating that the developers of the Columbus Center were in meetings with Wilkerson to ?push for additional taxpayer assistance? for the project. Alan Eisner, longtime spokesman for the developers, confirmed to the Globe that developers were meeting with Wilkerson to discuss public subsidy; the reporter was unable to reach Wilkerson. However, a July 7 Banker & Tradesman article quoted Wilkerson, who said that the developers were not discussing possible public subsidies with her. In that article, Eisner is quoted as saying that meetings with Wilkerson did not focus on any more taxpayer assistance.
Contacted on July 8, Eisner said that in the wake of the two recent articles, the developers are no longer commenting. ?What?s happened because of all these articles, I think the developers at this point really aren?t going to comment in the press any more,? he said. ?There?s been a lot of distortion of our positions; for the time being our standard response is going to be, ?No comment.??
Wilkerson, speaking to the South End News, said that discussions with the developers have been about how the developers can ?shore up? and how they can move forward in a way that doesn?t require the city or the state ?to write a big check.? ?There has been what I think an aggressive series of discussions on both the city and state level, but it hasn?t been about how we can get more money,? she said.
The Columbus Center project was proposed more than a decade ago, as a way to reunite the South End and Back Bay. At that time, the cost of the luxury condominium-hotel high-rise complex, to be built on a deck constructed over the Turnpike was an estimated $300 million; since then, the rising cost of construction has inflated the cost to more than $800 million. Wilkerson lays some of the blame for the delay - and therefore continually increasing price - with the Turnpike Authority. As of now, the Turnpike?s lease with the Columbus Center developers remains in limbo after the moratorium caused several amendments to it to be withdrawn from consideration. Over the course of the project?s lifetime, the Turnpike Authority also saw three different directors overseeing lease negotiations.
?This dramatic increase in the project cost over the last few years has come as a result of the musical chairs at Mass Turnpike. They are all critical players, but we?ve gone through three directors,? she said. ?There?s been little focus at the helm.?
Wilkerson said that she believes the focus right now is figuring out whether or not the project will be able to take off, adding that she thinks developers are close to an answer. ?I think this limbo ... is just unfair,? she said, especially to the residents of the streets surrounding the project. ?I think [the residents have] been incredibly patient for the duration of this project, but I think they?re growing increasingly anxious while we try to figure out what?s going on.?
Residents have been anxious about the seeming inaction on the site; in a June 26 South End News article, one resident said that he felt as if the city and state didn?t care about the people on his street (see ?No News on Columbus Center,? June 26). Though construction on the Columbus Center project began in November 2007, the developers asked for the 18-month moratorium on construction in late March, citing concerns about their finances and ?capital structure.? Since then, the construction site, swathed in green hurricane fencing, has been virtually abandoned, as the developers have scrambled to find funding for the $800 million project in harsh economic times.
At a May 27 meeting with the Bay Village Neighborhood Association, Turnpike Authority director Alan LeBovidge told residents that the Turnpike would be making a decision on whether or not to grant the construction moratorium within a month. Mac Daniel, spokesman for the Turnpike Authority, said that the Turnpike is still in talks with the developers over the terms of the moratorium.
?Alan LeBovidge said he hoped to get back to [the Bay Village residents] within a month with an answer and obviously, negotiations have not allowed us to do that yet,? he said, adding that the Turnpike is hopeful that the project will recover.
In the mean time, a few clean up efforts on the street have already been realized, although Cortes Street residents have reported recently that the site is becoming a de facto dump for local trash. The developers are still employing Project Place, the South End-based nonprofit that provides jobs for homeless and formerly homeless individuals, to keep the site clean. A resident parking only sign, another concern of the residents, will also be restored to the street this week, according to the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
Eisner declined to comment on any clean up or mitigation efforts the developers may be undertaking for the residents of Cortes and Isabella streets, adding that they won?t comment ?until there?s something constructive to say.?
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
[size=+1]Ousted chief?s love of huge deals yielded big flop[/size]
http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1106826
By Scott Van Voorhis ● Monday, July 14, 2008
Business Reporter Scott Van Voorhis brings 15 years of aggressive reporting to a wide range of topics that affect the Hub's business community and residents.
Developers like to build big. But the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority would probably do better to think small when it comes to its ambitious air-rights development plans, critics say.
The cash-strapped highway authority has spent years working with an array of developers to build grand projects over key stretches of the Turnpike?s canyon-like Boston extension.
But the Turnpike has little to show for its efforts. And that is prompting some real estate executives to question the authority?s strategy.
Overall, the Turnpike has spent too much time focusing on complicated, big-ticket projects, and too little time on smaller, more manageable ventures that might have produced quicker returns.
The most glaring example is former Turnpike chief Matt Amorello?s proposal for a massive skyscraper complex on authority-owned land near South Station.
Dubbing it ?South Bay,? the Turnpike in 2004 put out to bid its Kneeland Street headquarters and neighboring highway-crossed sites for more than $100 million.
The former Pike chief - ousted two years later after the deadly collapse of a Big Dig tunnel - even unveiled a splashy plan for a 50-story tower and millions of square feet of new development on the site.
But as they played up South Bay, Amorello and other Pike officials kept developers seeking to build on other, authority-owned lots near North Station cooling their heels for years.
In the end, it was the so-called Bulfinch Triangle sites that paid off, with one complex now under construction and others on the way.
But South Bay turned out to be an embarrassing flop, attracting just one bidder with no mega-development experience. No deal was ever struck and the Turnpike at the moment has no plans to put the site back out to bid, said Mac Daniel, the Pike?s spokesman.
?They worked on that South Bay plan. I thought it was foolish,? said David Begelfer, head of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties. ?That project is a future project. The market is not there yet.?
The Turnpike has also spent years on plans for other giant air-rights projects that show no signs of returns any time soon.
Despite past failures, the Turnpike is forging ahead with its efforts to turn air-rights development sites in Boston into cash.
For example, the Turnpike is now preparing to put out to bid a pair of small air-rights parcels in Charlestown, as well as retail space in a new garage near Government Center.
[size=+1]Ousted chief?s love of huge deals yielded big flop[/size]
http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1106826
By Scott Van Voorhis ● Monday, July 14, 2008
Business Reporter Scott Van Voorhis brings 15 years of aggressive reporting to a wide range of topics that affect the Hub's business community and residents.
Developers like to build big. But the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority would probably do better to think small when it comes to its ambitious air-rights development plans, critics say.
The cash-strapped highway authority has spent years working with an array of developers to build grand projects over key stretches of the Turnpike?s canyon-like Boston extension.
But the Turnpike has little to show for its efforts. And that is prompting some real estate executives to question the authority?s strategy.
Overall, the Turnpike has spent too much time focusing on complicated, big-ticket projects, and too little time on smaller, more manageable ventures that might have produced quicker returns.
The most glaring example is former Turnpike chief Matt Amorello?s proposal for a massive skyscraper complex on authority-owned land near South Station.
Dubbing it ?South Bay,? the Turnpike in 2004 put out to bid its Kneeland Street headquarters and neighboring highway-crossed sites for more than $100 million.
The former Pike chief - ousted two years later after the deadly collapse of a Big Dig tunnel - even unveiled a splashy plan for a 50-story tower and millions of square feet of new development on the site.
But as they played up South Bay, Amorello and other Pike officials kept developers seeking to build on other, authority-owned lots near North Station cooling their heels for years.
In the end, it was the so-called Bulfinch Triangle sites that paid off, with one complex now under construction and others on the way.
But South Bay turned out to be an embarrassing flop, attracting just one bidder with no mega-development experience. No deal was ever struck and the Turnpike at the moment has no plans to put the site back out to bid, said Mac Daniel, the Pike?s spokesman.
?They worked on that South Bay plan. I thought it was foolish,? said David Begelfer, head of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties. ?That project is a future project. The market is not there yet.?
The Turnpike has also spent years on plans for other giant air-rights projects that show no signs of returns any time soon.
Despite past failures, the Turnpike is forging ahead with its efforts to turn air-rights development sites in Boston into cash.
For example, the Turnpike is now preparing to put out to bid a pair of small air-rights parcels in Charlestown, as well as retail space in a new garage near Government Center.
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
[size=+1]Gov. snubs Columbus Center[/size]
Thomas Grillo ● Banker & Tradesman ● 14 July 2008
http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/pub/5_346/commercial/200336-1.html
[size=+1]Gov. snubs Columbus Center[/size]
Thomas Grillo ● Banker & Tradesman ● 14 July 2008
http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/pub/5_346/commercial/200336-1.html
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
[size=+1]Watching What We Breathe[/size]
Tufts University Journal ● 14 July 2008 ● http://tuftsjournal.tufts.edu/2008/07/briefs/01/
Impact of highway pollution on Boston-area neighborhoods, including Somerville and Chinatown, is focus of new research
Living in a neighborhood close to a major highway may expose residents to higher than average pollution rates, but up until now, no one has known for sure.
That?s about to change, though, as Tufts researchers team up with five Boston-area community groups to find the answer, aided by a five-year, $2.5 million grant from the National Institute of Environmental Health Science. The scientists will focus on Somerville, Mass. [I-93], Boston?s Chinatown [I-90 from Columbus Center to I-93], and two other communities that will be chosen soon.
?Most of the studies to date examined regional effects of pollution,? says Doug Brugge, associate professor of public health and family medicine. ?Only recently has research begun to suggest that highly concentrated local sources, such as highways, may be even more hazardous.?
Photo: Perry Kroll/iStock
A steering committee of representatives from five community groups will lead the research in collaboration with principal investigator Doug Brugge, director of the Tufts Community Research Center at the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service.
The Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership initially approached Brugge, an associate professor in the School of Medicine?s department of public health and family medicine, about the impact of highway pollution on Somerville neighborhoods next to Interstate 93, a major highway leading in and out of Boston.
Meeting with other communities adjacent to major highways, a literature review by Tufts faculty and more recent pilot studies of Somerville?s I-93 pollution all set the foundation for this grant, says Wig Zamore of the Somerville Partnership. ?We feel fortunate to be included in this scientific effort to learn more about these understudied exposures and to help better define their most serious impacts.?
By actively engaging the Boston and Somerville communities, the Tufts investigators predict the study will yield results that more traditional research methods would not achieve.
As part of the study, participants will be asked to submit blood samples to be tested for evidence of heart and lung disease. ?Many people live close to I-93 and I-95, and they may well be exposed to these tiny particles, but they aren?t aware of it,? says Bart Laws, senior investigator at the Latin American Health Institute, another of the participating groups. ?The particles are invisible and odorless.?
The ultrafine particulates, as they are known, have been shown to be present at higher levels close to highways, notes Brugge.
Additionally, co-investigators from the Tufts School of Engineering plan to outfit a van with air-monitoring instrumentation that can measure concentrations of a variety of chemical pollutants. John Durant, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering, will lead that effort.
?Pollution levels are highest on the highway and gradually decrease to background levels as they drift away from the cars on the road,? says Brugge. ?The air-monitoring van will measure pollution levels within 200 to 300 meters of highways in communities where most of the residents can see the highway from their homes.?
In Boston, both I-93 and the Massachusetts Turnpike border Chinatown. ?Some residents have lived at the junction of two major highways for decades,? says Lydia Lowe, executive director of the Chinese Progressive Association, another study participant. ?What does it mean for the long-term health of Chinatown residents, and what are the implications for future development and planning for our community? These are some of the questions we hope this study can help us to explore.?
Brugge says there is a large and growing body of scientific evidence that shows ambient pollution, even at levels below those set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is harmful to health. ?Most of the studies to date examined regional effects of pollution,? he notes. ?Only recently has research begun to suggest that highly concentrated local sources, such as highways, may be even more hazardous. To our knowledge, much of the work to date on near-highway exposures and health has come from southern California, so the project represents an expansion to the northeastern United States.?
Work on the project began on June 13, and preliminary results are not expected for several years. Brugge notes that other pilot studies addressing the issue of exposure near highways, not part of the new grant, are currently in the works. Results from those studies should be available later this year or next year.
[size=+1]Watching What We Breathe[/size]
Tufts University Journal ● 14 July 2008 ● http://tuftsjournal.tufts.edu/2008/07/briefs/01/
Impact of highway pollution on Boston-area neighborhoods, including Somerville and Chinatown, is focus of new research
Living in a neighborhood close to a major highway may expose residents to higher than average pollution rates, but up until now, no one has known for sure.
That?s about to change, though, as Tufts researchers team up with five Boston-area community groups to find the answer, aided by a five-year, $2.5 million grant from the National Institute of Environmental Health Science. The scientists will focus on Somerville, Mass. [I-93], Boston?s Chinatown [I-90 from Columbus Center to I-93], and two other communities that will be chosen soon.
?Most of the studies to date examined regional effects of pollution,? says Doug Brugge, associate professor of public health and family medicine. ?Only recently has research begun to suggest that highly concentrated local sources, such as highways, may be even more hazardous.?
Photo: Perry Kroll/iStock
A steering committee of representatives from five community groups will lead the research in collaboration with principal investigator Doug Brugge, director of the Tufts Community Research Center at the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service.
The Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership initially approached Brugge, an associate professor in the School of Medicine?s department of public health and family medicine, about the impact of highway pollution on Somerville neighborhoods next to Interstate 93, a major highway leading in and out of Boston.
Meeting with other communities adjacent to major highways, a literature review by Tufts faculty and more recent pilot studies of Somerville?s I-93 pollution all set the foundation for this grant, says Wig Zamore of the Somerville Partnership. ?We feel fortunate to be included in this scientific effort to learn more about these understudied exposures and to help better define their most serious impacts.?
By actively engaging the Boston and Somerville communities, the Tufts investigators predict the study will yield results that more traditional research methods would not achieve.
As part of the study, participants will be asked to submit blood samples to be tested for evidence of heart and lung disease. ?Many people live close to I-93 and I-95, and they may well be exposed to these tiny particles, but they aren?t aware of it,? says Bart Laws, senior investigator at the Latin American Health Institute, another of the participating groups. ?The particles are invisible and odorless.?
The ultrafine particulates, as they are known, have been shown to be present at higher levels close to highways, notes Brugge.
Additionally, co-investigators from the Tufts School of Engineering plan to outfit a van with air-monitoring instrumentation that can measure concentrations of a variety of chemical pollutants. John Durant, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering, will lead that effort.
?Pollution levels are highest on the highway and gradually decrease to background levels as they drift away from the cars on the road,? says Brugge. ?The air-monitoring van will measure pollution levels within 200 to 300 meters of highways in communities where most of the residents can see the highway from their homes.?
In Boston, both I-93 and the Massachusetts Turnpike border Chinatown. ?Some residents have lived at the junction of two major highways for decades,? says Lydia Lowe, executive director of the Chinese Progressive Association, another study participant. ?What does it mean for the long-term health of Chinatown residents, and what are the implications for future development and planning for our community? These are some of the questions we hope this study can help us to explore.?
Brugge says there is a large and growing body of scientific evidence that shows ambient pollution, even at levels below those set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is harmful to health. ?Most of the studies to date examined regional effects of pollution,? he notes. ?Only recently has research begun to suggest that highly concentrated local sources, such as highways, may be even more hazardous. To our knowledge, much of the work to date on near-highway exposures and health has come from southern California, so the project represents an expansion to the northeastern United States.?
Work on the project began on June 13, and preliminary results are not expected for several years. Brugge notes that other pilot studies addressing the issue of exposure near highways, not part of the new grant, are currently in the works. Results from those studies should be available later this year or next year.
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
[size=+1]Pike?s projects stall[/size]
Real estate sales no cure for looming deficit ● Deals won?t plug Pike deficit
By Scott Van Voorhis ● July 14, 2008
The Massachusetts Turnpike is facing a financial meltdown, but market conditions prevent it from tapping its most valuable asset - its real estate.
As the authority grapples with a $75 million to $100 million budget gap, the Turnpike is sitting on - or actually under - some of the most valuable stretches of developable property in Boston.
The air rights to build over the Turnpike in Boston are worth, on paper anyway, hundreds of millions of dollars.
But the downturn in the real estate market - coupled with what some say has been the authority?s clumsy handling in the past of its real estate - has for now shuttered this potential goldmine.
?People could say we should be a lot more aggressive with the sale of our real estate,? said Turnpike spokesman Mac Daniel. ?The market is just not there to do that.?
Beyond dispute is the Turnpike?s dire financial situation. Both the authority?s spokesman and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation peg the authority?s budget deficit to be as high as $100 million.
One factor is Big Dig debt. Payments on the project?s bonds are starting to ramp up and the first large principal payments are due, Daniel said. The authority is also dealing with the fallout from questionable financing deals made under former Turnpike chief Matt Amorello, which reportedly could trigger as much as $200 million in increased costs.
Meanwhile, maintenance costs on the new Central Artery tunnel and highway system are also draining away millions in revenue, said Michael Widmer, president of the taxpayers foundation.
That leaves the Turnpike with little choice but to increase tolls to get itself out of its budget jam, some say.
?Certainly time is running short,? Widmer said. ?Certainly by the end of this calendar year they will have to have announced a new toll increase. There is no way you can do this without a new toll increase. The only question is how.?
Market conditions mean the prospect is slim for any help from the Turnpike?s real estate holdings, despite years invested in planning a series of big projects in Boston.
The $800 million Columbus Center plan was supposed to have created a new neighborhood on a deck over the Turnpike between the South End and Back Bay. The development was to have generated millions in lease payments. But after years of community meetings, planning and debate, the project?s developer, Arthur Winn, put the project on hold after losing a key piece of his financing.
Meanwhile, in the Fenway, developer John Rosenthal has also spent years planning a massive air-rights project spanning the Turnpike near Fenway Park [map]. But that project is still under regulatory review, with no immediate prospect of any financial return to the beleaguered Turnpike.
Plans to bring in more than $100 million through the sale of highway-crossed Turnpike land near South Station - dubbed ?South Bay? by Amorello - also turned out to be a big flop.
The slow pace of development along the Turnpike?s Boston corridor stands in stark contrast to rosy assumptions made by authority officials a decade ago when the idea of air-rights development began to take flight.
At that time, the value of the Turnpike?s air-rights holdings was estimated to be in the hundreds of millions.
Those projections helped fuel aggressive plans by the Turnpike to spur construction of mega-projects along prime pieces of the Turnpike?s Boston extension.
But as developers like Columbus Center?s Winn began to craft detailed plans, the economics of the deals began to come under question.
The tens of millions or more it costs to build decks over the Turnpike suddenly loomed large, requiring developers to propose ever-larger towers to make the numbers work. In the case of Columbus Center, that triggered a firestorm of community opposition that led to hundreds of meetings and long delays.
?No one can afford to build the decks,? said downtown tower developer Dean Stratouly. ?You can?t pay for air-rights and then have to create them.?
But the downturn in the economy and the real estate market may have delivered the final blow to some of these big air-rigths projects, at least for of any near-term groundbreaking.
?Clearly at this point in time they will not be seeing any great revenue surge on the real estate issue,? said David Begelfer, head of the local chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties.
http://www.bostonherald.com/business/real_estate/view.bg?articleid=1106827
[size=+1]Pike?s projects stall[/size]
Real estate sales no cure for looming deficit ● Deals won?t plug Pike deficit
By Scott Van Voorhis ● July 14, 2008
The Massachusetts Turnpike is facing a financial meltdown, but market conditions prevent it from tapping its most valuable asset - its real estate.
As the authority grapples with a $75 million to $100 million budget gap, the Turnpike is sitting on - or actually under - some of the most valuable stretches of developable property in Boston.
The air rights to build over the Turnpike in Boston are worth, on paper anyway, hundreds of millions of dollars.
But the downturn in the real estate market - coupled with what some say has been the authority?s clumsy handling in the past of its real estate - has for now shuttered this potential goldmine.
?People could say we should be a lot more aggressive with the sale of our real estate,? said Turnpike spokesman Mac Daniel. ?The market is just not there to do that.?
Beyond dispute is the Turnpike?s dire financial situation. Both the authority?s spokesman and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation peg the authority?s budget deficit to be as high as $100 million.
One factor is Big Dig debt. Payments on the project?s bonds are starting to ramp up and the first large principal payments are due, Daniel said. The authority is also dealing with the fallout from questionable financing deals made under former Turnpike chief Matt Amorello, which reportedly could trigger as much as $200 million in increased costs.
Meanwhile, maintenance costs on the new Central Artery tunnel and highway system are also draining away millions in revenue, said Michael Widmer, president of the taxpayers foundation.
That leaves the Turnpike with little choice but to increase tolls to get itself out of its budget jam, some say.
?Certainly time is running short,? Widmer said. ?Certainly by the end of this calendar year they will have to have announced a new toll increase. There is no way you can do this without a new toll increase. The only question is how.?
Market conditions mean the prospect is slim for any help from the Turnpike?s real estate holdings, despite years invested in planning a series of big projects in Boston.
The $800 million Columbus Center plan was supposed to have created a new neighborhood on a deck over the Turnpike between the South End and Back Bay. The development was to have generated millions in lease payments. But after years of community meetings, planning and debate, the project?s developer, Arthur Winn, put the project on hold after losing a key piece of his financing.
Meanwhile, in the Fenway, developer John Rosenthal has also spent years planning a massive air-rights project spanning the Turnpike near Fenway Park [map]. But that project is still under regulatory review, with no immediate prospect of any financial return to the beleaguered Turnpike.
Plans to bring in more than $100 million through the sale of highway-crossed Turnpike land near South Station - dubbed ?South Bay? by Amorello - also turned out to be a big flop.
The slow pace of development along the Turnpike?s Boston corridor stands in stark contrast to rosy assumptions made by authority officials a decade ago when the idea of air-rights development began to take flight.
At that time, the value of the Turnpike?s air-rights holdings was estimated to be in the hundreds of millions.
Those projections helped fuel aggressive plans by the Turnpike to spur construction of mega-projects along prime pieces of the Turnpike?s Boston extension.
But as developers like Columbus Center?s Winn began to craft detailed plans, the economics of the deals began to come under question.
The tens of millions or more it costs to build decks over the Turnpike suddenly loomed large, requiring developers to propose ever-larger towers to make the numbers work. In the case of Columbus Center, that triggered a firestorm of community opposition that led to hundreds of meetings and long delays.
?No one can afford to build the decks,? said downtown tower developer Dean Stratouly. ?You can?t pay for air-rights and then have to create them.?
But the downturn in the economy and the real estate market may have delivered the final blow to some of these big air-rigths projects, at least for of any near-term groundbreaking.
?Clearly at this point in time they will not be seeing any great revenue surge on the real estate issue,? said David Begelfer, head of the local chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties.
http://www.bostonherald.com/business/real_estate/view.bg?articleid=1106827
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Columbus Center
[size=+1]No movement on Columbus Center[/size]
by Linda Rodriguez ● Managing Editor ● August 7, 2008
It?s been more than four months since construction on the massive Columbus Center abruptly stopped after developers requested a ?moratorium on construction? due to financial woes. It?s been nearly three months since the director of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority visited residents of Cortes and Isabella streets, whose homes overlook the now dormant sight, and said he?d have a decision for them within 30 days.
And so far, no one?s heard anything. The site, a barren dirt pit bordered by the roaring Pike and torn green hurricane fencing, remains inactive.
?No one?s responding at all,? said Artie Rice, a resident of Cortes Street. ?We?re ignored, we?re ignored really. ... It?s looking pretty ugly down here; the weeds are growing to tree height.?
Rice said that though the perimeter of the site is cleaned up weekly by workers from Project Place, a South End-based homeless advocacy organization, there are still problems.
The green hurricane fencing now bears graffiti and tears, the street?s trees were shorn to make way for the construction, and the interior of the site, he says, is full of rusting equipment and trash. The most tangible progress on the street is the return of the resident parking signs, bringing back parking for the neighborhood. Rice has e-mailed complaints and sent photos of the site to various representatives of the Boston Redevelopment Authority, individuals on City Council, and the Turnpike Authority, but says he?s heard nothing back from any quarter. (District 2 City Councilor Bill Linehan, one of those on Rice?s e-mail list, did not return a call for comment; a Boston Redevelopment Authority spokesperson said that she had no news regarding the project.)
?I suppose that there?s no answer, that they?re not ignoring us, but it would be nice if they would say, ?We?re still working, we?re still negotiating with the developers,?? said Rice. ?There?s nothing, I don?t know who to scream to anymore. None of us know who to yell to any more.?
Mac Daniel, spokesman for the Turnpike Authority said that right now, the Turnpike is still negotiating with the developers. ?I don?t have any news on the negotiations front. We continue to support the project, but we still need to iron out the terms of this year and a half moratorium,? he said Monday.
While he wasn?t aware of any complaints from residents, he said that the Turnpike Authority does need to meet with residents of the street again.
?Obviously, if residents feel that more needs to be done to keep the site up, we?ll work together with the BRA to make sure that gets done. We owe the community another meeting to update them on the status of the project and to hear about their concerns and we?ll probably set that up shortly,? Daniel said. ?We don?t want to see the site remain frozen in time either. It behooves the Pike to make sure the area is cleaned up and is as close to normal as it can be until the project gets on surer footing.?
The Columbus Center project was proposed more than a decade ago, as a way to reunite the South End and Back Bay with a luxury condominium-hotel high-rise complex built on a deck constructed over the Turnpike. Construction on the Columbus Center site started in November 2007, but was abruptly stopped in March; at the time, the developers said they had concerns about their finances and ?capital structure,? and said they were waiting on a stronger financial commitment from the state. Not long after, in April, the Patrick administration announced that the Columbus Center would not be one of the recipients of the MORE grant, a $10 million infrastructure grant; following that, MassHousing pulled out of more than $25 million in loans it had agreed to give the project.
Since then, the construction site has been virtually abandoned, as the developers have scrambled to find funding for the $800 million project in a trying economic climate.
While the Columbus Center situation has continued to unfold, so have more details over the Pike?s woeful financial situation. The Turnpike Authority remains deeply in debt after the $15 billion Big Dig project, and although the state has agreed to back $1 billion of the Turnpike?s debts, allowing the quasi-public agency to lower its borrowing costs, it still faces rising maintenance costs. Daniel said that the Turnpike?s financial situation has had no bearing on the Columbus Center project?s delays, adding, ?That?s completely different subject matter, and it?s not slowing this down at all.?
Meanwhile, the site still remains dormant and residents are increasingly frustrated. ?It?s just very, very frustrating that no one seems to want to address it; at least get these people to clean it up. I guess they?re all expecting miracles, but I would just like for them to acknowledge our existence. It?s hard to walk out every day and see it,? Rice said, adding that he?s concerned about how long the site may sit neglected. ?We?re kind of a forgotten street.?
http://www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=78527
[size=+1]No movement on Columbus Center[/size]
by Linda Rodriguez ● Managing Editor ● August 7, 2008
It?s been more than four months since construction on the massive Columbus Center abruptly stopped after developers requested a ?moratorium on construction? due to financial woes. It?s been nearly three months since the director of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority visited residents of Cortes and Isabella streets, whose homes overlook the now dormant sight, and said he?d have a decision for them within 30 days.
And so far, no one?s heard anything. The site, a barren dirt pit bordered by the roaring Pike and torn green hurricane fencing, remains inactive.
?No one?s responding at all,? said Artie Rice, a resident of Cortes Street. ?We?re ignored, we?re ignored really. ... It?s looking pretty ugly down here; the weeds are growing to tree height.?
Rice said that though the perimeter of the site is cleaned up weekly by workers from Project Place, a South End-based homeless advocacy organization, there are still problems.
The green hurricane fencing now bears graffiti and tears, the street?s trees were shorn to make way for the construction, and the interior of the site, he says, is full of rusting equipment and trash. The most tangible progress on the street is the return of the resident parking signs, bringing back parking for the neighborhood. Rice has e-mailed complaints and sent photos of the site to various representatives of the Boston Redevelopment Authority, individuals on City Council, and the Turnpike Authority, but says he?s heard nothing back from any quarter. (District 2 City Councilor Bill Linehan, one of those on Rice?s e-mail list, did not return a call for comment; a Boston Redevelopment Authority spokesperson said that she had no news regarding the project.)
?I suppose that there?s no answer, that they?re not ignoring us, but it would be nice if they would say, ?We?re still working, we?re still negotiating with the developers,?? said Rice. ?There?s nothing, I don?t know who to scream to anymore. None of us know who to yell to any more.?
Mac Daniel, spokesman for the Turnpike Authority said that right now, the Turnpike is still negotiating with the developers. ?I don?t have any news on the negotiations front. We continue to support the project, but we still need to iron out the terms of this year and a half moratorium,? he said Monday.
While he wasn?t aware of any complaints from residents, he said that the Turnpike Authority does need to meet with residents of the street again.
?Obviously, if residents feel that more needs to be done to keep the site up, we?ll work together with the BRA to make sure that gets done. We owe the community another meeting to update them on the status of the project and to hear about their concerns and we?ll probably set that up shortly,? Daniel said. ?We don?t want to see the site remain frozen in time either. It behooves the Pike to make sure the area is cleaned up and is as close to normal as it can be until the project gets on surer footing.?
The Columbus Center project was proposed more than a decade ago, as a way to reunite the South End and Back Bay with a luxury condominium-hotel high-rise complex built on a deck constructed over the Turnpike. Construction on the Columbus Center site started in November 2007, but was abruptly stopped in March; at the time, the developers said they had concerns about their finances and ?capital structure,? and said they were waiting on a stronger financial commitment from the state. Not long after, in April, the Patrick administration announced that the Columbus Center would not be one of the recipients of the MORE grant, a $10 million infrastructure grant; following that, MassHousing pulled out of more than $25 million in loans it had agreed to give the project.
Since then, the construction site has been virtually abandoned, as the developers have scrambled to find funding for the $800 million project in a trying economic climate.
While the Columbus Center situation has continued to unfold, so have more details over the Pike?s woeful financial situation. The Turnpike Authority remains deeply in debt after the $15 billion Big Dig project, and although the state has agreed to back $1 billion of the Turnpike?s debts, allowing the quasi-public agency to lower its borrowing costs, it still faces rising maintenance costs. Daniel said that the Turnpike?s financial situation has had no bearing on the Columbus Center project?s delays, adding, ?That?s completely different subject matter, and it?s not slowing this down at all.?
Meanwhile, the site still remains dormant and residents are increasingly frustrated. ?It?s just very, very frustrating that no one seems to want to address it; at least get these people to clean it up. I guess they?re all expecting miracles, but I would just like for them to acknowledge our existence. It?s hard to walk out every day and see it,? Rice said, adding that he?s concerned about how long the site may sit neglected. ?We?re kind of a forgotten street.?
http://www.mysouthend.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=78527