Pinnacle at Central Wharf (Harbor Garage) | 70 East India Row | Waterfront | Downtown

Status
Not open for further replies.
Op-ed in today's Globe

www.bostonglobe.com

Janey decision undermines viable waterfront plan - The Boston Globe

The acting mayor’s withdrawal of the Downtown Waterfront Municipal Harbor Plan throws out years of viable careful planning along with a controversial development.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

The op-ed blasts Janey's decision. Makes no mention of Baker's announcement that the city can't withdraw the plan. The op-ed appears to be aligned with and supportive of the goals of the Trustees of Reservations and a new coalition, under the aegis of the Trustees, called The Coalition for a Resilient-and Inclusive Waterfront.

While imperfect, the Municipal Harbor Plan was an important step on the path to making our harbor more available to everyone. I was a vocal participant in its development, and believe that it properly balances the need for waterfront redevelopment with the critical — and I might even say, moral — requirement to deliver new and valuable public open space, amenities, and resiliency measures.
Click to expand...

I do not question the mayor’s commitment (or the commitment of either mayoral finalist) to inclusivity, access, and resilience, but the August announcement, whatever its intention, does not serve these goals. The new coalition has worked laudably to elevate the waterways conversation, but simultaneous efforts to kill the MHP and start over, especially given the significant progress of the parallel Climate Ready Boston initiative, threaten to set us back years. Regardless of one’s opinion of the two redevelopment proposals, restarting a process that began in 2013, rather than building upon it, does not reflect urgency.
Click to expand...
 

Bizjournal article discussing the City Council's vote in favor of amending Boston's MHP includes two quotes from each mayoral candidate:

Wu and Essaibi George, who will face off this November to become Boston’s mayor, have both previously indicated their support of amending the MHP.

“Boston has the right to hold a community planning process for a waterfront that is accessible, resilient and equitable,” Wu has previously said in a statement to the Business Journal. “I look forward to working with Mayor Janey and stakeholders across our neighborhoods to shape our shared waterfront so it works for everyone.”

Essaibi George, meanwhile, said: "While I personally have reservations against a portion of the project, I do not think we need to completely scrap this plan and throw out an entire seven years worth of work and community engagement. We need an activated, accessible, resilient waterfront and a plan that delivers that efficiently, responsively, and responsibly. We should continue community engagement and we can make changes, but those changes need to be done in partnership with all stakeholders and not leave thousands of residents without jobs."

While each candidate wants to alter the MHP, to me the difference is significant and illustrates the approaches/philosophy of the candidates: Wu (planning and process-oriented) v. George (practical and results-oriented). I appreciate the journalists at Bizjournal asking the candidates directly about this project and hope the Globe and/or the debate moderators follow their lead.
 
SuffolkHeights11 said:
While each candidate wants to alter the MHP, to me the difference is significant and illustrates the approaches/philosophy of the candidates: Wu (planning and process-oriented) v. George (practical and results-oriented). I appreciate the journalists at Bizjournal asking the candidates directly about this project and hope the Globe and/or the debate moderators follow their lead.
Click to expand...
how is talking out of both sides of your mouth an indication of practicality? At least WU is honest about her intentions, with Essaibi George she seems to leave a lot of wriggle room on anything except expanding the police budget.
 
donkeybutlers said:
how is talking out of both sides of your mouth an indication of practicality? At least WU is honest about her intentions, with Essaibi George she seems to leave a lot of wriggle room on anything except expanding the police budget.
Click to expand...
Would rather have police and practical development than far fewer police and little development. Quality of life in this city is not improving.
 
Nibbles O’Plenty said:
Would rather have police and practical development than far fewer police and little development. Quality of life in this city is not improving.
Click to expand...
What? What is "practical development"? These are just buzzwords lacking any of the specificity they claim to suggest. We also currently have both lots of ongoing development and an expanding police budget so if you really think quality of life is not improving maybe the calculus to improve that is not so simple as building and fortifying private spaces with lots of cops? Essaibi George does what is profitable for herself I see no reason to think she will do what benefits the city, she seems to generally oppose those things.
 
Last edited:
I despise the harbor garage and support this tower. But that said, the quality of life for the vast majority of Boston residents isn't really going to be impacted by this development much, if at all.

The type of development that actually improves quality of life for the people who live here is TOD in the outer neighborhoods; small-scale mixed used development that creates 15-minute neighborhoods; development that plugs holes in the urban fabric; and an expanded and modernized transit system. I don't see any evidence that Essaibi-George--who doesn't even take the T despite living less than half a mile from the red line, who largely opposes road diets and thinks bike lanes are bad for local businesses, and who blocked construction of 5-story mixed-use apartment building in Southie because it would obstruct the views from one of her husbands buildings--has any sort of vision for those things.
 
Last edited:
BronsonShore said:
I despise the harbor garage and support this tower. But that said, the quality of life for the vast majority of Boston residents isn't really going to be impacted by this development much, if at all.

The type of development that actually improves quality of life for the people who live here is TOD in the outer neighborhoods; small-scale mixed used development that creates 15-minute neighborhoods; development that plugs holes in the urban fabric; and an expanded and modernized transit system. I don't see any evidence that Essaibi-George--who doesn't even take the T despite living less than half a mile from the red line, who largely opposes road diets and thinks bike lanes are bad for local businesses, and who blocked construction of 5-story mixed-use apartment building in Southie because it would obstruct the views from one of her husbands buildings--has any sort of vision for those things.
Click to expand...

Essaibi-George is reliably pro-development and more importantly pro-density. Having landmark projects like the Harbor Tower are critical for the capital markets to be excited about investing in a city and having a strong pro-development government to back these projects is necessary for the capital markets to operate in a city like Boston. Returns are razor thin on development projects here and one of the only reasons Boston has created housing in the last few years is because of the capital markets' trust in Walsh. Having Wu's Trumpian narrative towards development as well as her desire to aimlessly delete the BPDA will only have negative impacts on urbanism and affordability.

Also correcting the record on your Globe hit-piece reference. That project was approved by the ZBA and George had 0 legal review over that project. As an abutter to the property, George raised concerns about some of the baseless variances that were proposed for that project despite lacking a real hardship. Abutters raise these same concerns every day in Boston and you would have raised the same if you were the abutter. But yet, no one seems to care that Landlord Wu has illegally claimed residential tax exemptions on her income properties taking tax revenue away from the City she claims to represent.
 
CancelEuclid said:
Having landmark projects like the Harbor Tower are critical for the capital markets to be excited about investing in a city and having a strong pro-development government to back these projects is necessary for the capital markets to operate in a city like Boston. Returns are razor thin on development projects here and one of the only reasons Boston has created housing in the last few years is because of the capital markets' trust in Walsh.
Click to expand...

This is critical... keeping the development pipeline full requires confidence in government and Wu is not inspiring with her anti-BPDA position. The last 10 years of development are what has added over $1B in taxes to Boston's budget, you can hire a lot of teachers, firefighters and create affordable housing with this added income.
 
CancelEuclid said:
Essaibi-George is reliably pro-development and more importantly pro-density. Having landmark projects like the Harbor Tower are critical for the capital markets to be excited about investing in a city and having a strong pro-development government to back these projects is necessary for the capital markets to operate in a city like Boston. Returns are razor thin on development projects here and one of the only reasons Boston has created housing in the last few years is because of the capital markets' trust in Walsh. Having Wu's Trumpian narrative towards development as well as her desire to aimlessly delete the BPDA will only have negative impacts on urbanism and affordability.

Also correcting the record on your Globe hit-piece reference. That project was approved by the ZBA and George had 0 legal review over that project. As an abutter to the property, George raised concerns about some of the baseless variances that were proposed for that project despite lacking a real hardship. Abutters raise these same concerns every day in Boston and you would have raised the same if you were the abutter. But yet, no one seems to care that Landlord Wu has illegally claimed residential tax exemptions on her income properties taking tax revenue away from the City she claims to represent.
Click to expand...

For the sake of clarifying what actually happened, Essaibi-George most certainly did not oppose the Southie apartment building as an abutter. In fact, what makes her involvement so ethically dubious is that she didn't even disclose that her husband owned the building next door. What she did, was send a staff member to the ZBA hearing and argue against the building in her official capacity as a city councilor, claiming that she was doing so on behalf of concerned neighbors.

But I gotta admit, it's pretty remarkable to see someone call Essaibi-George pro-development in one paragraph, and then--completely without irony--defend her engagement in the very definition of NIMBY conduct in the second paragraph. I admire your ability to compartmentalize.

Anyway, you got a cite for your claim about Wu illegally claiming a residential tax exemption? I just did a quick deed search, and it looks like the only property she owns is the house she lives in. If you have information to the contrary, I'd love to see it.
 
CancelEuclid said:
Also correcting the record on your Globe hit-piece reference. That project was approved by the ZBA and George had 0 legal review over that project. As an abutter to the property, George raised concerns about some of the baseless variances that were proposed for that project despite lacking a real hardship. Abutters raise these same concerns every day in Boston and you would have raised the same if you were the abutter.
Click to expand...
Literally a NIMBY. Its weird how some people on this board seem to love NIMBYs when they are corrupt politicians and landlords.

CancelEuclid said:
Essaibi-George is reliably pro-development and more importantly pro-density.
Click to expand...
No she is not and you literally go on to site a direct example of where she is not as I already highlighted.

CancelEuclid said:
But yet, no one seems to care that Landlord Wu has illegally claimed residential tax exemptions on her income properties taking tax revenue away from the City she claims to represent.
Click to expand...
It's really easy to pretend things are remotely equivalent when you just make things up.

CancelEuclid said:
Having Wu's Trumpian narrative towards development as well as her desire to aimlessly delete the BPDA will only have negative impacts on urbanism and affordability.
Click to expand...
Comparing Wu to Trump is absurd. I also remind you that a Trump supporters super pac is backing someone in the race and it is not Wu, it is the person who's support is exclusively in the whitest areas of the city.

Vivanna said:
This is critical... keeping the development pipeline full requires confidence in government and Wu is not inspiring with her anti-BPDA position. The last 10 years of development are what has added over $1B in taxes to Boston's budget, you can hire a lot of teachers, firefighters and create affordable housing with this added income.
Click to expand...
Truly telling that democracy is scarier to them than corruption.
 
Last edited:
There is a case for a major lawsuit against the city.

Subject: A decade of wasted non-sense

There is only so long that these so called political representatives can claim they are either incompetent before reality sinks in that they are actually just outright corrupt.
The fact that they are just trying to scrap the Harbor plan without having another alternative plan pretty much shows they have no interest to do what is best for the taxpayers or that area of Boston.

The developer has shown a positive plan over a decade to work with the city and try to remove a decrypted above garage that offers no waterfront access for pedestrians which should have never been approved to be built by the city in the first place. I have not seen one an alternative plan to make the area better from the oppositions just non-sense.

You would think our leaders had more things to worry about instead of some developer knocking down a garage that would be best for the area.


www.boston25news.com

âItâs never ever been this badâ: 100+ tents set up along Methadone Mile concern community leaders

Community leaders are sounding the alarm on what they describe as a new “tent city” forming along the so-called Methadone Mile. Neighbors, business leaders and public officials told Boston 25 News the network of tents now set up symbolizes a new level of urgency.
www.boston25news.com www.boston25news.com
‘It’s never ever been this bad’: 100+ tents set up along Methadone Mile concern community leaders
This will get much worse because its more about affordability in the city now.
 
The mayoral candidates are both bad on NIMBYism, despite potentially promising rhetoric (reform of the process for Wu and build build build for AEG):

AEG NIMBYs anything a local abutter complains about (hence that Seaport/Southie thing), where her reflexive "community service" NIMBYism made garden variety nonsense look like a conflict of interest. Luckily, this only extends to a small radius around her Polish Triangle home.

Wu has publicly NIMBY'd a one story house building a second story in her neighborhood of two story SFHs, a parking lot in the North End to be converted into a small 3 story apartment building, and has been MIA or directly opposed affordable projects in Roslindale.

Worth keeping all this history in the back of your mind.
 
I am unlocking this thread at the suggestion of a valued member because they spotted news in BLDUP that the garage had been refinanced for $90M.

Harbor Garage in Downtown Boston Refi'd for $90 Million

Harbor Garage in Downtown Boston Refi'd for $90 Million
www.bldup.com www.bldup.com

Let’s try a focused conversation on actual facts of this project at the fraught intersection of a bunch of great topics.
 
[Mod note: I or another mod should move nearly-all the 2021 Mayoral Election stuff to the Harbor Garage Pontification thread, which will remain a lockbox for our off topic stuff.]
 
Arlington said:
I am unlocking this thread at the suggestion of a valued member because they spotted news in BLDUP that the garage had been refinanced for $90M.

Harbor Garage in Downtown Boston Refi'd for $90 Million

Harbor Garage in Downtown Boston Refi'd for $90 Million
www.bldup.com www.bldup.com

Let’s try a focused conversation on actual facts of this project at the fraught intersection of a bunch of great topics.
Click to expand...

Interesting that they still mention the proposed tower. I think we can safely assume nothing above 150' will ever be built on this site.
 
As long as it's Michelle Wu's Boston we'll never see a building over 500' get approved or built at any site across the entire city (not counting the ones that were already in motion). They really needed to make those approvals happen during the Marty Walsh era, but if I recall the CLF lawsuit got in the way. The garage is a moneymaker and isn't going to be replaced by something 150'. It will stay there in perpetuity without some type of miracle happening, and those miracles aren't going to happen under this administration.
 
Kind of reminds me of THIS, the planned 51-story South Station Tower! Hah!!
South Station Tower..jpg
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top