Rose Kennedy Greenway

So basically Menino picks and chooses who develops what in this city. Fallon, Drucker? That is why the city is so short-sighted
 
Shepard said:
It's fun to preach the choir. I love doing it myself. But what can we do beyond drowning this thread with anti-Menino vitriol (which we should continue to do nonetheless)?
Click to expand...

Drown the newspaper board.
 
^^ Oh yes, the Globe & Herald comment sections.

Those bastions of intellectual thought and informed debate.
 
Haha I know but more people read those boards than ours. It doesn't matter if they are intelligent or not because all the intelligent people are already opposed to it. It won't be surprising if Menino or any of his aids check the comment section.
 
TheRifleman said:
So basically Menino picks and chooses who develops what in this city. Fallon, Drucker? That is why the city is so short-sighted
Click to expand...

While this result is interesting, I'm not sure it's intentional. There is a wee bit of logic to the zoning, which is the idea that you step height up as you move away from the harbor. That actually works for me, though I did really like Chioforo's proposal. Visually, the skyline looks better if it is tallest near the center with just a few outliers on the perimeter. This zoning follows that concept. I care not for discussion of shadows and wind, but I do think we can potentially get a more cohesive downtown form with there being more height on the inland side of the greenway.
 
KentXie said:
It doesn't matter if they are intelligent or not because all the intelligent people are already opposed to it.
Click to expand...
You give too much credit to the intelligent. LeCorbusier was intelligent, Goebbels was intelligent; and I'll bet at some level ... even Kairos Shen is intelligent.
 
Banker and Tradesman said:
Development height decisions were made on the basis of shadow impact on the Greenway, without considering the economics of development, Shen added.
Click to expand...

Um, is that a good idea? While I don't think that economics should be the only factor in urban planning and would argue that certain zoning regulations that negatively impact profits are worthwhile, that the Boston Redevelopment Authority makes huge, sweeping zoning decisions seemingly overnight and by fiat "without considering the economics" is ludicrous and clearly not a good thing for the city.

Banker and Tradesman said:
"This is not about financial feasibility, it's about long-term value for the city, and for the adjoining properties," Shen said. "The market isn't interested in building a city the way we are. It is not the responsibility of the city to make feasible projects that would otherwise be infeasible."
Click to expand...

How can you have long-term value if something is entirely infeasible? Are "the market's" decisions so much worse than the BRA's? The BRA has a pretty terrible track record, and turning the Financial District/Greenway into a strip of 4-story squat boxes of CVSes seems to be a worse solution than whatever "the market" (spoken with all the disdain of the BRA nabobs for "the market," which is to say "whatever dude owns the plot of land in question") wants here.

The special concern for "the adjoining properties" -- the Harbor Towers -- makes me wonder if they were actually built by a joint venture between Mother Nature, Father Time and All That Is Good And Holy, Inc., or if they too were once a "market-based" development that somehow has ended up having filthy, outsize political sway.

Banker and Tradesman said:
Shen held up Rowes Wharf as a model for development along the water, and said the city was willing to wait years, if not decades, for developers to build on that scale.
Click to expand...

I can't tell if this is really what he said. Is he actually saying the city is happy having a concrete parking garage -- or nothing -- in what should be a showpiece gateway to the city for decades?! Who the hell are these people? And after waiting for decades, what are we expected to get? As already mentioned on this forum, that site would not accommodate another Rowe's Wharf. It'd be a great place for a Dunkin' Donuts outlet, but I don't think we need to thwart the normal market-based development processes for that.

Banker and Tradesman said:
Two other Boston development veterans could also stand to gain from the Greenway guidelines. Ron Druker controls an 18,400-square-foot Chinatown building that the BRA has ticketed for a 14-story, 285,000-square-foot residential and retail redevelopment.
Click to expand...

This cake has been iced.
 
3829669-5482185-thumbnail.jpg
Click to expand...
So they suggested to Chiofaro a few weeks back that he could build 2x 400' towers, but changed their mind and now say 200' is the max? What did he do to piss off Menino even more?

At what point does this constitute a "taking" by the city? I bet the Hooks have a case.

HenryAlan said:
... There is a wee bit of logic to the zoning, which is the idea that you step height up as you move away from the harbor.
Click to expand...

I have to agree overall, stepping the heights gives the skyline an interesting texture.

Visually, the skyline looks better if it is tallest near the center with just a few outliers on the perimeter.
Click to expand...

Why can't the aquarium garage site be one of those outliers? This site could support a signature building for Boston.

Maybe the "arch" concept could be improved, maybe Mumbles would like some input in the concept for something iconic. Make it look like a giant lighthouse - 60 storys tall. Or does Menino just not want Chiofaro playing in his sandbox at all?
 
PlanBoston said:
So they suggested to Chiofaro a few weeks back that he could build 2x 400' towers, but changed their mind and now say 200' is the max? What did he do to piss off Menino even more?

At what point does this constitute a "taking" by the city? I bet the Hooks have a case.



I have to agree overall, stepping the heights gives the skyline an interesting texture.



Why can't the aquarium garage site be one of those outliers? This site could support a signature building for Boston.

Maybe the "arch" concept could be improved, maybe Mumbles would like some input in the concept for something iconic. Make it look like a giant lighthouse - 60 storys tall. Or does Menino just not want Chiofaro playing in his sandbox at all?
Click to expand...

IMO, the BRA and Menino would accept a project that was close in height to what Chiofaro initially proposed and discussed with the BRA over a year's time coincident with his buying the garage: 475 feet. That's a height consistent with Harbor Towers. There's been no commentary that I've seen that the BRA discouraged him from going that tall.

Not content with 475 feet however, he subsequently unveils towers that are 300 feet taller. The FAA soon shoots down that height, so he quickly dials back to a somewhat lower height. Chiofaro cannot be that stupid, knowing the history of the FAA previously imposing height limits on towers near Logan and its runways, that he would naively propose a project that would run afoul of the FAA limits. (Back in the Spring of 2008, Chiofaro ought to have noticed that the FAA shot down Tommy's Tower because of its proposed height.)

Since building International Place, which he started circa 1981, Chiofaro has built no other building in Boston. He's bid on other development sites, but has always lost out; e.g., I think he most recently was interested in helping the Hook's develop their lobster shack. So the question becomes, is he a one-trick pony? (Albeit, International Place has turned out very nicely IMO, and has aged wonderfully as the skyline has changed around it.)

My sense is that Menino and Chiofaro do not like each other. These are two prickly paisans, irascible and difficult. Chiofaro's offer to pay $50 million was hollow; he knew that Menino could never accept it, its a quid pro quo bribe.

Finally, I frankly think Chiofaro doesn't really expect to build his tower(s). Rather, he is desperate to get something big approved and permitted so PREI (Prudential Real Estate Investors) can sell the garage and the permits to some other developer for the $155M they paid for it. In today's depressed market, the garage is probably worth half that. No other developer can find the money to build a tower in Boston these days, and there are some with much deeper pockets than Chiofaro, and who haven't pissed off their peers in the real estate community like Chiofaro has. Chiofaro has a reputation for aggressive pricing and being tough to deal with. Tenants aren't going to be doing him any favors. So where is Chiofaro and PREI going to find the financing?

In March, the downtown Boston commercial office vacancy rate was described by the Fed as a "soft 16 percent". So there'll be no financing for commercial office towers until that rate comes down a lot, or a developer is fortunate enough to find tenants to pre-lease much of the new space.
 
There have been a lot of good arguments made on this thread that I think a sensible person would agree with, the question is who should we try to have hear them. Who can put pressure legitamit pressure on menino? Maybe Duval is the guy to try, or representatives and senators (both within the state and in DC). We need people of Menino's caliber to ever prevent this shit from becoming actual policy.
 
This is a photo from today's San Francisco Chronicle showing San Francisco's 'Greenway', actually the Embarcadero, near the Ferry Building.

dd-peterpan20_ph_0501358880.jpg


Is there a space on the Boston Greenway that could be used for a show like this?

Peter Pan needs room to move - up to the clouds and 400 miles out across London to Neverland. To create this fly space took two hours Thursday. A crew of Englishmen working mechanical hoists, bolstered by local muscle, grabbed the top of a white tent and raised it 100 feet, to the level of the eighth floor on the Four Embarcadero Center office building that stands behind it.

A hundred feet is all the ceiling needed because Pan does most of his flying at the behest of 12 projectors that will rim the stage and supply computer-generated imagery. When "J.M. Barrie's Peter Pan" opens April 27, audience members in their seats will take to the air right along with the Darling children, Wendy, John and Michael. The tent has no interior poles to block the sightlines as its walls become a panorama of London in the 1800s.

What goes around ...

The performance is in the round, returning to a concept not seen on this scale since the Circle Star Theater in San Carlos closed 17 years ago. The Threesixty Degree Theatre seats 1,350 in 14 rows of risers. The stage is 8 feet off the ground to allow a whole world of busy technicians to work underneath it, popping props and puppets and cast up through the floor.

Tent, crew and cast were brought over from London, where the play received its world premiere in 2009 and ran for 22 weeks. It took 27 containers to ship all the gear to Ferry Park, a city-owned patch of grass across from the Ferry Building and just north of Justin Herman Plaza. The park has been fenced off for the duration of the production, which will be at least 18 weeks and at most who knows.....

So far, 23,000 tickets have been purchased for the show, and that is without publicity other than banners on the chain-link fence that surrounds the park. The tent will serve as its own advertisement, 150 feet in diameter, visible from the Bay Bridge.

"We looked at several locations, all over the country," said Butters. "When we got here, we looked around and said 'perfect.' The story feels like it's right in San Francisco"

It will take the crew six more weeks to prepare the site. The concession tent has already been erected, and when the show opens, there will be a proper English tea service every afternoon at 3 p.m. There will be a decked-in food court, souvenir clothing and a free display of 100 years of Peter Paniana.

The tent is waterproof, though Butters claims it won't be a concern. He has been promised by San Francisco officials that there will be no rain until October. He has heard about the summer fog. "That's why we are selling fleece."
Click to expand...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/03/20/DD1R1CHBF0.DTL
 
Sorry Deval as in Deval Patrick the current govenor of massachusetts.. He must have some say in things regarding Boston, especially when the mayor is hell bent on minimizing new tax base. Although maybe the Greenway could have Robert Duval be the sherif of that prarie land.
 
stellarfun said:
Finally, I frankly think Chiofaro doesn't really expect to build his tower(s). Rather, he is desperate to get something big approved and permitted so PREI (Prudential Real Estate Investors) can sell the garage and the permits to some other developer for the $155M they paid for it. In today's depressed market, the garage is probably worth half that. No other developer can find the money to build a tower in Boston these days, and there are some with much deeper pockets than Chiofaro, and who haven't pissed off their peers in the real estate community like Chiofaro has. Chiofaro has a reputation for aggressive pricing and being tough to deal with. Tenants aren't going to be doing him any favors. So where is Chiofaro and PREI going to find the financing?

In March, the downtown Boston commercial office vacancy rate was described by the Fed as a "soft 16 percent". So there'll be no financing for commercial office towers until that rate comes down a lot, or a developer is fortunate enough to find tenants to pre-lease much of the new space.
Click to expand...


I think Chiofaro and pru have every intention in building this project. Remember they probably have more at stake than the city making the Greenway worth the value. The only way the Greenway will work in this area is a development of this magintude. 625ft is not that big compared to other cities. I also believe Chiofaro factoring in on giving the city 50 Million part of the development costs . Why would you write a letter to Menino asking him for an extra 200 or 400ft.

The Commercial Vacancy is defintely a problem so would be interesting how Chiofaro handles that. My bet is he wouldn't build without a bluechip tenant. I think this type of development would not suffer like Filene's or Fan Pier. Aquarim area already has the pedestrian traffic.

I really have a problem with the BRA and Mayor on this one.
 
Hi all, I'm brand new to archboston and enjoy reading the greenway thread. There is so much misinformation going around that I signed up and wanted to set a few things straight:

1. Everyone seems to be forgetting that all of the sites along the Greenway are (and have been for decades) already zoned much lower than the Greenway District Planning Study is proposing. In that regard, the BRA and the mayor are actually promoting very tall towers at many places along the Greenway, like near Dewey Square, at Government Center, etc, where they are not permitted today. Even the Harbor Garage site is getting an upzoning so quit whining about how the BRA and Mayor are punishing Don Chiafaro. Besides, the state law (Chapter 91) on that site is so strict it practically doesn't matter what the city says. The state will have a field day with a coupe 600+ foot towers on that site. Never Happening. And it won't be the BRA's or the Mayor's fault. So please get your regulatory facts straight before you start opening fire on the city.

2. Chiafaro has stated publicly that he DOES NOT have the money to build the project. He stated at a recent public meeting that all he has is the "pre-development equity" for the project, which is a couple of million bucks from Prudential to go through the permitting process. Again - NO MONEY FOR CONSTRUCTION. So where's he gonna get he $50 million he pledged to the city?

3. Everyone here seems to be forgetting that the Greenway is already surrounded by tens of millions of square feet and thousands of residents. Even if Chiafaro were allowed to build his monstrosity, that would add what, less than a million more SF of office and 120 luxury condominiums. Like 120 more rich people are going to make a lick of difference to the Greenway. Why toss zoning out the window and set a terrible precedent for the entire waterfront just to get another 120 NIMBY snobs living down there?

4. Chiafaro decided he was going to pay $150+ mill for a site assessed at about half that (something like $80 mill). Why should the city reward that kind of overt real estate investment stupidity by bailing him out and allowing him to exceed the existing zoning by 400% and existing FAR regulations by 700%? Real Estate is a risky business, let those who make bad investment decisions suffer the consequences, just like any businessperson.

Just a few thoughts to set the record straight for all you who seem to think that the BRA's Greenway Study is a terrible planning document that will single-handedly set Boston back 50 years on the world stage. Please check your facts before you make such ridiculous and uninformed assertions.
 
If you are going to call someone a moron make sure you know the difference between "your" and "you're" first.
 
TheRifleman said:
You should do your research but you have to love the fact that Menino is giving a billion dollar insurance company tax breaks? (Liberty Mutual) Why because they are involved in the FAN PIER project backed by developer FALLEN. You see my friend this is all politcal.
Click to expand...

That sounds rather conspiracist. The real reason according to a Herald interview with Ted Kelley is that Boston is simply too damned expensive to do business in and accordingly they were bought off to stay in town. Otherwise, as Kelley says in that article, they'd be breaking ground anywhere but Boston. I think that sounds a bit more plausible than the Fan Pier-Fallon-"it's all political!!!" kooky talk. It's the same thing that happened with J. P. Morgan and will continue to happen in the future unless the state and city are willing to take a hard look at the tax, regulatory and permitting structures and make some changes to make Boston appear somewhat attractive to businesses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top