Seaport Neighborhood - Infill and Discussion

[Boston02124]

Re: South Boston Seaport

Co-sign

Also: Here is the Southie thread:

MacAllen II and all things South Boston

Thanks ^

 

[Sicilian]

Re: South Boston Seaport

^KentXie

"Planning" is not development. "Planning" is planning.

Current budgets have nothing to do with it.

Aspirations, expectations and obligations to achieve the highest potential of the land have everything to do with it.

So when you state, "I do believe that the Seaport will need a school or library" you are in agreement with me. That statement is in contradiction with the BRA's position that it is no longer planning for civic sites and spaces to be developed commensurate with the commercial projects anticipated over the next half-century.

 

[HenryAlan]

Re: South Boston Seaport

Not sure what the answer to this is, but maybe planning for libraries and schools are not considered to be the job of the BRA?

 

[Sicilian]

Re: South Boston Seaport

Really? I'd like to know how libraries, schools, community centers, police and fire stations, etc. get built without long-term planning as part of a comprehensive vision. Especially when all property is private property, and the City's only leverage is in its awarding of new density above what the property owner purchased.

Certainly, the BRA suggested it was responsible for ensuring the development of civic uses when they placed a moratorium on Seaport development in 1998 to engage in a multi-year planning process, and their own consultants made clear that civic uses were an important component of the rezoning.

Unfortunately, for the past 5 years, the BRA has been handing out variances on a parcel by parcel basis. Agreements which hand over significant new density call for NO civic uses.

Does anyone believe the developer/owner of Gehry's tower in NYC simply volunteered to build a public school? Or, maybe it was just the Mayor and some NIMBYs that insisted on the relocation of an existing hospital?

 

[TheRifleman]

Re: South Boston Seaport

Really? I'd like to know how libraries, schools, community centers, police and fire stations, etc. get built without long-term planning as part of a comprehensive vision. Especially when all property is private property, and the City's only leverage is in its awarding of new density above what the property owner purchased.

Certainly, the BRA suggested it was responsible for ensuring the development of civic uses when they placed a moratorium on Seaport development in 1998 to engage in a multi-year planning process, and their own consultants made clear that civic uses were an important component of the rezoning.

Unfortunately, for the past 5 years, the BRA has been handing out variances on a parcel by parcel basis. Agreements which hand over significant new density call for NO civic uses.

Does anyone believe the developer/owner of Gehry's tower in NYC simply volunteered to build a public school? Or, maybe it was just the Mayor and some NIMBYs that insisted on the relocation of an existing hospital?

The only correct way to let Seaport grow and evolve. Is Zone the entire area according to Massport & FAA. Get rid of the BRA and the Mayor needs to step out of the picture. Let this evolve, It might start off small like MOM & POP stores but as time goes on and no interference from the city. I'm sure Seaport would end up working out over time. It would probably be very unique the first 20 years. Then the corporations would start to move in.

The city should have a plan for the future with some schools and libraries in the area. Besides that the city should only keep the area clean and maintain it. It's not the city's job to tell which company's should be down in this area or create special tax breaks for the innovation district. The Financial district looks like SHIT these days.
I'm against tax breaks 90% of the time. In this instance if a major corporation wanted to relocate from some other part of the country or world I would defintely consider covering their moving costs in some form of tax breaks.

The only way to build up Seaport right now is a major corporation or sometype situation like FENWAY park relocating. But this doesn't mean it will be a success. Vertex could work out for the area but I don't agree with the strategy they used 72 Million in tax breaks to relocate from Cambridge.

Just look how Cambridge evolved. And now the city of Boston is trying to steal what Cambridge has acomplished by competing city to city? For the Massachusetts taxpayer this deal makes know sense. For the Mayor and his boy Fallon this a big payday.

What most people don't understand about GOVT spending it doesn't work.
You can jam billions of dollars into an area. If the area does not know how to generate revenue and make income then the area will go bust Long-Term. It might look good for 10 years but the trend will go to shit because it won't be able to maintain itself.

Just my theory. I also predict Vertex will be bought out in the future.

 

[Beton Brut]

Re: South Boston Seaport

...maybe planning for libraries and schools are not considered to be the job of the BRA?

Correct assumption. The BRA is supposed to function in the role of economic development. Or so I've been told by my city councilor...

Really? I'd like to know how libraries, schools, community centers, police and fire stations, etc. get built without long-term planning as part of a comprehensive vision.

I believe each entity (the BPS and the BPL) has its own strategic plan.

I'm not suggesting that the model in place is an intelligent one. Indeed, I believe it wastes money and resources, while allowing each disparate agency/department/bureau to function as a nourishing hive for patronage jobs. Welcome to Massachusetts (The Democratic People's Republic of FAIL).

Here's a larger question, perhaps off-topic: If the city were to build state-of-the-art elementary and middle schools in the Seaport, does anyone believe that this would attract new residents with school-aged kids? Would residents of Southie-proper pitch a fit because they're not getting the new schools on their side of the tracks? Does anyone remember the Mayor's reaction when a private school was proposed (or merely suggested) as part of (IIRC) Seaport Square?

 

[Sicilian]

Re: South Boston Seaport

Correct assumption. The BRA is supposed to function in the role of economic development. Or so I've been told by my city councilor...

Incorrect assumption. Most reasonably significant American cities have a planning department that functions sometimes at odds with the economic development department since long-term objectives don't always mesh with short-term objectives.

Boston had two separate departments, BRA (planning) and EDIC (economic development), until the two were merged during a real-estate bust in the 1970's.

Does anyone remember the Mayor's reaction when a private school was proposed (ore merely suggested) as part of (IIRC) Seaport Square?

Yes. Not that I supported the objection to the Hynes school proposal, but that proposal was for a private school. There is a big difference between considering a neighborhood with a private school and one with a public school, particular where affordability is an issue.

I wish people would stop making excuses for the status quo. With a step up in planning, zoning, and our own expectations to match our investment in Boston as taxpayers, we could see some exciting projects take root.

 

[Beton Brut]

Re: South Boston Seaport

I make no excuses, my friend. The world is a chess match, and we're governed by folks who are challenged by tic-tac-toe.

Demand more, or expect less.

And you're right on the private school -- I should have made that distinction.

 

[Sicilian]

Re: South Boston Seaport

I hear you Beton Brut. I just have a hard time with pragmatism

Seeing the Gehry project reviewed in New Yorker really riled me. There's no reason we shouldn't expect projects of that caliber all over this town. The property owners have made profit hand over fist seeing their land improved by $$$ billions in public taxpayer infrastructure and appeals for variances to support 2-3 times the density they purchased. All of that value has been sucked out of the Seaport and is leaving town.

 

[statler]

Re: South Boston Seaport

I think it's demand more and expect less.

But I'm a pessimist.

 

[KentXie]

Re: South Boston Seaport

The only problem I have is the quality of the schools. I rather not construct a new "shitty" school if we could better use those funds to improve existing one. Boston hasn't exactly been sleeping when constructing schools with both Orchard Gardens and Mildred Avenue School opened in the previous decade.

Plus there's that one that's proposed for Congress St Garage.

 

[TheRifleman]

Re: South Boston Seaport

I think it's demand more and expect less.

But I'm a pessimist.

The demand would be there the problem is Boston has become a political risk for outside developers and corporations. Too much corruption going on.

 

[statler]

Re: South Boston Seaport

I think the problem is that too many people are demanding we suburbenize Boston and they are getting what they want. Too few people want what most people on this board want, so even if we were to speak up and be heard, nothing would change. It's a simple numbers game. Politicians listen to the masses who get them elected, not the fringe elements like us.

 

[Sicilian]

Re: South Boston Seaport

Statler, you may be right in Back Bay and other districts of Boston where NIMBYs rule, but not in the Seaport. Seaport property owners have been handed approvals for significant density (given FAA caps) and they generally get what they want.

In my opinion, they have been allowed to suck the Seaport dry of the value spent in taxpayer funded improvements by gaining approvals for vast amounts of new density without being required to build projects on the caliber of a Beekman Tower (or even a mini-Beekman stump). If people want to argue with me that One Marina Park Drive and Atlantic Wharf stretched the property owners thin, prove it... I think I'm on firm ground to suggest that these property owners ? particularly those that secured the original approvals from the BRA, made out like bandits and skipped town.

 

[statler]

Re: South Boston Seaport

I'm not willing to give the developers a pass on the shitty development/big box buildings going up in the Seaport, but I still say the super wide roads, open space requirements and auto-centric layout is simply built into our planning DNA from years of city-wide, suburban-minded NIMBYism.

No one is innocent in this mess, city or developers.

 

[TheRifleman]

Re: South Boston Seaport

I'm not willing to give the developers a pass on the shitty development/big box buildings going up in the Seaport, but I still say the super wide roads, open space requirements and auto-centric layout is simply built into our planning DNA from years of city-wide, suburban-minded NIMBYism.

No one is innocent in this mess, city or developers.

I think sicilian said it right. Seaport has been gutted. Given a developer a free pass might not even matter. The numbers just don't make sense anymore. The BRA & the Mayor sucked this area dry like vampires with their backroom zoning deals. They had to persuade a biotech with 72 million in tax break to move in Fallon's Vault.

I still think if Boston can grow it's profitable private sector The Seaport could evolve if left alone. I would give the developers a free pass they really can't do any worse than what has been built over the last 2 decades in this city under the planning process by city officials. We might even get some pride in building quality skyscrapers.

 

[statler]

Re: South Boston Seaport

^^Only if that's the most profitable way to build.

blah, blah, Houston Argument, blah, blah.

 

[Sicilian]

Re: South Boston Seaport

blah, blah, Houston Argument, blah, blah.

LOL. Guilty as charged. I know we've all been down this road before.

And I do agree with your "DNA" point above.

 

[GW2500]

Re: South Boston Seaport

Not sure if I'm feeling the subsidies, but if it does go through, I'd hope it could be a cool 1000 room hotel w/ character!


Boston.com
http://www.boston.com/business/arti...oposes_convention_center_hotel/?p1=News_links

A state panel is considering construction of a 1,000-room hotel next to the Boston Convention & Exhibition Center that would require $200 million in public subsidies.


Tweet 2 people Tweeted this
Yahoo! BuzzShareThis

The hotel is part of a larger expansion under review by the state panel, one that would double the exhibition and meeting space at the South Boston facility, at a total cost that could run to $2 billion. The panel has not yet estimated how much public aid the expansion of the convention center itself would require.

Officials involved in the planning said the hotel, estimated to cost about $640 million, is needed to help the city grow into one of the nation?s top meeting destinations. They said the largest business meetings and trade shows are bypassing Boston because there are too few hotel rooms within walking distance of the center.

?We?re losing business, plain and simple,?? said James Rooney, head of the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority. ?Over the last three years alone we?ve competed for 46 events that have told us they can?t come to Boston because we don?t have enough hotel inventory.??

Boston has 1,700 hotel rooms within a half-mile of the convention center; its ultimate goal is 6,000 rooms. That would still leave Boston with fewer rooms than its major competitors: Orlando has 10,800 within a half-mile of its facility, while New Orleans, Atlanta, and Philadelphia each have more than 8,000 rooms. Rooney and other officials said the authority can finance some of the hotel by issuing bonds, but a gap remains because larger institutional in vestors that traditionally back such projects are reluctant to invest. In the last 10 years, only two hotels with more than 700 rooms were built in the United States without public assistance, according to Piper Jaffray, a financial services firm advising the state-appointed panel reviewing the convention expansion. Both were in New York City.

The panel suggested the $200 million funding shortage for the Boston hotel could be eliminated by offering tax breaks, subsidized loans, state grants for infrastructure, and other assistance to induce investors or developers into the project. Officials have yet to identify an operator for the hotel, but have winnowed its location to two sites: One is across the street from the convention center, the other at its western edge, closer to the Fort Point neighborhood.

The panel, appointed by the governor and state and city officials, is expected to release recommendations next month. The goal is to put Boston among the top five convention cities in the United States, as measured by the number of large events each facility hosts. It currently is ninth, behind cities including Las Vegas, Chicago, and New York.

Any expansion ? and public subsidies to pay for it ? would need approvals from the city and state governments.

But critics said the absence of private funding for the hotel is a clear warning there won?t be enough business to support it. The convention center, built with substantial public subsidies six years ago, received millions of dollars from the state in its early years to cover operating deficits, and to pay for construction of the adjacent Westin Boston Waterfront hotel.


?When do we stop digging??? said Charles Chieppo, a critic of expansion who owns a Massachusetts-based public policy research firm. ?There is no market for this. It becomes this ?trust me? kind of thing where everything is squishy and subjective. But the bottom line is, the demand isn?t real.??

But convention officials argue the new center has been a net benefit. While it?s received about $120 million in subsidies in six years, it has also generated more than $160 million in taxes, according to the authority. Moreover, the fund that collects convention-center related revenues was able to give the state $65 million in fiscal 2009 to help the government with its budget problems.

However, Boston is pursuing expansion at the same time as many other US cities. Earlier this month, Philadelphia completed a $787 million expansion that doubled its exhibit space, posing a direct challenge to Boston in the Northeast market.

At least 16 other cities have expanded recently or are pursuing new projects. Dallas and Washington, D.C., are each building hotels of 1,000 rooms or more; Nashville is building a new convention complex and 800-room hotel; and San Diego, New Orleans, Miami, and San Antonio are also considering expansions.

Some industry specialists said there will be a surplus of convention space that will leave Boston and other cities fighting over dwindling revenues to pay off huge expansion debts. In 2009 a convention hotel in St. Louis fell into foreclosure, while authorities that financed facilities in Phoenix and Baltimore saw their credit ratings suffer.

Rooney acknowledged that the market is saturated with space, but he argued Boston has proved an effective competitor and must grow to maintain its advantage. Since its opening, the convention center has generated $3 billion in overall economic activity, Rooney said, and exceeded performance expectations in several categories. For example, he said, the facility produced $123 million in revenue from events between 2005 and 2010, when the estimate for that period was $52 million.

?I agree that there are a lot of other cities that never should have gotten into this. Those cities are not doing as well as Boston,?? said Rooney, ?but their troubles are not a reason for us to pack up our bat and ball and go home.??

Even critics said Rooney has been effective running the convention center the past several years and has put Boston on the map in a highly competitive business. But they said other performance measures raise questions about the wisdom of expansion. Many cite a 1997 feasibility study by the state that predicted the facility would generate some 670,000 hotel room stays by 2009; but the authority said it generated 313,000 room nights by that year. Rooney said the 1997 study was done at a time when the industry was booming and it assumed more hotels would have been built in Boston.

Officials involved in the planning are far from a consensus on financing and other matters, with some saying that the debate will intensify in the coming months.

?We still have a lot of work to do before we make recommendations,?? said Samuel Tyler, president of the Boston Municipal Research Bureau and a member of the panel studying the convention expansion. ?In my mind we?re just getting to the point of talking about these issues.??

 

[kz1000ps]

Re: South Boston Seaport

Judging by the fact that we haven't heard jack s*** about the hotel proposed for the teardrop site in years, I'd have to side with the investors.