I think the news regarding Seaport Square is basically new ownership of a vacant parcel.
Skanska/Twining are the new owner.
This project itself has been announced and BRA-approved multiple times over the past 5 years by the prior owner, most recently in 2011, with renderings published each time it was announced. Nothing has changed besides ownership... correct?
"“The Innovation District provides one of the most exciting opportunities for development in Boston in many years and we are eager to contribute to this area,” said Shawn Hurley, vice president and regional manager for Skanska in Boston. “The plan for a mix of uses will allow for creation of a dynamic neighborhood where people will want to live, work, and play.”
The building by Skanska and Twining will also have 25,000 square feet of retail space on the ground floor, enough for several restaurants and shops.
Twining has been involved in the larger Seaport Square project since 2007, advising Morgan Stanley on the 2.85 million square feet of planned residential space. Its project with Skanska will be among the first buildings to break ground in the massive project, which will also include several other residential buildings, offices, a hotel, parks and community spaces.
Twining has also been involved in the development of Kendall Square in Cambridge -- including the 321-unit Watermark Cambridge project and another residential building next door. Its projects brought six new restaurants to that area.
Skanska started worked last fall on its first local development at 150 Second St. in Cambridge, where it is building a laboratory building. "
I think the news regarding Seaport Square is basically new ownership of a vacant parcel.
Skanska/Twining are the new owner.
This project itself has been announced and BRA-approved multiple times over the past 5 years by the prior owner, most recently in 2011, with renderings published each time it was announced. Nothing has changed besides ownership... correct?
I think you are correct.
Here is a decent diagram, props to John Keith:
http://www.bostonreb.com/2008/05/the-beauty-that-is-seaport-square/
As for ownership, Seaport Square largely represents McCourt's former holdings across the board. I'd guess that even the existing Our Lady of Good Voyage parcel (building slated to be demolished) and the land occupied by the MBTA headhouse were both in McCourt's portfolio of land holdings. McCourt donated Childrens Museum park to the Childrens Museum on his way out.
Correct with one major caveat.
With VC funding no one gets to leave town with a payoff until a product is built.
On the contrary, in Boston, a lucky landowner leaves town with a payoff, having built NOTHING. The last owner who develops the building, in this case Skanska/Twining, has the slimmest of margins to fulfill all the BRA-approved obligations.
I've reminded you of this issue a number of times, whighlander. It's a mystery why you continue to insist there's so much risk involved when NOTHING is built. A vacant parcel was flipped and the beneficiary walks away -- in many cases the beneficiary leaves town.
Do VC's get to cash out before a single customer order is fulfilled?
I know you don't want to believe it -- but there really are no sure things --- Think of McCourt himself -- after everything has transpired -- what will he have to show for all his activity?
500 Million to 700 Million liquid. Mr. McCourt is the either the luckiest guy on the planet or he actually is very bright.
Just look what is going on with the Dodgers right now.
Riff -- Not to get into the muck of his personal life -- But it seems quite possible that when Mrs. McCourt and all the attorney's are paid that Mr. McCourt might end up just with the parking lots next to Dodger Stadium
McCourt had a couple of decades to enjoy living atop the house of cards. If you take two guys who end up with nothing, which is better off? The one who always had nothing, or the one who for a time had huge amounts of something?
"Just" 180 acres next door to downtown LA.
With beautiful veiws of downtown (on clear days), the Santa Anna Mountains, and the Hollywood hills on 2 other sides. Not a bad patch of land.
During my time working with the McCourt Group out in LA, I saw some ideas for that land, that could end up making him a very rich single man.
The Dodgers property is a phenomenal piece of property.
McCourt could not only get the record $1.5 billion he was looking for, but possibly $2 billion and still own the parking lots.
He always was, and perhaps always will be, the parking lot king.