Widett Circle Development, so it begins.

BronsonShore said:
Widett is extremely accessible. It's minutes away--by foot--from two of Boston's densest neighborhoods, two red line stations, the silver line, and the ink block. Deck Cabot Yards (as the city has discussed before,) restore the street grid, connect Southie to the South End, and build the neighborhood from there. This is literally a hole in the middle of the city that, with the right vision, can be transformed into a neighborhood filled with people who walk to work in the Financial District, Seaport, or Back Bay.
Click to expand...

...which they can't get any developer willing to pay for! This was the fatal blow to Boston 2024, and it appears it's going to be the fatal blow to getting anything remotely mixed-use done here, too.

Decking is expensive. But rather than try to leverage the ground-level transit storage angle for all the potential underwriting value it's worth (acknowledging that it's going to add many up-front years before they can feasibly build on the deck), short attention-span theatre continues reigning chasing low-effort quick deals. This is what you get for that relative lack of discipline: prime real estate getting eaten up by a warehouse that's ideally better-positioned at a highway junction in Randolph rather than chewing scenery in the CBD.

Look...it's not that there was any lack of warnings that failure to execute this with dynamic vision and coalition-building was going to lead to a great disappointment. You get what you pay for: compromised effort leading to a great big whiff.
 
Last edited:
I think a bunch of people are going to be against an amazon warehouse at that location, including myself. But if it is able to go forward its going to be interesting what amazon does with the traffic flow as it has to change from its current form. Most people probably have no idea how much of a mess it is to get in and out of Widett, depending on which direction you're going. It wont work for amazon as currently constituted.
 
BronsonShore said:
RED ALERT!!! RED ALERT!!

The Globe reports that this site could become . . . an Amazon warehouse. This would be a disaster and doom long-term efforts at intracity connectivity. This needs to be stopped.
Click to expand...
I really don't understand the prevailing belief on this forum that the developer here is drawing up plans in a bubble and ignoring the value of this land for rail operations. Is there any evidence of this? The Globe article explicitly says that Keravouri, MassDOT, and the T are "in discussions" and that MassDOT does "appreciate the land owners' willingness to work with us." The logical conclusion seems to me to be that the developer has been in talks with the T on this since day one, but those talks take a long time!

Amazon works on a MUCH shorter timeline than the T (like, months versus decades). Amazon could put up a warehouse on this land, use it for many years, and then tear it all down before the T is able to move forward on any long-term plans. Distribution warehouses -- even fancy new ones -- are basically disposable, and can be a great short-term stopgap while working on longer term plans.

There's also really no reason why it can't hold both private industry and expanded T facilities. That's obviously possible with decking, but this site is so big (900k+ sf) that it could work even without decking.
 
JumboBuc said:
I really don't understand the prevailing belief on this forum that the developer here is drawing up plans in a bubble and ignoring the value of this land for rail operations. Is there any evidence of this?
Click to expand...

Uhh...the original sale being hatched bang-bang as a mixed-use narnia with dev & BDPA hand-waving away that they hadn't even thought of the flood-proofing logistics of one of the scariest flood-risk sites in the city? That kind of evidence?

What we're seeing now is the *most* inevitable self-fulfilling prophecy of drawing up doodles in a bubble. Yes, it was always obvious they'd have to involve MassDOT. But backing into it in a series of short-term ploys nets lower-leverage planning than if they'd been doing coalition-building up front like their lives depended on it. This drawn-out whittling down effect is the end result, and it was as predictable as the fiefdoms involved.
 
I would basically agree with the premise that any dry distribution center is basically temporary land use; they simply are cheaply built, and given the MBTA/MassDOT/FTA planning horizon, probably a better choice than something less easily replaced, once the surrounding area fills out enough to justify touching this area for anything other than train storage. Widett is *so* isolated from any connections to surrounding neighborhoods (and those areas are still industrial in character) that I would expect it to stay industrial for a good while longer. Hell, the only way you can get there is via a one way 93 frontage road; not exactly walkable as it stands now. Once the areas opposite Southampton Yards, the cabot air rights and between BMC and Newmarket build out, then I can see a case for mixed use here.

But a question: Widett / food mart obviously once had rail freight service; there's still track and abandoned railcars on satellite view. Would I be correct in assuming that, this far into the terminal district, there's no way that any distribution center here could be intermodal?
 
Last edited:
F-Line to Dudley said:
Uhh...the original sale being hatched bang-bang as a mixed-use narnia with dev & BDPA hand-waving away that they hadn't even thought of the flood-proofing logistics of one of the scariest flood-risk sites in the city? That kind of evidence?

What we're seeing now is the *most* inevitable self-fulfilling prophecy of drawing up doodles in a bubble. Yes, it was always obvious they'd have to involve MassDOT. But backing into it in a series of short-term ploys nets lower-leverage planning than if they'd been doing coalition-building up front like their lives depended on it. This drawn-out whittling down effect is the end result, and it was as predictable as the fiefdoms involved.
Click to expand...
Again, I'm not so sure that this "coalition-building" you speak of hasn't been happening behind the scenes. The public releases on this have been few and far between. We simply don't know the full details of the plans, and I don't understand how posters are so confidently stating that T and MassDOT uses are being ignored.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
This is what you get for that relative lack of discipline: prime real estate getting eaten up by a warehouse that's ideally better-positioned at a highway junction in Randolph rather than chewing scenery in the CBD.
Click to expand...

I don't trust your word on that over Amazon's... they seem desperate for a south-of-the-Charles distribution center to match Revere.
 
JumboBuc said:
Again, I'm not so sure that this "coalition-building" you speak of hasn't been happening behind the scenes. The public releases on this have been few and far between. We simply don't know the full details of the plans, and I don't understand how posters are so confidently stating that T and MassDOT uses are being ignored.
Click to expand...
A surprise sale-drop excluding statements from those crucial coalition partners, developer talking out one side of mouth about grand plans then admitting he has no idea what land use is feasible because stuff like funding stream-dependent flood mitigation plans were flat-out not thought of, months of total radio silence from everyone, then a downsized switcheroo to not-much-different land use than before strongly suggests a less-than-robust coalition process. We don't need insider-ball tells to get a picture that this is proceeding in something a lot less than organized fashion. It's showing its face accordingly. There's more outlying evidence for process disorder than there is for double-secret super order. These players aren't stealthy enough to do it that way.
 
Equilibria said:
I don't trust your word on that over Amazon's... they seem desperate for a south-of-the-Charles distribution center to match Revere.
Click to expand...
And this has...what?...to do with the developer promising mixed-use, the BDPA jumping head-first to facilitate one of the largest land-transfers in City history, and then the opacity of this process being punctured by a total reversal?

Huzzah for Amazon...they fill a niche for a massive underpay because the developer abandoned the pretense of any zoning change. This has nothing to do with them. It has everything to do with why public institutions were so damn hot to grease the skids for yet another privileged developer without ensuring any follow-thru on the upzoning, on a slab we were told for years just *had* to be upzoned. If it's because upzoning is tough here, why were they in such a hurry to take the dev's overhype in the first place?

Amazon's urban warehousing needs have zilch to do with that question.
 
As if this development site hadn't already been farcically Bostoned enough in the first place (as F-Line exhaustingly if not lovingly details), I'll point out that this thoroughly odious backstory also includes this fine piece of ZBA-induced melodrama... which apparently precipitated this knee-jerk maneuver by The Octopus.

As a wise man once observed: be more cynical.
 
Shirley Leung joins the fray,
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03...5615983&s_campaign=todaysheadlines:newsletter

Shirley's long 'we can do better than Amazon' epistle does not promote an alternative use of the site. She takes a shot at Michelle Wu for blocking a more cohesive and larger development solution for Widett with Wu's objection to moving the city's public works garage.

Of the three other supposed finalists besides Amazon, one is probably Fedex / UPS / or another warehouse company that has a large profile in Southie, i.e., Pappas Way, E St. Summer St. Moving a logistic operation from that area would free up land for re-development. So a potential positive.

As for the life sciences company, I can't think of a single company searching for a 20 acre parcel near the heart of downtown as the site for a 3-5 million square feet building complex. If one were, the tax revenue would be more than enough to tease an okay from the city.

As for a huge biomanufacturing facility, my guess would be a facility that needs to be near the airport because the bioproducts being manufactured must be shipped quickly to other manufacturing sites, and/or the reagents/'ingredients' (such as lipid nanoparticles) being used in the manufacturing are shipped by air. Speed is essential. The Biden Administration is apparently prioritizing development of domestic biomanufacturing sites, and reducing dependence on outside sources such as China.
 
stellarfun said:
Shirley Leung joins the fray,
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03...5615983&s_campaign=todaysheadlines:newsletter

Shirley's long 'we can do better than Amazon' epistle does not promote an alternative use of the site. She takes a shot at Michelle Wu for blocking a more cohesive and larger development solution for Widett with Wu's objection to moving the city's public works garage.

Of the three other supposed finalists besides Amazon, one is probably Fedex / UPS / or another warehouse company that has a large profile in Southie, i.e., Pappas Way, E St. Summer St. Moving a logistic operation from that area would free up land for re-development. So a potential positive.

As for the life sciences company, I can't think of a single company searching for a 20 acre parcel near the heart of downtown as the site for a 3-5 million square feet building complex. If one were, the tax revenue would be more than enough to tease an okay from the city.

As for a huge biomanufacturing facility, my guess would be a facility that needs to be near the airport because the bioproducts being manufactured must be shipped quickly to other manufacturing sites, and/or the reagents/'ingredients' (such as lipid nanoparticles) being used in the manufacturing are shipped by air. Speed is essential. The Biden Administration is apparently prioritizing development of domestic biomanufacturing sites, and reducing dependence on outside sources such as China.
Click to expand...
I love how jaded we are about distances in Boston. Widett is closer to Logan than virtually any real world biotech manufacturing facility is to almost any other airport. It is less than 5 miles/8 minutes away via the South Boston Bypass road, avoiding 93 traffic issues.
 
stellarfun said:
Shirley Leung joins the fray,
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03...5615983&s_campaign=todaysheadlines:newsletter

Shirley's long 'we can do better than Amazon' epistle does not promote an alternative use of the site. She takes a shot at Michelle Wu for blocking a more cohesive and larger development solution for Widett with Wu's objection to moving the city's public works garage.

Of the three other supposed finalists besides Amazon, one is probably Fedex / UPS / or another warehouse company that has a large profile in Southie, i.e., Pappas Way, E St. Summer St. Moving a logistic operation from that area would free up land for re-development. So a potential positive.

As for the life sciences company, I can't think of a single company searching for a 20 acre parcel near the heart of downtown as the site for a 3-5 million square feet building complex. If one were, the tax revenue would be more than enough to tease an okay from the city.

As for a huge biomanufacturing facility, my guess would be a facility that needs to be near the airport because the bioproducts being manufactured must be shipped quickly to other manufacturing sites, and/or the reagents/'ingredients' (such as lipid nanoparticles) being used in the manufacturing are shipped by air. Speed is essential. The Biden Administration is apparently prioritizing development of domestic biomanufacturing sites, and reducing dependence on outside sources such as China.
Click to expand...


Again with the "single" company/plant view. Why can't it become SEVERAL plus many housing components? I'm not following the idea being presented that whatever gets done in Widett Circle has to be some sort of monolith.
 
shmessy said:
Again with the "single" company/plant view. Why can't it become SEVERAL plus many housing components? I'm not following the idea being presented that whatever gets done in Widett Circle has to be some sort of monolith.
Click to expand...
I take the Widett developers description of the four entities with whom negotiations are underway at face value:

In a statement, Keravuori said his group is “considering a range of uses,” including “light industrial, life sciences and transit,” and is talking with city and state officials about what might work.

“We are currently studying what is feasible to achieve at the site,” he said.

Rob Griffin, head of capital markets at real estate firm Newmark, who is working with developers on the project, said negotiations have narrowed to four potential users. He declined to name them, but said two are logistics companies — a broad category that includes warehousing and shipping and could describe Amazon — one is a life sciences firm, and one would build a biomanufacturing plant..

“There is no deal in place with anyone at this point,” Griffin said. “We’re entertaining all four offers.”

A year into a pandemic that has lessened the appetite to build office towers and urban apartments, Griffin said it’s no surprise that logistics and life sciences companies are the most likely tenants. Both sectors are red-hot, he said, and use similar kinds of space: large, low-slung buildings that would fit in a place like Widett Circle.
.....
Developer John Hynes, who had previously worked with the food wholesalers, said the Widett site presents challenges for a mixed-use project because of its inaccessibility.

“The only way that works is with a massive infrastructure investment to create access points in and out of the site,” Hynes said. “There’s only one way in and one way out.
Click to expand...

If the life sciences "firm" was Alexandria or BioMed, I think the phrasing would be different, like 'co-developer'. And I don't know that an Alexandria or a BioMed engage in joint development partnerships; they have enough capital to fly on their own.
 
Last edited:
Coalition of environmental groups, including CLF, send a letter to the mayor and city council expressing concerns about potential redevelopment / flooding of Widett Circle:

www.bostonglobe.com

Environmental groups criticize potential development of Widett Circle because of flooding issues - The Boston Globe

A coalition of more than 15 environmental advocacy organizations, led by the Charles River Watershed Association, sent a letter to Mayor Martin J. Walsh and members of the City Council on Tuesday, expressing concerns about tidal flooding in the low-lying Widett Circle area.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
 
Ah yes the CLF... everyone's favorite NIMBY organization. I like how the solution to the problem of flooding is never careful mitigation with drains and elevation but instead "make it a big open park".

That's it folks. We should just tear down Boston and make it a fucking park. I hate these people so much.
 
meddlepal said:
Ah yes the CLF... everyone's favorite NIMBY organization. I like how the solution to the problem of flooding is never careful mitigation with drains and elevation but instead "make it a big open park".

That's it folks. We should just tear down Boston and make it a fucking park. I hate these people so much.
Click to expand...

I'm no fan of the CLF, but re-establishing coastal wetlands is a good way manage sea level rise and coastal flooding. It's why there are huge parks in the middle of both Cambridge Crossing and Suffolk Downs.
 
meddlepal said:
Ah yes the CLF... everyone's favorite NIMBY organization. I like how the solution to the problem of flooding is never careful mitigation with drains and elevation but instead "make it a big open park".

That's it folks. We should just tear down Boston and make it a fucking park. I hate these people so much.
Click to expand...

I say more parks, fewer pie-in-the-sky visions of decking industrial zones. With that cost, do you really think the resulting build-out would benefit anyone but a handful of corporations and investment-driven buyers?

The CLF is not a perfect organization, but the strident "development first, logic second" voices on this board - many attached to people with real influence on future planning - prove that the CLF is a necessary voice in the discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top