Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

dshoost88 said:
I know all the talk has been about GE going to the Seaport, but is there any possible way this site would be in consideration for the GE HQ?
Click to expand...

GE wants to be fully in its new HQ by 2018. No tower at Winthrop Sq would be ready, and a tower doesn't have the floorplate you want for an Innovation Lab.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

stellarfun said:
GE wants to be fully in its new HQ by 2018. No tower at Winthrop Sq would be ready, and a tower doesn't have the floorplate you want for an Innovation Lab.
Click to expand...

The CIC at 1 Broadway and 101 Main St. Might disagree somewhat.

20,000 sf floor plates of open space are fairly big and conducive still to innovation/collaboration .
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Every time I see this thread near the top, my heart flutters in the hope that there is real news here. So sad.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

REAL NEWS! But it's not positive:

Globe: Sale halted again of Winthrop Square Garage

The Boston Globe said:
The saga of the Winthrop Square Garage has taken another twist, halting efforts of Boston officials to sell the dilapidated municipal garage so that it can become one of the city’s largest real estate developments.

A longtime critic of Boston’s development process filed a complaint alleging that City Council held secret meetings and violated the open meeting law when it voted in December to approve transferring the garage to the Boston Redevelopment Authority. The critic, Shirley Kressel, filed the complaint Jan. 4 with the state attorney general.

[...]

Kressel is trying to block the transfer of the garage to the redevelopment authority because she fears the proceeds from the sale of taxpayer-owned land will go to the quasi-public agency. City councilors had an agreement with the redevelopment authority stipulating that the money would go to city coffers.

Eight big-name developers have expressed interest in building a skyscraper on or near the site. Kressel contends the property is worth $200 million; the city has said the land is worth $70 million.

[...]
Click to expand...
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

jeeeeez
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

I started reading that thinking "damn nimby" but reading to the bottom I realized there may be a legitimate concern. She may just be blowing the whistle on what she sees as corruption.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Jouhou said:
I started reading that thinking "damn nimby" but reading to the bottom I realized there may be a legitimate concern. She may just be blowing the whistle on what she sees as corruption.
Click to expand...

Jouhou -- Shirley Kressel aka "Shik" has never been known to favor anything -- she is not a NIMBY -- who can be reasoned with under some circumstances

No -- Shik is a BANANA -- Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Shirley point is why didn't it go out for public bid. Its a valid point.
Why is everything an INSIDE deal?

Then give GE, Fallon, LibertyMutual, JPM all these tax incentives to build. Anything this State Govt does is like Backwards.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

The objective of the City in selling an underutilized City owned parcel is not just to maximize the $ gained in the sale. It is to maximized the value created for the entire city in the redevelopment of the parcel.

I guess you can call City of Boston to BRA an "insider" deal, in a snarky kind of way. But it is basically a City to City Agency deal with a clear beneficial intent. My understanding is that the BRA has the ability to maximize the development potential of the garage, though a PDA, which a private sale makes more complex (or perhaps not doable). So by transferring the parcel to the BRA, the City is fulfilling its function of maximizing value creation by helping to ensure maximum development potential for this parcel in the center of the Financial District.

Who benefits, we all do.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Equilibria said:
Also, you're right about the one-engine-out being the initial height restriction. The radar issue is an additional, lower ceiling that was imposed on Chiofaro for the Harbor Garage site (and so far only on him, AFAIK - it's never come up for any other project). The 780' ceiling on the Winthrop Square site was imposed by the FAA due to one-engine-out, not radar.
Click to expand...

The issue with Chiofaro's tower was radar coverage, which IIRC could be alleviated by Chiofaro building the FAA a secondary radar in an offset position that would fill the gap in coverage created by his tower(s).

Very similar to Rosslyn VA, where the FAA said no more towers, not because of one engine out, but because of radar coverage problems of planes coming down the Potomac River.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

^Could alot of the height restraints in the city be alleviated with a much taller control tower at logan?
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Suffolk 83 said:
^Could alot of the height restraints in the city be alleviated with a much taller control tower at logan?
Click to expand...

I don't believe that is the issue. It is mostly engine out glide paths (emergency access back to the airport, after, for example a bird strike right after takeoff). Also, those glide paths are sometime used for very fast approaches for planes with medical emergencies (I was on one a few year ago that did that, a totally unheard of high speed approach directly over Back Bay and Downtown.)

And some issue of radar coverage, which could be helped by someone paying for radar relocation.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Suffolk 83 said:
^Could alot of the height restraints in the city be alleviated with a much taller control tower at logan?
Click to expand...
I think it would be significantly cheaper to install a secondary radar at an offset location than a new primary radar on top of a taller tower. I actually think you would have to build a whole new tower, as you couldn't take the primary radar off-line.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

stellarfun said:
The issue with Chiofaro's tower was radar coverage, which IIRC could be alleviated by Chiofaro building the FAA a secondary radar in an offset position that would fill the gap in coverage created by his tower(s).

Very similar to Rosslyn VA, where the FAA said no more towers, not because of one engine out, but because of radar coverage problems of planes coming down the Potomac River.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? Chiofaro Tower only would block all airplanes from landing if he was allowed to build a 600ft+ tower.

I would think that a congress st tower would cause more radar coverage issues than Harbor Garage Tower which is already surrounded by 400,600ft towers around.

What is the obsession with Chiofaro? Just curious? This ain't even the Harbor Garage Blog.

Your a fucking idiot with an agenda on this site to make such stupid comment up above.
Every Tower would cause sometype of adjustment for the FAA: Bottom-line
Welcome to the city, LA, NYC, San Fran, Chicago have all figured it out.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

TheRifleman said:
Are you serious? Chiofaro Tower only would block all airplanes from landing if he was allowed to build a 600ft+ tower.

I would think that a congress st tower would cause more radar coverage issues than Harbor Garage Tower which is already surrounded by 400,600ft towers around.

What is the obsession with Chiofaro? Just curious? This ain't even the Harbor Garage Blog.

Your a fucking idiot with an agenda on this site to make such stupid comment up above.
Every Tower would cause sometype of adjustment for the FAA: Bottom-line
Welcome to the city, LA, NYC, San Fran, Chicago have all figured it out.
Click to expand...
As you seem to be a fount of great knowledge, you should readily understand this image. The radar issue with respect to Chiofaro's proposed tower is an azimuth one, related to elevation of the plane / helicopter. Perhaps you would care to explain it to the board.

radar-techniques-primer-principles-apr-1945-qst-1.gif


From October 29 2009, B&T
The FAA's letter, released today, requests additional substantial cuts [to Chiofaro's tower]. It says any height above 407 feet "will result in a substantial adverse effect" to air navigation.
Click to expand...

Emphasis mine.

Rosslyn and radar (December 2007)

The FAA warned in its advisory that any further tall-building development in Arlington could interfere with radar coverage, posing a "cumulative and unacceptable impact on radar performance."
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122702154.html

____
And while you are at it, you can explain to the board how azimuth affects the Winthrop St garage site differently than the Harbor garage site.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

TheRifleman said:
Shirley point is why didn't it go out for public bid. Its a valid point.
Why is everything an INSIDE deal?

Then give GE, Fallon, LibertyMutual, JPM all these tax incentives to build. Anything this State Govt does is like Backwards.
Click to expand...

Redevelopment authorities typically are exempt from state mandated land and lease procurement laws for acquisition and disposal if the land holding is part of a redevelopment plan approved by the municipal legislative body.

If this land was held by the BRA, and was part of a redevelopment plan approved by the City Council, that is the why. (I say "if" because I don't know who owns what or if there is an approved plan. Seeing some of the past legal and custody gyrations, I have wondered whether those in charge have connected all of the dots.)
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

In the immortal words of Michael Kinsley: "the scandal isn't what's illegal, the real scandal is what's legal"
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

lapradetom said:
Isn't this the same woman who abruptly resigned from her post, after a fight with the city over some other project?
Click to expand...

Checked other thread, no that was Kathleen Ryan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top