Gov. Baker and Mayor Walsh this morning announced plans to redevelop land now occupied by a MassDOT office building - originally built for Wang Labs - and a steam plant near South Station into up to 2 million square feet of space for housing and other uses.
At a press conference this morning, Baker said the 5 1/2-acre project at 185 Kneeland St. would also include land owned by Veolia, which runs a steam-generating plant at the site; the company would replace the current large plant with a smaller one.
Baker said the proposal would make a great city even greater by doing something constructive with an underused parcel.
"I never really understood why any of our assets are open space, tall grass, beer cans and burned out automobiles," Baker said.
Mayor Walsh said the project would further help re-knit a city split apart by the construction of I-93.
State Transportation Secretary Stephanie Pollack said the state and city will seek community input on just what to do with the land before advertising RFPs from developers. The first public meeting on the parcel is 6 p.m. on Wednesday, March 2, in the first-floor conference room at 185 Kneeland St.
She added that part of the proceeds from any bid would be used to relocate the MassDOT offices now in the building.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
.
By boo_urns
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:22am
This isn't for 185 Kneeland St., is it?
Yes, it is
By adamg
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:26am
Thanks, will add that in.
Well then...
By boo_urns
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:32am
This is the District 6 HQ for the DOT. Kind of surprising....they've spent the past 3-4 years renovating the entire building starting from the 10th floor, down. Seems like a silly investment for the building if it was only going to be renovated into housing units....
On the other hand, it also seems odd they'd move from that location. It's such a central spot for that district, which serves Boston, Cambridge, Chelsea, and points south to Milton. Then again, I never understood a lot of the rational that gets used at the DOT.
I'm just surprised, honestly.
Hey they just rebuilt and renovated...
By Marco
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:02am
....the Mattapan Trolley too and now they plan on ripping it up. Nothing says "government waste" like tearing down/apart recently rennovated infastructure.
REBUILD THE BIG DIG!
DEBT TILL 2200!!!
I seriously doubt that DOT
By roadman
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:00pm
is driving (no pun intended) this proposal. Baker's going right from the Republican playbook with this one. Because goverment use of land and buildings is wasteful, but selling the land to private developers is beneficial.
Wasteful use of land
By Ron Newman
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:32pm
MassDOT's occupancy of the building is not "wasteful", but the parking lot surrounding it certainly is. Keep the building, sell off the parking lot for development.
Actually, no.
By Rob
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:47pm
Actually, no.
A lot of the highway district engineering, operations, maintenance and construction personnel operate out of district HQ. They need to be able to come in and out, and access work vehicles.
Contractors and consultants come in and out, too.
Now, if you want to say "build a tower on top of the parking lot but make sure you set aside two-three stories of parking deck for DOT parking" - that might make sense.
Yep...
By boo_urns
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 2:37pm
As far as I recall, this lot is filled on a daily basis, with the exception of the designated visitor spots in the front of the building. Additionally, out back there is a gated loop where there is a landfill. Visitors can park out back there. As far as I know all of the other spots are assigned to the folks who are employed from that building.
That's still a wasteful use of downtown land, though
By Ron Newman
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 3:29pm
so redeveloping the land while keeping the building (perhaps with different occupants) makes sense.
What's the deal on the
By kvn
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 2:26pm
What's the deal on the Basketball court nearby , along side the X-Way ramp? That seems a tad out of place.
It's a neighborhood park -
By Rob
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 2:38pm
It's a neighborhood park - mostly Chinatown, provided by the Turnpike at some point. I don't know if it was a land swap for Big Dig ramps or what. DOT inherited the arrangement.
no joke
By Marco
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 4:16pm
you can buy whatever the hell you want there after dark. THATS the deal....
Maybe
By boo_urns
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:24pm
But during my time there, and at DOT HQ up the road, both places seemingly had plans to move to new locations. This dates back to when Patrick was in office. There are 10 floors at the D6 office and they weren't using all of them. I believe the State originally got the building in eminent domain after Wang had, um, moved on, for lack of better wording (not sure what exactly when down in the history books, personally). I was on a floor that was up for renovation that was currently holding down tons of new furniture for the renovated floors. There were two other people on the floor and we had our own offices. Greenway employees also operated out of the space. It was pretty clear that the building's capacity wasn't being completely utilized, but it served as a very good central location for the district.
Even at HQ, there had been plans to move out to somewhere else, I believe Dudley Square was a potential location for their offices.
I'm not about to start playing the game of which party is driving this agenda, personally.
I recall that this was Big Dig headquarters
By Ron Newman
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:33pm
while that project was going on.
That is correct
By roadman
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 2:48pm
When the state took over the building from Wang, they had both the managing consultant and all the sub consultants for the Big Dig move in there. At one point, there was a combined MassHighway/Big Dig logo on the side of the building where the Wang logo used to be. MassHighway's oversight staff on the project was split between HQ at 10 Park Plaza and the office building at South Station.
Once the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority took over responsibility for the project, they downsized the consultant presence in the building and moved their Big Dig adminstrative staff there. As the Big Dig was winding down, the building transitioned to headquarters for the Metropolitan Highway System staff. After the MassDOT merger in 2009, the MHS now comprises the majority of District 6.
Then again, I never
By Rob
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:04pm
This wasn't the DOT's idea.
Must be.
By TiminCharlestown
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:32am
That's my guess too. It's an interesting spot for housing development. CLose to the leather district, which has some decent restaurants (Bel Ari is awesome, check it out, I have no interests or relationship with anyone there.)
But it's surrounded on three sides by highway access ramps, on one side by Kneeland Street. Not to mention the bus station.
I can see wanting to develop the land, I'm just surprised that its for housing. Hope they have very soundproof windows and walls!
Are Bostonians
By ChrisInEastie
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:26am
actually going to be able to afford this, or is it just going to be for GE transplants?
I don't
By TiminCharlestown
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:33am
think too many GE transplants from CT are looking for housing surrounded on three sides by highway access ramps and a bus station for next door neighbors.
Good question though on how much affordable housing there will be.
All housing in the city is
By anon
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:39pm
All housing in the city is affordable. The people living there can afford it or they would be gone. Maybe if you are a liberal arts major you should live elsewhere until you grow up and get a real job
Thank you for that illuminating reply, Dr. Pedantry
By adamg
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:45pm
Yes, technically, every owned unit is "affordable." That you choose to ignore that the word has a very specific, and legally binding meaning in the context of Boston housing development suggests you're looking for the argument room. It's down the hall.
It's unfortunate that the
By Refugee
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:54pm
It's unfortunate that the term "affordable housing" has been appropriated in Boston as the label for income restricted units. At least capitalize it as "Affordable" to distinguish it from the generic use of the word.
And, technically,
By whyaduck
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:05pm
all jobs are "real" because they are jobs meaning someone, somewhere is performing duties that are associated with what they call "a job". Which makes its exist and thus the job is "real". The hourly rate one may make doing "a job" really makes no difference.
It's too bad
By TiminCharlestown
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:36pm
that the archetypal internet comment writer doesn't live and surf the web elsewhere until he or she becomes a semi-decent human being.
Also, I went to a liberal arts school and you probably work for me.
"Affordable" is the modern
By anon
Wed, 02/10/2016 - 9:26am
"Affordable" is the modern replacement for rent control and government housing projects. Government socialists can't get away with outright rent control anymore and realize "the projects" are stigmatizing and counterproductive so they invented a subtler and more obfuscated way of doing essentially the same things.
Make noise about it now.
By Boston_res
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:41am
Attend those public input sessions and voice this concern. If we all just stand by and watch it happen nothing will change.
GE is only going to employ
By Baker-Christie 2016
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:42am
GE is only going to employ about 600 people, so even if they all moved in here it wouldnt fill it. Plus, given the fact that GE wants a new car bridge and a parking garage built by taxpayers for their new office, it seems like most will be living in the burbs.
They will be "affordable"
By BullDetector
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:48am
Studios will start at $2700 and go up from there.
I certainly hope this isn't another apartment building.
By Boston_res
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:55am
Low end market rate condos are badly needed. All the current apartment developments are just creating a transient population.
"Low end market rate condos"
By Refugee
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:19am
"Low end market rate condos" what does that mean? Anything close to downtown is going to be so expensive that formica countertops would not lower the price by much.
Granite counter tops and stainless steel aren't the only costs
By Boston_res
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:44am
A lot of the luxury units have doormen, private parking, gyms, pools, free tenant parties, activity rooms (with pool tables, large screen TVs, bars, couches), lounge areas, dog walking, package delivery, internet, offices...there are far too many perks to list. Those all add to the overall cost of rent.
An apartment building without the above listed perks can have lower-end market rates. I can easily see apartments in the $1600 range without having to pay out for all of the amenities.
Maybe...
By LN
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:01pm
Most of those perks are nice, but don't actually cost that much compared to the basic action of putting up a new building in an urban area. Recreation rooms are often areas that they couldn't monetize as a unit anyway because they are interior rooms without good access to light, ventilation, etc. These are ultimately just cheaper ways to appeal to prospective buyers and tenants than, say, building larger units. Pools might be an exception, as I understand they are pretty expensive to build and operate. But there are only a handful of new downtown buildings that have pools. (And those that I have seen are basically just shallow water-features...)
But the real issue with condos in particular is that they are worth whatever the market thinks they are worth, regardless of the cost to build. In this location, I suspect units without the perks you mentioned probably wouldn't trade that much lower than units with the full ensemble. Someone could probably do some market research (or share anecdotes) looking at renovated/smaller condo buildings downtown to see how their prices compare to units in full-amenity buildings.
Take a look at all of the units being built downtown
By Boston_res
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:57pm
Go through their Google images. Their rec rooms aren't interior rooms. They are nice rooms with large outward facing windows. One building downtown even has an indoor pool with skylights.
Ummm, no
By anon
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:05pm
My building that has none of the above amenities and isn't anywhere near the downtown core has one bedroom units going for around $1600-1700/month - there's no way in hell you can get those prices in a new construction downtown, no matter how cheaply made the building might be.
There is a building in planning in the range I suggested
By Boston_res
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:51pm
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/04/28/bo...
re: Granite Countertops and stainless
By BullDetector
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:35pm
Perhaps you can give us a breakdown on that $1600 and how you can "easily see apartments" in that range.
How much was paid for the land?
How much was paid to build the building?
How much is the monthly mortgage on the loan?
How much is the insurance on the building?
How much is the monthly utilities for the public area?
How much does the elevator maintenance cost?
How much does landscaping/snow removal cost?
How many people on staff maintaining the building?
How much is the monthly water and sewer bills?
How much are the yearly taxes on the property?
They all have to be factored into the rent, don't they?
It can be done.
By Boston_res
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:50pm
Did all of you forget about this:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/04/28/bo...
The devil is in the details
By BullDetector
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:00pm
The apartments aren't really affordable. They are just partly paid for by others not living in the units.
This:
By Boston_res
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:21pm
"The apartments aren't really affordable. They are just partly paid for by others not living in the units."
Is exactly how I view Airbnb.
I'm confident housing can be built for all income levels in the city. Will it be easy? No, not at all. But it will be worth it even if only attempted.
I have no clue what that means
By BullDetector
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 1:33pm
Im confident I can get dinner at Del Frisco's steak house tonight
(As long as somebody is else is paying for 60% of my meal)
That's cute and all
By merlinmurph
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 2:05pm
Actually - no.
The cost of something has very little to do with what one charges for it, especially when it comes to something as fluid as rent.
An apartment could cost 10 bucks to build, but if the landlord can get $5000/month for rent he'll do it.
Conversely, if a landlord would have to charge $5000/month to break even, but the market is soft and he can only get $2000, then he charges $2000 - or doesn't rent it out.
Amen , but people will never
By kvn
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 3:03pm
Amen , but people will never acknowledge such until they take their own hard earned dough, forgo some personal consumption , and invest into that which everyone has an opinion of but no clue to how the actual nuts and bolts connect.It all falls under the umbrella of Other People's Money is other people's problem.
It is better to use this
By anon
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 10:51am
It is better to use this prime real estate for housing, offices that will generate maximum taxes. We will get some affordable units. Use the tax money to improve our schools and improve transit.
I'm not sure if many
By eastiesveryown
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:00am
I'm not sure if many Bostonians are going to be able to afford this( at least non professionals) but any housing being built is a plus due to a massive shortage of housing going back more than a decade.
The Greater Boston Housing report card is a must read to understand our housing issues. A few key points below.
"prosperity brings its own challenges. None is more acute than the region’s severe housing crisis. Vacancy rates are now so low that home prices and rents are being bid up substantially faster than most household incomes. As a result, many longtime residents of the region, in addition to many newcomers, are facing a severe affordability gap between their incomes and what they must pay to rent housing or purchase a home. Prices and rents are rising so quickly that not only are the poor in trouble, but an increasing number of working and lower middle income families worry that prosperity may price them out of the Boston housing market.
Those words written in 2000 are just as valid today
in 2015."
"The New Paradigm report analyzed the supply and demand gap for housing and concluded that Greater Boston would need to produce approximately 7,200 additional new units per year— a total of 36,000 units above current production levels— if supply were to match demand. Otherwise, prices and rents would continue to escalate faster than household and
family incomes."
Professionals
By anon
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 12:07pm
Still can't afford anything unless we're talking lawyers or doctors pulling in six figures. $2000 that will get you a run-down rat trap slightly larger than a shoe-box is half of a $75,000 salary monthly take-home check.
Greater Boston Housing Report
By eastiesveryown
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:03am
Greater Boston Housing Report Card! Please read, as a lifetime Bostonian it helped me understand our housing issues.
http://www.tbf.org/~/media/TBFOrg/Files/Reports/GB...
We need more housing yesterday
By LN
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:07am
Chinatown has a great NGO community that will help advocate to set aside a large percentage of units as affordable housing. The One Greenway project next door is a great example, where almost 40% (!) of the new housing units in that building are income restricted somehow.
And even though much of the market-rate housing will be relatively expensive (construction costs are high, and this is downtown we are talking about), adding this many new units will help take the pressure off of skyrocketing rents in the region. (Which will help the vast majority of people in MA who make too much to qualify for income-restricted housing but don't own a Rolls Royce)
Or we can do nothing and become San Francisco, where we just let ALL of our existing housing stock become so expensive that the entire city is only affordable to corporate executives. I don't think either of us want that to happen.
One Greenway isn't affordable.
By Boston_res
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:18am
66 Hudson is affordable. The two are the same building. The developers went out of their way to put the affordable entrance on the opposite corner of the building.
"Poor door"
By LN
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:38am
Interesting--it's odd that the "poor door" issue caused such a flurry of rage in NYC but not here!
At least we are creating long-term affordable housing units in the neighborhood. People with different incomes living cheek-by-jowl is a fine idea, but I'll settle for block-by-block if it means a diverse overall neighborhood. Although I do understand the opposite point. The values displayed by going out of the way to create a separate entrance are not the best.
Interesting--it's odd that
By Rob
Tue, 02/09/2016 - 11:33pm
It's caused a flap here.
A few years ago, a developer got a deal to build near Broadway Station by including lower-income units along with market rate units. He included them by putting them in another building - all the way over near E and 2nd!
Pages
Add comment