Developers are seeking approval for a $190 million, mixed-use project on 13 acres of land along Clippership Wharf in East Boston.
It remains to be seen whether the community will come aboard, but the developers of East Boston’s Clippership Wharf have finally set sail on their quest to gain regulatory approvals for the $190 million condominium project.
After several previous efforts failed to yield fruit, the latest proposal calls for 400 market-rate units on the 13-acre parcel. Along with four buildings ranging in size from five to seven stories, the complex would include a parking garage for 670 spaces and a variety of retail and other commercial uses. The development team, Noddle Island LP, is a partnership of Winn Development Corp. and the Related Cos.
Noddle recently filed an Environmental Notification Form with state officials that offers a detailed explanation of the project. Among other things that they claim “will have a positive impact on the quality of water resources in the project vicinity,” the developers note in the ENF that a just-passed master plan for East Boston “specifically envisions” residential units at Clippership Wharf.
“Housing is an economically viable, environmentally sound, and community-supported use for this transit-served urban site at the core of the Boston metropolitan area,” Noddle officials state in their filing.
While that may be the case, advocates of public access to the waterfront say they are concerned that such a project could blunt efforts to keep Boston Harbor open to everyone. Although Noddle officials insist that maintaining public access is important to the property, Vivien Li of The Boston Harbor Association says the project at present fails to meet the minimum standards for so-called “facilities of public accommodation” as called for in the state’s Chapter 91 regulations that monitor waterfront development. FPAs include everything from restaurants and retail stores to museums and community meeting rooms.
Li said the plan provides nearly 30 percent less FPA space than is required by state law. The nature of the development makes that especially worrisome, Li said.
“We have never said that we are fixated on a percentage, but what we are fixated on is to make sure that [a waterfront] site is activated,” she said. With Clippership Wharf, Li noted, “You have the potential of having a fairly private enclave of luxury housing.”
‘A Long Time’
Were Noddle’s proposal more commercial in nature, such as an office building or hotel, it would serve to attract people, Li said, but a residential use tends to do the opposite. Because TBHA’s Harbor Use Committee is slated to meet with Noddle this week, Li said she would reserve judgment for the time being, but did stress that “there’s still a lot of work left to do.”
Project representative Carol Gladstone insisted that Noddle will provide the full amount of FPA required, although some of it may be located on private tidelands versus Commonwealth tidelands. The reason, Gladstone said, is the configuration of the property and a desire to bolster retail uses along Lewis Street, where a pedestrian mall is planned.
“We are trying to balance two good objectives,” said Gladstone, who pledged to work with TBHA and other groups to iron out any differences.
TBHA is calling for the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act office to extend the ENF’s comment period past the current deadline of mid-August, with Li explaining that many of the residents and community groups that traditionally would weigh in on the Clippership matter are on vacation. Li said she is hopeful that the comment period will continue at least into September.
Boston City Councilor Paul Scapichcio said he believes the complexities of the site and a desire to keep the size of the buildings as low as possible might require compromises on the FPA issue, perhaps allowing Noddle to open up other areas of the parcel to offset any shortcomings elsewhere. “If you just stick to Chapter 91 strictly, nothing would get done,” he said.
Scapichcio said the developers’ willingness to work with the community during the past two years should also be taken into account, noting that Noddle principal Roger Cassin and Gladstone have regularly attended East Boston civic meetings to obtain input about the project and the neighborhood.
“For the most part, we’re pretty happy with the project the way we see it today,” he said. “They’ve done their homework and continue to do their homework.”
East Boston is also eager to see some sort of development occur in the Maverick Square area, Scapichcio said. After years of economic struggles, the neighborhood is in the midst of a resurgence, with plans to overhaul the square itself, renovate and reposition the public transportation stop there and to continue revitalizing the waterfront. Along with Clippership Wharf, a New Jersey company is proposing an upscale mixed-use development on the adjacent Pier One, a decrepit wharf currently owned by the Massachusetts Port Authority.
Clippership Wharf has seen a number of concepts come and go since developer Edward Saxe initially floated the idea of a 370-unit condominium project at the parcel, one which gained city approvals in 1989 just as the condominium market was collapsing amidst a sea of overbuilding and the economic recession. The proposal was later revived in 1997 when the Beal Cos. placed the property under agreement, but the firm was stymied in its attempt, supposedly because it felt the Chapter 91 requirements were unworkable.
One common denominator that continues with the latest concept is the architect, CBT/Childs Bertman Tseckares, which worked for Saxe, Beal and now Noddle. Principal Richard Bertman, whose firm also designed the successful Piers Park in East Boston, acknowledged last week that the firm is eager to see something tangible emerge from its latest design.
“It has been a long, long time,” Bertman said.
