Columbus Center team wants $50m in public aid

Developers of Columbus Center, the residential, hotel, and retail project to be built over the Turnpike between the South End and Back Bay, say they will seek loans and other public assistance totaling more than $50 million.

''This project is like building a Swiss watch," said Roger M. Cassin, partner in charge of WinnDevelopment, developer and co-owner of Columbus Center. ''What's critical is to nail down the last bits of public financing, and then we start construction."

News of the increase dismayed David Mundel, a neighborhood activist who has studied the financial numbers that have been made public on the project.

''They said the project would provide several public benefits," said Mundel, who has worked to oppose the project. ''They never mentioned that providing it would involve the public paying for it. This is nonsense." The project, approved by the city but disputed because of its size, has zoomed in cost from $388 million to almost $600 million in 2 1/2 years. But the market value of the project also has gone up during that time, as property values have increased in the city, and estimates of the taxes it will yield to the City of Boston have simultaneously escalated, from $5 million to $9 million a year.

Private financing has been secured, according to project executives who last week outlined about $30 million in low-interest housing loans, state economic stimulus money, and deferments on city tax payments that they are seeking. But interviews with the developer and an examination of financing plans show they hope to lean more heavily on public subsidies than they have said.

Cassin said the project, which was delayed for a year while complexities related to building over the Turnpike and railroad tracks were resolved, cannot proceed without much of the assistance he is seeking.

Public help for such projects is routine, Cassin said, and was part of the financing plan from the beginning.

Opponents of the project in its current form disagree.

Cassin acknowledged he didn't broadcast the fact that he intended to seek public assistance, but said he never ruled it out.

Help from city, state, and federal sources sought by the developers breaks down this way:

A $16 million combined forgiveness of city and state taxes, through so-called tax-increment financing, over a 20-year period.

$15 million in low-interest state loans to help build 44 condominiums in the affordable range -- 10 percent of the project's total on-site residences.

Up to $15 million under the federal New Markets Tax Credits program. The developers say they may not qualify and have not yet applied.

$4.3 million in state economic stimulus funds, now being considered in the Legislature.

$3 million in federal and city funds to build or improve roads, utilities, a rainwater recovery system, and other basic elements.

That total, though upward of $50 million, is dwarfed by the more than $550 million of private equity being put in, and debt being taken on, by the investors, Cassin said.

He and a team of public relations specialists cite a list of other projects that won similar help. They include Copley Place, also over the Turnpike, and the Clarendon, a $200 million mixed-use project next door to Columbus Center that is being developed with $70 million in federally issued, tax-exempt bonds for affordable housing.

Cassin noted that the so-called Civic Vision for the Turnpike air rights, drawn up in 2000 by the city and public representatives, stated that subsidies should be considered to help defray the heavy cost of building over a highway.

But neighborhood activists who fought a long battle to keep Columbus Center from being so big -- 1.3 million square feet in four buildings, including a 35-story tower -- say the subsidies are not justified.

The project was so controversial that more than 100 often contentious public meetings were held before the project was approved in 2003.

A development consultant analyzed the project's finances to certify to a citizens' group that it was only as tall and dense as it needed to be to cover its costs and provide a reasonable return to the investors.

''She never included in any analysis she presented any impact of public grants or public subsidies," said Mundel. ''There was no justification then. There is no justification now."

The consultant, Pamela McKinney, did not respond to a request for comment.

Thomas C. Palmer Jr. can be reached at tpalmer@globe.com.