Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

bostonplans.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 413 posts

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#131

Post by ezfe »

natdempk wrote: post #106
MildRant wrote: post #5

I think this is fantastic. Boston desperately needs more housing. Let's get some increased funding for the T as well while we are at it.

I will probably get sniped by someone who actually knows what they're talking about (please correct me if I'm wrong :D), but my impression of the T issues is less a funding issue, and more a competency/corruption issue. We're building above-ground rail at underground rail prices for one example problem.

It's certainly a mix of both, but the T has been underfunding maintenance and repair work in favor of the big capital projects that are demanded of it. That is a funding issue, even if there are many more issues to add to that.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#132

Post by 1986 »

eagleinparadise wrote: post #123
jimt1234 wrote: post #85

I'm confused. Why is this program necessary? If building owners are sitting on vacant space because the demand for office space has dropped, while the demand for housing continues to rise, aren't they already incentivized to convert to residential space just based on the market conditions? Not sure why the city has to subsidize the property owners.

Most office buildings are not architecturally feasible to convert to residential. In fact, because of zoning laws, many/most can't even be converted. Would you live in an apartment 15 feet wide and 50 feet deep? No. That's why most office buildings dont work You have to redo all the mechanical, plumbing, electric, and then entirely refinish the building. Its literally cheaper to build new than deal with the nightmare…

> Would you live in an apartment 15 feet wide and 50 feet deep?

Isn't this basically a railroad?

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#133

Post by maximinus_thrax »

steveBK123 wrote: post #9
lusus_naturae wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends. If everything is owned by the same management or equity firm, then no.

Sure less owners is bad for competition, but more supply itself creates competition in a sense. Let's say theres 100 apartments in the entire town, and they are all owned by the same company. Next let's say they build 50 more apartments and theres now 1000 apartments still all owned by the same company. Given the number of apartments has increased, renters now have more power to negotiate as the owners have more unit…

> Let's say theres 100 apartments in the entire town, and they are all owned by the same company. Next let's say they build 50 more apartments and theres now 1000 apartments still all owned by the same company. Given the number of apartments has increased, renters now have more power to negotiate as the owners have more units they need to fill.

Unfortunately, that's not what is happening on the ground. In my town, they've built hundreds of units over the past years and rent has gone up. The building facing mine was newly built and I went there to see if I can score some deal and they did not budge at all. Half the building was kept empty for about a year, until the new generations of tech workers moved to the area to occupy them.

It's a numbers game but not the way you think. It's often more lucrative to lose money in the short term but still keep rent expensive for the future. This is why owners are being sued right now for price fixing by using Realpage. See https://mynorthwest.com/3719431/property-owners-accused-of-p...

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#134

Post by spywaregorilla »

mrDmrTmrJ wrote: post #98
bee_rider wrote: post #78

How is Boston doing nowadays, overall? As an Masshole, but not a city one, I’ve always kinda admired the job they do in Boston. At least, you don’t get the big dramatic narratives about it crumbling, like California cities, and NYC seems to be a bit boom-bust. Boston seems to always be doing fine. The Big Dig was a ripoff but that was ages ago, and the T smells like piss but that’s par for the course, right?

Fun fact - The Big Dig can pay for itself if they ever toll on 93 like they do the Mass Pike

The Big Dig does pay for itself. Despite being horrendously overbudget and overdue, it still works, and it's more valuable than what was put into it. It was a poorly managed success.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#135

Post by zarathustreal »

eagleinparadise wrote: post #119
thinkcontext wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Office space rents for more per SQ ft than residential, so landlords have incentive to keep it vacant in the hopes that markets come back.

I work in CRE - anyone reading this completely disregard this silly comment. it is laughably stupid

In other news: internet rando calls other internet rando an idiot! Fails to recognize irony! More at 11pm.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#136

Post by spywaregorilla »

menus wrote: post #92
Arrath wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing says that banning general commuter cars also means banning handicapable public transit, cabs, or specialty medical transport though.

The original comment did not specify that. It may be obvious to you or me but not to most people. Advocates for improved cities need to understand that are less likely to receive pushback if they are clear and concise from the get go.

The original comment was a single sentence, not a thorough advocate proposal.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#137

Post by spywaregorilla »

Our new office building in boston (Winthrop Center) is doing something I thought was interesting. It's got residences on the upper floors above the office spaces. I hadn't seen that before.

They're grossly luxurious mind you, but it was still interesting.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#138

Post by binarymax »

My first job out of university, was a dotcom company called ZEFER. They had an amazing 2 floors of loft building in the old Boston leather working district on Beach St.

I hadn’t been back to Boston in years until this past October, and stayed in a hotel near by.

One evening I walked past the office, which are now high end condos.

I’m sure they were crazy expensive. I loved that part of town, and walking around I saw lots of empty commercial space available. How wonderful it will be to have it teeming with life. That part of the city is glorious, and I’m sure many people will enjoy living there, hopefully at reasonable prices.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#139

Post by seanthemon »

afavour wrote: post #84
HWR_14 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that would convert space really badly. If you're making 10'x10' rooms out of a 100'x100' space, it's 74% dead space. If a floor is more than 10,000 sq feet, maybe 40,000 sq feet, it goes up to to 90%. I mean, numbers are made up, but the point holds.

I’d be interested to see people get really creative with it. Throw a gym in on one floor. Cinema room on another. Storage units in a few more. Probably difficult to structurally support a pool on a floor not already designed for one but sure, let’s throw one in there too. A kids playroom is maybe a little depressing with no natural light but it could work. Hell: keep the middle commercial space and put a grocery stor…

Sound like what inevitably happens to my Sims games, just start filling in those gaps

Dance floor #3? Make it happen!

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#140

Post by SoftTalker »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #111
mlyle wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know your numbers are made up but presumably an apartment is much deeper than 10'. You'd want to make it as narrow and deep as practical. 20x45'? 25x36'? I get that you get (almost) twice as many apartments (presuming you don't build up higher), but you also get a massive and complicated one time cost. It surprises me that it could ever be worth it.

I call this the Chicago layout -many apartments are long and narrow. I have assumed it was to ensure access to two fire escapes. To hazard a guess, I have seen some that might only be 15’ wide, supporting a 10x10 room with a hallway to access it.

Chicago lots are long and narrow. Typical Chicago residential lot is 25x100 or so. Street in front, alley in the back, garage if you have one is a separate building fronting the alley. Many houses are built as "two flats" or "three flats" i.e. two or three houses stacked on top of each other.
Post reply on HN