Cambridge Crossing (NorthPoint) | East Cambridge/Charlestown | Cambridge/Boston

type001 said:
Could you please point me to where you read this?
Click to expand...
Rough estimate based on what they're advertising as available, some back of the envelope math - I got roughly 750k/1.1sqft at 1 Lincoln & 190k/800k at 75 State vacant, which worked out to ~50% by rsf combined being vacant, which I then promptly collapsed into "half empty."

Workplace — One Lincoln

Elevate design. Explore all One Lincoln has to offer.
www.onelincolnboston.com www.onelincolnboston.com
 
Stlin said:
I mean, what would you propose if you were Divcowest? They're not going to build new office when that market is also soft, their One Lincoln & 75 State class A office spaces are half empty. If Residential, I'd think they'd move first with their approved parcel R plans which are stalled for want of funding, especially since they're kinda deep in a financial hole with 441 Morgan. Proposing a change in use for the Q2 site means they need to spend the money and effort on amending their PUD, which isn't super easy - if a prospective anchor tenant comes knocking I'm sure they'll do something, but I imagine right now they're parking it as what's approved.
Click to expand...
Simply in the spirit of "out there" creative thinking, given that Divco is sitting on a large collection of stalled gravel lots, including stalled residential (both approved and further downstream):
Cite the challenging economics of the present situation, reenter negotiations with the city to see if the city will approve using this location as an affordable housing offset for other planned residential throughout CX. Partner/form a JV with an affordable housing developer or the city itself. Build this building as all-affordable housing. That would relieve the affordability requirement for units in neighboring CX parcels, thus potentially lowering the economic headwinds of building those other parcels.

In other words, find some creative way to meaningfully keep things moving forward at CX rather than sitting on huge expanses of fenced-in gravel pits for what is sure to become a decade+ under present conditions.
 
I’m guessing DivCo is betting that things will snap back after the current administration departs.
 
RandomWalk said:
I’m guessing DivCo is betting that things will snap back after the current administration departs.
Click to expand...
Someone at DivCo has done the long term discounted cashflow analysis, and determined that waiting for future lab and market rate housing is worth more than cashing in now on really hard to finance affordable residential.
 
JeffDowntown said:
Someone at DivCo has done the long term discounted cashflow analysis, and determined that waiting for future lab and market rate housing is worth more than cashing in now on really hard to finance affordable residential.
Click to expand...
No doubt some kind of analysis like that is going on in actuality, but my post rested on a few assumptions 1) only building the affordable they're already on the hook to build anyway within their approved master plan, yet, negotiating a physical-layout-reallocation of it assuming some kind of affordable-specific financing could be more likely to be available for that (given that we're seeing some of such projects continue to more forward in the area while a lot of other projects are in a holding pattern waiting for financing)...we've already seen divcowest negotiate physical layout reallocation as amendments to their plan, such as where commercial parking spaces are located, 2) that would shift their future residential construction to market rate, which presumably gives them more flexibility down the road, 3) there is such a gross over-supply of already-build vacant lab right now it would take an unprecedented magnitude of rebound to activate these non-shovel-in-ground labs. I am sure they can assume some timeline for that in their analysis, but whatever they're assuming is just as much of a wild assumption as anything else.

To be clear, I am just creatively poking at assumptions here. They probably are thinking much more deeply about this. But, hey, what are discussion boards for?
 
bigpicture7 said:
No doubt some kind of analysis like that is going on in actuality, but my post rested on a few assumptions 1) only building the affordable they're already on the hook to build anyway within their approved master plan, yet, negotiating a physical-layout-reallocation of it assuming some kind of affordable-specific financing could be more likely to be available for that (given that we're seeing some of such projects continue to more forward in the area while a lot of other projects are in a holding pattern waiting for financing)...we've already seen divcowest negotiate physical layout reallocation as amendments to their plan, such as where commercial parking spaces are located, 2) that would shift their future residential construction to market rate, which presumably gives them more flexibility down the road, 3) there is such a gross over-supply of already-build vacant lab right now it would take an unprecedented magnitude of rebound to activate these non-shovel-in-ground labs. I am sure they can assume some timeline for that in their analysis, but whatever they're assuming is just as much of a wild assumption as anything else.

To be clear, I am just creatively poking at assumptions here. They probably are thinking much more deeply about this. But, hey, what are discussion boards for?
Click to expand...
I suspect someone in Cambridge would need to come up with pretty attractive financing or other support to change the calculations. Certainly doable, but it would take real money. Realize that all the reallocation work is also further design costs (more sunk costs).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top