Recent content by 3decker

Old picture back in May; view from the top of the Bunker Hill Monument

I'm hope the Southfield redevelopment turns out something like this.

A snippet of their conversation posted on Instagram reached 17k people. That's not nothing!

These AI outputs are often quite shallow and crude, even if they appear polished at a glance. I simply view people who tout the results as telling on themselves that they have no value/discernment of quality.

Very old news, but I don't believe this ever got posted: 59 Mill St, Woburn Mill Street Heights, 72 units (18 affordable), completed Nov. 2025 https://bostonrealestatetimes.com/hamilton-company-completes-and-leases-72-unit-mill-street-heights-development-in-woburn/

Agreed. In all honesty, that looks like a very spacious studio to me. I would be fine with something even 2/3 or 1/2 that size if it meant cheaper rent.

Tangential, but does anyone know if a map or list exists of the CR stations that indicates platform length as well as which ones are full-high, mini-high, or low platform?

"being next to a rail" is underselling it It's wedged between clapped-out industrial, an intermodal yard, rail, and an 8-lane highway.

You know, this paint job thing is really starting to piss me off. First, it was the CRRC orange + red line cars: acceptable, but not excitingly modern. Then the green line type 10s: obviously dated and far from something you could call beautiful. And now this. WTF are these stripes. I know...

Why are modern developers allergic to corner trim?

What a failure of the MBTA communities act. 432 units of complete, unabashed car-centric living.

I'm surprised they are planning to demolish the existing student housing but keep the instructional buildings. The dorms are newer construction (~1990) than the old catholic school buildings. And the student housing is suite-style that lends itself well to traditional apartment conversions: I

How were they able to justify this project? $5.7B for 40,000 daily riders seems insane

RE: negative externalities of long-term vacancies, would a vacancy tax not also be an effective mechanism to discourage vacancies/encourage conversion?

Why does this need tax breaks then? If it truly was vacant, poor office space that would not serve office tenants, but would work well as residential if converted, the building owners would already have an incentive to convert. Subsidizing it admits that it doesn't actually make sense to...