Echelon Seaport | 133-135 Seaport Blvd | Seaport

HarvardP said:
It's all about the higher gross rents to satisfy the building's lenders (you're not lowering the price of the rental), and as a real estate trick it works better with commercial tenants (you throw them 2-3 free months over five years) than it does in residential buildings.
Click to expand...

So, I keep hearing this, but help a non-insider (thank God) understand: why does a lender who has already issued a loan need to see this to be satisfied? Do you mean that it is in the building owner's interest to pursue this approach so that the building is more sellable to another entity in the future (i.e., so they can get new financing)? Help me understand why a lender who has already issued a loan gets a say in what future rents are, so long as the debtor is paying.
 
HarvardP said:
It's all about the higher gross rents to satisfy the building's lenders (you're not lowering the price of the rental), and as a real estate trick it works better with commercial tenants (you throw them 2-3 free months over five years) than it does in residential buildings.
Click to expand...
It also keep the rent benchmark in place, in case the rents in the area rebound. If you lower the actual rents, you have a much harder time raising them back to current levels during lease renewals. Throw in a few free months, and the lease still states the high rate. Puts the landlord in a much stronger position for negotiation.
 
The top end starts around $4500 for a 1br in Manhattan.
I recently moved out of Hudson Yards in one of those massive, new glassy buildings and I was on a high floor (above the 50th floor) in a corner unit with fancy Bosch appliances. A 1 br was $5300 gross and they did 1 or 2 months free. I could see JFK airport over 15 miles away. If I was on a lower floor (sub 40th floor), rent was $4500 for a 1 br, with NER just under $4000.
Even over the top midtown places, like Aro (think Brickell Miami all white and glass) and Waterline Square by Raphael Vinoly (has a Cipriani food hall in the lobby!) start around $4000 for a 1 br.

A lot of info, but I am impressed they are going for this at Echelon. I think the rent is very high but the quality of the place looks amazing and think they should be able to cultivate enough high end renters given the unique nature of this kind of development.

kmp1284 said:
Two free months though so NER is ~$2750/$2900-4300. The real top tier stuff in Manhattan starts around $6k.
Click to expand...
 
Czervik.Construction said:
The top end starts around $4500 for a 1br in Manhattan.
I recently moved out of Hudson Yards in one of those massive, new glassy buildings and I was on a high floor (above the 50th floor) in a corner unit with fancy Bosch appliances. A 1 br was $5300 gross and they did 1 or 2 months free. I could see JFK airport over 15 miles away. If I was on a lower floor (sub 40th floor), rent was $4500 for a 1 br, with NER just under $4000.
Even over the top midtown places, like Aro (think Brickell Miami all white and glass) and Waterline Square by Raphael Vinoly (has a Cipriani food hall in the lobby!) start around $4000 for a 1 br.

A lot of info, but I am impressed they are going for this at Echelon. I think the rent is very high but the quality of the place looks amazing and think they should be able to cultivate enough high end renters given the unique nature of this kind of development.
Click to expand...

I think we’re all aware by now that you lived in Hudson Yards. I’m sorry that you seem to think I’d be impressed by that though. Wake me up when you own in a cash only co-op on Fifth or overlooking the park. The high end(“fancy Bosch appliances”) begins at $4-4.5k but the best of the best(Gaggenau, Miele or Wolf/Sub-Zero or to use your phraseology “the top in the top end”) is generally over $6k.
 
The low end Gaggenau coffee maker runs north of $4k. It can make 2 cups of coffee at once. Neat!
 
Czervik.Construction said:
The top end starts around $4500 for a 1br in Manhattan...
Click to expand...

C'mon Czervik, you've been on aB long enough to have already known what kmp's response was going to be to your post.

The thing is, your post was spot-on for purposes of this discussion. You identified what near-similar-to's in NYC go for. No one looking at the Alyx thinks they're going to get a 5th Ave view over the park. The fact that there are other irrelevantly further over-the-top places in NYC is not a surprise nor particularly interesting.

Advice: next time just don't say "top in the top end," because kmp will be sure to let you know that they know about a topper-than-the-topmost-top than you're aware of. Funny thing is, I guarantee you there's an even higher top somewhere than whatever highest top kmp knows about too.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the support, @bigpicture7 Much appreciated.
I actually did some research, went on Streeteasy and a few building websites to compare prices and "free month" deals to get to my numbers for that post.
My Hudson Yards credentials reference was specific to the post, and hope no one thought it was bragging. And definitely did not know I had a reputation for it.

bigpicture7 said:
C'mon Czervik, you've been on aB long enough to have already known what kmp's response was going to be to your post.

The thing is, your post was spot-on for purposes of this discussion. You identified what near-similar-to's in NYC go for. No one looking at the Alyx thinks they're going to get a 5th Ave view over the park. The fact that there are other irrelevantly further over-the-top places in NYC is not a surprise nor particularly interesting.

Advice: next time just don't say "top in the top end," because kmp will be sure to let you know that they know about a topper-than-the-topmost-top than you're aware of. Funny thing is, I guarantee you there's an even higher top somewhere than whatever highest top kmp knows about too.
Click to expand...
 
bigpicture7 said:
So, I keep hearing this, but help a non-insider (thank God) understand: why does a lender who has already issued a loan need to see this to be satisfied? Do you mean that it is in the building owner's interest to pursue this approach so that the building is more sellable to another entity in the future (i.e., so they can get new financing)? Help me understand why a lender who has already issued a loan gets a say in what future rents are, so long as the debtor is paying.
Click to expand...
I don't work in real estate, but I do work in a finance role for another industry. It is possible, probably likely, that the loan agreements come with performance benchmarks. Failure to meet the benchmark means that the bank can call in the loan unless they choose to waive the requirement. There are lots of reasons why a lender might want to do this, even if they think the borrower can still service the loan.
 
HenryAlan said:
I don't work in real estate, but I do work in a finance role for another industry. It is possible, probably likely, that the loan agreements come with performance benchmarks. Failure to meet the benchmark means that the bank can call in the loan unless they choose to waive the requirement. There are lots of reasons why a lender might want to do this, even if they think the borrower can still service the loan.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Seems like quite a broken system though: I keep my lender happy if I have a high vacancy rate, but sustained my rents! Or, I'm giving away months-free discounts left and right, but sustained my rents! These seem like fragile performance benchmarks to me that don't necessarily reflect (or could actually thwart) the borrower's true ability to service the loan. Like many elements of the banking system, they seem like carry-overs from simpler times.
 
bigpicture7 said:
Thanks. Seems like quite a broken system though: I keep my lender happy if I have a high vacancy rate, but sustained my rents! Or, I'm giving away months-free discounts left and right, but sustained my rents! These seem like fragile performance benchmarks to me that don't necessarily reflect (or could actually thwart) the borrower's true ability to service the loan. Like many elements of the banking system, they seem like carry-overs from simpler times.
Click to expand...
Think of it as a way to meet the benchmark during less than perfect economic conditions. The waiver process can be complex, but a built in loophole much less so. It is likely that the banks prefer a loophole than a more complex metric that explicitly factors in externalities.
 
Just an FYI - WS Development is tasked with leasing the retail here (which I bodes well, I think), and they are calling it The Superette
 
awood91 said:
Just an FYI - WS Development is tasked with leasing the retail here (which I bodes well, I think), and they are calling it The Superette
Click to expand...
That's an impressive vision, it'll be nice if it lives up to those renderings...

Screenshot_20210630-185923_Chrome.png
Screenshot_20210630-185932_Chrome.png
Screenshot_20210630-190029_Chrome.png
Screenshot_20210630-190041_Chrome.png
 
If they can pull that level of programming off for the space it will become one of the premier spots in Boston. I'm skeptical they can do that though, I still feel like the density isn't here for all these $$$ and $$$$ restaurants/shopping/etc.
 
393b40 said:
If they can pull that level of programming off for the space it will become one of the premier spots in Boston. I'm skeptical they can do that though, I still feel like the density isn't here for all these $$$ and $$$$ restaurants/shopping/etc.
Click to expand...

I worry about the lack of density around here, too. In certain areas of the Seaport--particularly the eastern end--the neighborhood almost takes on the feel of a Hollywood movie lot. You look south from Liberty Wharf, for example, and the two blocks of ~20 story buildings give the impression that you're in a dense urban neighborhood--but then you look closer and realize that there's absolutely nothing behind them for three quarters of a mile. There's still a lot of building to come, of course, and this development is a lot closer to the heart of the Seaport than Liberty Wharf. But still, between the highway ramps, ventilation building, and convention center, there's a whole lot of land adjacent to this building that will never house permanent residents.
 
BronsonShore said:
I worry about the lack of density around here, too. In certain areas of the Seaport--particularly the eastern end--the neighborhood almost takes on the feel of a Hollywood movie lot. You look south from Liberty Wharf, for example, and the two blocks of ~20 story buildings give the impression that you're in a dense urban neighborhood--but then you look closer and realize that there's absolutely nothing behind them for three quarters of a mile. There's still a lot of building to come, of course, and this development is a lot closer to the heart of the Seaport than Liberty Wharf. But still, between the highway ramps, ventilation building, and convention center, there's a whole lot of land adjacent to this building that will never house permanent residents.
Click to expand...

Yep and don't get me wrong, there's definitely improving density here and the neighborhood is growing but is there going to be enough to support 365 days of year of this programming throughout not just this development but the entire neighborhood? Isn't the Seaport Square area with the Amazon towers also going to have similar retail ambitions?

We'll see...
 
Not only is density a problem but lack of solid public transportation is an issue and above all else the types of living quarters here- there's going to be a bunch of empty condos from speculators and tax shelters and just people with multiple homes that only are there 1/3 of the year
 
Suffolk 83 said:
Not only is density a problem but lack of solid public transportation is an issue and above all else the types of living quarters here- there's going to be a bunch of empty condos from speculators and tax shelters and just people with multiple homes that only are there 1/3 of the year
Click to expand...

I might actually challenge you on your assertion on the amount of empty residential that will wind up in the Seaport. To this point, the type of housing in the neighborhood has tilted toward rental, which should generally speaking, be almost always occupied as real estate investors don't rent pied-a-terre's. My understanding is a lot of the unbuilt housing left on the primary vacant lots is also intended to be mostly rental, so that should provide a decent fire break from having a neighborhood full of empty condo buildings.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top