Lovejoy Wharf - Hoffman Building | 160 North Washington Street | West End

Re: Lovejoy Wharf

According to the filing, construction on the residential portion won't begin until 2014?? What are the chances that happens?
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

fattony said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again - there are a hell of a lot of luxury condos without attached garages in New York. It is not a bad idea there and is not a bad idea here.
Click to expand...

Or in the South End or Beacon Hill.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

New construction should have parking...why would you shell out the premium without it?

I understand that older buildings sometimes don't allow for it but come on...dumb idea.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

617 said:
New construction should have parking...why would you shell out the premium without it?
Click to expand...

Maybe because you don't have a car or prefer to live a car-free lifestyle?

Do you think the developers are stupid? That they are taking a reckless gamble? They have done the market research to be sure they can sell these or they wouldn't have altered the proposal.

While I agree that you pay a premium for new construction, you pay an extra premium for the parking space you may not want or need. I recall a recent article that pointed out something like 30% of the construction cost of some residential buildings was the massive underground garages. There is a lot to be saved and passed on to tenants by not building parking.

Not to mention that owning and operating a car costs me over $500 per month. If I could live without the car (which I cannot because I work in the 'burbs) I'd have that money to spend on something else - like a nice new construction apartment or condo.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

Why build construction w/o parking?

Because the developer thinks there is a market for it.

Who spends an awful lot of money studying markets?

Developers. It's abundantly clear that developers spend a whole lot more money studying, and have a much greater understanding of, local market demands than municipalities ever will.

But really, why do people even care if it doesn't have parking? It's not like the area has really any street parking anyway, so complaints about street parking competition are frankly moot. If people buy units and want cars, they will buy spots in one of the numerous garages in the area. If people don't want the units, then the developer eats the loss. I know this development got some public subsidy, but it's not like the subsidy was premised on the parking being a "public benefit".

Let's face it, the garage was going to be an above ground garage that drove up unit costs and reduced the total number of units produced. This change should equal more units with a lower cost per unit. As for the "luxury" complaints, I don't think I've evener seen new construction that doesn't claim to be "luxury" that's not strictly affordable housing. Hell, Parcel 24 in Chinatown claims to be "luxury" despite the fact that it has received numerous city and state grants to up its inclusionary housing percentage to the 20-35% range.

As for the condo conversion from apartments, I'm not sure it is such a loss. A huge number of the development currently being built are rental and housing demand has to bet met for both housing types.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

jdrinboston said:
According to the filing, construction on the residential portion won't begin until 2014?? What are the chances that happens?
Click to expand...

Seems reasonable. "2014" is pretty unclear, but it doesn't sound crazy that they'd work on the rehabbed building for 4-6 months and then move on to the new tower.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

underground said:
Seems reasonable. "2014" is pretty unclear, but it doesn't sound crazy that they'd work on the rehabbed building for 4-6 months and then move on to the new tower.
Click to expand...

I guess my issue has more to do with that I assumed this project - in its entirety - to be already under construction. Adding administrative hurdles to the process sort of surprised me. Hopefully they already have atheir financing wrapped up.

Was Stern always on board with this project? I seem to remember TAT was the original architect. If they are starting a new design from scratch, that would also make me skeptical of the timetable.

FYI...there is a rendering in the new filing. Page 17

http://www.bostonredevelopmentautho...ing/Lovejoy Wharf - Hoffman Building_NPC2.pdf
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

They got Stern for this? I mean, he's a great choice given the building they would be attaching this to, I just didn't expect it. I generally like his work, though.

The revised building seems nice in the elevation they provided. It looks a bit less cheap than the old design did.

 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

So Converse is going into the old wharf building and the new tower is residential. I had it backwards.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

Also notice the covered pedestrian connection through the building, connecting the waterfront to Causeway St. It is 3 stories tall in the rendering. Hopefully it is grand enough to rival the Rowe's Wharf dome.

Masonry on the North End side blending into glass on the Garden towers side will be a nice effect.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

fattony said:
Maybe because you don't have a car or prefer to live a car-free lifestyle?

Do you think the developers are stupid? That they are taking a reckless gamble? They have done the market research to be sure they can sell these or they wouldn't have altered the proposal.

While I agree that you pay a premium for new construction, you pay an extra premium for the parking space you may not want or need. I recall a recent article that pointed out something like 30% of the construction cost of some residential buildings was the massive underground garages. There is a lot to be saved and passed on to tenants by not building parking.

Not to mention that owning and operating a car costs me over $500 per month. If I could live without the car (which I cannot because I work in the 'burbs) I'd have that money to spend on something else - like a nice new construction apartment or condo.
Click to expand...

Depending on the price point of these units-yes I think the developer is stupid. If these all are 800k and up then yes they're gambling. This hasn't been tested.

Don't act like every developer is really smart. Otherwise so many wouldn't have gone bankrupt 3-5 years ago.

I wonder what the condo fees will be?? $1 per square foot?

That being said I love this project and can't wait to take a walk along the harbor. Hope they get a great restaurant.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

Here is the old render:
JohnAKeith said:
A6tw9JACcAEr-Bb.png
Click to expand...
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

Please tell me there's going to be a few cafes here. Great waterfront area!
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

The location and set-up really are a lot of things... unique and fantastic are adjectives that come to mind. A price point of $.8kk+ is not only reasonable but conservative. The whole downstairs area could become a pocket night spot.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

fattony said:
Also notice the covered pedestrian connection through the building, connecting the waterfront to Causeway St. It is 3 stories tall in the rendering. Hopefully it is grand enough to rival the Rowe's Wharf dome.

Masonry on the North End side blending into glass on the Garden towers side will be a nice effect.
Click to expand...

Agreed on all fronts. That cut-through looks pretty amazing. Maybe not as spectacular as Rowes Wharf which is almost as wide as it is high, but still an awesome feature to include. Those are the kinds of details that I really think we need more of. Unique features that take a somewhat ordinary building and use the setting to make it stand out.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

Ehhh...I think Stern is lousy. The new design looks looks kind of like 265 Franklin Street with those crappy "steps" in the facade.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

617 said:
Depending on the price point of these units-yes I think the developer is stupid. If these all are 800k and up then yes they're gambling. This hasn't been tested.
Click to expand...

Yes, it has been tested. At least half of the condos at the Clarendon were sold (at very high prices) with no parking. There are many, many people - even those with the financial means- that choose to live car free.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

617 said:
Depending on the price point of these units-yes I think the developer is stupid. If these all are 800k and up then yes they're gambling. This hasn't been tested.

Don't act like every developer is really smart. Otherwise so many wouldn't have gone bankrupt 3-5 years ago.

I wonder what the condo fees will be?? $1 per square foot?

That being said I love this project and can't wait to take a walk along the harbor. Hope they get a great restaurant.
Click to expand...

If it's really a problem, they can have "free" valet parking at a nearby garage at a fraction of the cost of building their own.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

sidewalks said:
Ehhh...I think Stern is lousy.
Click to expand...

Same...there's no spark of imagination to his work. It's all by the numbers, and this one looks especially phoned in.

Then again, I do like that this one doesn't challenge the existing building. Deferential is the best path here, and in that sense Stern is a good choice.
 
Re: Lovejoy Wharf

But the request to remove parking wasn't to meet buyers' expectations, right? It was to lower the cost of construction. Or, is that too obvious to mention?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top