One Harbor Shore Dr. | Fan Pier Parcel H | 1 Harbor Shore Drive | Seaport

navigator4 said:
When Fan Pier was first proposed, a Grand Hyatt hotel was going to be the centerpiece. Then the hotel was supposed to be at this site. Now, they are going with residential. Given that hotel rooms in Boston routinely go for $500-900 a night, it's a crime that the BRA (or whatever they call themselves now) allowed the hotel to be eliminated from Fan Pier entirely. The needs of the city, not the developer should be the goal of the agency. Boston needs hotels!
Click to expand...
Yes, because the housing stock for residents is so plentiful and cheap...
 
navigator4 said:
When Fan Pier was first proposed, a Grand Hyatt hotel was going to be the centerpiece. Then the hotel was supposed to be at this site. Now, they are going with residential. Given that hotel rooms in Boston routinely go for $500-900 a night, it's a crime that the BRA (or whatever they call themselves now) allowed the hotel to be eliminated from Fan Pier entirely. The needs of the city, not the developer should be the goal of the agency. Boston needs hotels!
Click to expand...
And since Fan Pier was first proposed, the Envoy has been built, the Omni has been built, the Yotel has been built, and the Residence Inn has been renovated (that come immediately to mind). Plenty of new hotel rooms, and with the Envoy and Omni, pretty prominent flagship properties. Also, we've seen two CitizenM locations open at Hub on Causeway and Lyrik, along with a few others on a quick Google search. Also, for this upcoming weekend (Labor Day Weekend, btw), I see plenty of $200-$300 per night rooms, even at this late date.

Boston needs housing more than it needs hotels.
 
navigator4 said:
When Fan Pier was first proposed, a Grand Hyatt hotel was going to be the centerpiece. Then the hotel was supposed to be at this site. Now, they are going with residential. Given that hotel rooms in Boston routinely go for $500-900 a night, it's a crime that the BRA (or whatever they call themselves now) allowed the hotel to be eliminated from Fan Pier entirely. The needs of the city, not the developer should be the goal of the agency. Boston needs hotels!
Click to expand...

Here’s some actual data instead of your cherry-picked peak season/event rates.

1724943823073.jpeg


www.hospitalitynet.org

Boston/Cambridge Lodging Market â 2023 Year End Review | By Rachel Roginsky

The Boston/Cambridge lodging market ended 2023 at 76.4% occupancy, a 6.8% variance over 2022’s 69.6%. This 6-point increase in occupancy is a result of the market accommodating 8.6% more rooms in 2023 compared to the prior year; 0.6% more rooms occupied as compared to 2019. Seasonality appears...
www.hospitalitynet.org www.hospitalitynet.org
 
navigator4 said:
When Fan Pier was first proposed, a Grand Hyatt hotel was going to be the centerpiece. Then the hotel was supposed to be at this site. Now, they are going with residential. Given that hotel rooms in Boston routinely go for $500-900 a night, it's a crime that the BRA (or whatever they call themselves now) allowed the hotel to be eliminated from Fan Pier entirely. The needs of the city, not the developer should be the goal of the agency. Boston needs hotels!
Click to expand...

I don't know what you're talking about. I just got $419.90/night for a couple of nights next month downtown at the Marriott Custom House Tower. And I didn't even look very hard - - just dialed into Expedia today.
 
Even this weekend, in tonight and out Monday and only looking at Marriott properties - $216/night for the East Boston Courtyard to $634 for the Ritz with good spots like the W and Copley Westin and Marriott around $400.
 
While those numbers are certainly exaggerated, I do remember seeing a survey of prices last year with the conclusion that Boston has the most expensive hotel market of any major American city (at least the highest price floor, I bet the ceiling goes way higher in NYC). I would still like to agree that housing is in a more urgent situation.

1724961703273.png


 
Do all these rates include fees and taxes? It always ends up being way more than the original listings.
 
I’d love to know which three star and above hotels they used to come up with these numbers. I’d move in in a second.

1724968052210.jpeg
 
sean99090900 said:
just filtering for 3+ star hotels, there seem to be plenty in and around Tenderloin for unspecified reasons lmao
View attachment 54714
Click to expand...

Not sure if it’s ignorance or an agenda but everyone knows Google hotels is notoriously unreliable as it links to a lot of highly questionable third party booking sites.
 
Last edited:
kmp1284 said:
Not sure if it’s ignorance or an agenda but everyone knows Google hotels is notoriously unreliable as it links to a lot of highly questionable third party booking sites.
Click to expand...
You can check Expedia if you wish, but it doesn't really change the conclusion, this time with tax and fees included and whatever else, there are still a plethora of 3+ star hotels for less than 150/night in SF.

1000012283.jpg


But that aside, I do openly have an agenda in that I'm making a point Boston has an unusually expensive hotel market price floor by looking in a highly blighted part of SF. I imagine part of the reason why we are so high up on that list is because our major homeless camp is much smaller and more geographically isolated. I don't know how they designate 'city center' in SF or anywhere else, but I bet this region is why the city is so cheap on that survey.
 
sean99090900 said:
You can check Expedia if you wish, but it doesn't really change the conclusion, this time with tax and fees included and whatever else, there are still a plethora of 3+ star hotels for less than 150/night in SF.

View attachment 54731

But that aside, I do openly have an agenda in that I'm making a point Boston has an unusually expensive hotel market price floor by looking in a highly blighted part of SF. I imagine part of the reason why we are so high up on that list is because our major homeless camp is much smaller and more geographically isolated. I don't know how they designate 'city center' in SF or anywhere else, but I bet this region is why the city is so cheap on that survey.
Click to expand...
This is very true --- Boston is insanely expensive for hotels, as anyone signing expense reports for business travel can attest. That said, seems reasonable to do more housing in the seaport when it's full of giant hotels. We do need to think about how to zone for more hotel space --- a big problem here was financing disappeared for hotels during the pandemic due to an absurd panic, but not for resi. That's why the Alexandra had to pivot multiple times. Genius move, lenders!
 
Why is the fight between residential and hotels???????

As long as it's EITHER of those, it means more humanoids populating the city 24/7 and creating more 24/7 economy of restaurants, theatres, museums, stores, etc (and a safer environment with less nightime ghost town islands).

Residential and Hotel should hold hands, hug one another and unite, sing Kumbaya......and slay the evil lab and office devil!!!!! (Ok, j/k).
 
shmessy said:
Why is the fight between residential and hotels???????

As long as it's EITHER of those, it means more humanoids populating the city 24/7 and creating more 24/7 economy of restaurants, theatres, museums, stores, etc (and a safer environment with less nightime ghost town islands).

Residential and Hotel should hold hands, hug one another and unite, sing Kumbaya......and slay the evil lab and office devil!!!!! (Ok, j/k).
Click to expand...
Because one lowers housing costs in a housing crisis, and the other lowers expense reports for convention-goers.
 
Equilibria said:
Because one lowers housing costs in a housing crisis, and the other lowers expense reports for convention-goers.
Click to expand...
……because the only people staying in hotels are business travelers? Some of those corporate expense accounts folks look awfully young and old - even like little kids and grandparents.

.........and feeds the coffers of the city of Boston, Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Convention Authority with the 16.45% tax..........amongst other huge restaurant, service, museum, theatre revenue benefits from more tourists/business travelers who spend far more money on a daily basis than residents.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top