53% is a dominant number? I'd argue that absentee owners don't need to be a majority for their presence to dominate and define a neighborhood. 47% non-owner-occupied dominates way more than 53% owner-occupied does.
bostonrealestatetimes.com
53% is certainly a majority. Financial institutions differentiate between above and below 50% for condo financing (but what do they know?).
I don't quite think so, since the 47% is very likely not a homogenous group. It's probably a mix of all of: pieds-a-terres, vacation/seasonal homes, units being used as rentals, etc. I'd say that the 53%, categorically, means the owner occupants are indeed the dominant group.
Two of those three categories would leave the unit empty most of the time, and more relevant to the initial conversation, they would care less about the nature of the immediate area vs. the centrality of the location (and accessibility from out-of-town through the Airport and South Station) as compared to full-time owner-occupants.
I would not assume pied-a-terres leave the unit empty a large fraction of the time. I know people with downtown pied-a-terres who occupy the units 4-5 nights per week -- moving to their coastal, suburban other homes for the weekend. Vacation/seasonal homes, yes likely empty a significant fraction of the time. Rental units are full time occupancy because luxury buildings usually forbid short-term rentals -- rentals are long-term leases.
Nice shots! I think they really reflect how the lack of imaginative architecture really makes our skyline quite kind of lacking though. Many missed opportunities.
Nice photos! The third one reminds me of the Hancock.
I'm curious on what the square footage price comparison is with Back Bay super luxe, notably the units in the Raffles and Four Seasons hotels (the tower). If I'm spending millions on a place to live or even park some money, I'd much rather have 24/7 concierge from a top hotel in the building (and for the in-laws) along with a far greater selection of surrounding shops and things to do. Back Bay is still the most dynamic part of Boston in that regard. I love the Seaport for its visuals, but few are pushing baby strollers around in this place.I'd be curious what the vacancy/unsold percentage is. Super luxe is overbuilt and both Winthrop and St Regis are not at capacity, and Ritz SS is going to make the issue "worse". Long term inventory will be the biggest problem here from a developer's perspective. And if I were an investor/institutional fund I don't think an asset that has waning demand would be something I'd want in my portfolio.
There are certainly lots of pieds-a-terre both downtown and in Seaport (probably true in Back Bay and Beacon Hill too), and the mechanism to address this is loss of the residential exemption. Worst case is everyone gets over-leveraged, the developers have to refinance/take a bath and units are pushed out at fire sale prices or in an auction (see St Regis). Parcel H in Seaport will be another test, so we'll see how that shakes out.
Boston Seaport's Select St. Regis Residences to be Offered in Limited Inventory Exclusive Bid Sale - Boston Real Estate Times
Boston–The Collaborative Companies and Cronin Development are bringing a new opportunity to owners for Boston’s first-ever St. Regis branded luxury residences. The five-star St. Regis Residences, Boston at 150 Seaport Boulevard, that features 114 luxury […]
Edited to add that there are at least a thousand rental units in Seaport as well, and demand gets reflected in pricing much more efficiently in rental units than sales. Since Boston's overall rental vacancy rate remains one of the lowest in the country at something like <2%, this is likely true in Seaport too. Renters add to neighborhood dynamics too.
End of an era.
Back then, it was nicknamed the Plywood Building or Plywood Palace. Hah!!!!Nice photos! The third one reminds me of the Hancock.
