The Beverly (née Merano) (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

The apartments will consist of 58 studio units, 113 one-bedroom units, 44 two-bedroom units, and 24 three-bedroom units.

Get used to hearing, "24 three-bedroom units are available for rent at The Merano ..." There's no one to rent them. They'll go to two-person households who will use the extra bedroom for storage and wedding gifts.

Two-person households renting a three-bedroom unit? One bedroom per person, plus a storage room?
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

Two-person households renting a three-bedroom unit? One bedroom per person, plus a storage room?

Preference in the lottery goes to households with >=1 person per bedroom [source]. So a two-person household could apply for a three-bedroom unit, but they'd never get it.

Sure. or 3+ roommate digs.

Or, much more likely, a household with children. Three (or more) working adult roommates push up household income pretty quickly.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

Preference in the lottery goes to households with >=1 person per bedroom [source]. So a two-person household could apply for a three-bedroom unit, but they'd never get it.



Or, much more likely, a household with children. Three (or more) working adult roommates push up household income pretty quickly.

Question (because I have no idea how affordable rentals work). In the roommate scenario, do all the roommates actually end up on the lease, and have their incomes verified?

My experience with roommate rentals was that landlords used to want one responsible party on the lease, not multiple people. They might want the roommates identified, but not on the lease. (Single point of responsibility/liability.)
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

Question (because I have no idea how affordable rentals work). In the roommate scenario, do all the roommates actually end up on the lease, and have their incomes verified?

My experience with roommate rentals was that landlords used to want one responsible party on the lease, not multiple people. They might want the roommates identified, but not on the lease. (Single point of responsibility/liability.)

I don't know when your experience is from, but I've had roommates on the lease in every apartment I've lived in, spanning 15 years and 3 states.

Forget what the landlord wants, who would ever be the sucker to put their name on a lease without their roommate having any obligation?!? That's madness.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

Question (because I have no idea how affordable rentals work). In the roommate scenario, do all the roommates actually end up on the lease, and have their incomes verified?

My experience with roommate rentals was that landlords used to want one responsible party on the lease, not multiple people. They might want the roommates identified, but not on the lease. (Single point of responsibility/liability.)

If you win the lottery and get a subsidized unit then have off-the-lease roommates living with you, that is fraud. And if they're paying you under the table then it's even more fraudulent.

But even in non-"affordable housing" situations, roommates should always be on the lease.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

My experience with roommate rentals was that landlords used to want one responsible party on the lease, not multiple people. They might want the roommates identified, but not on the lease. (Single point of responsibility/liability.)

My experience has been the opposite. I have family who have managed rental property (apartments) for many years, and their sentiment is that they always want everyone on the lease - and specifically for certain types of liability reasons. If you're a landlord and something happens on premises, and it originates from an undocumented case, you're much more likely to end up having to eat the cost yourself. Case example: one tenant ended up adding a roommate after she moved in; the roommate had a sketchy boyfriend who got drunk one night and punched several holes in the wall in the common space hallway. Everyone knew this guy was the boyfriend of this person, and when my uncle confronted the roommate (who at this point DID end up on the lease) about repair costs coming out of the security deposit, she went along with it (hopefully she got the $ from the boyfriend). The point is, if this were an undocumented case, rather than an on-lease case, there is no way my uncle was recovering that money. Lease = connection to security deposit. Simply maintaining a roommate list isn't quite as powerful.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

There's a lot of hurdles to jump with affordable housing requirements for the lotteries including long lag times. The lotteries anyway aren't really lending themselves to a few friends getting together to rent a place next month. I believe people who enter the lotteries are families but I could be wrong.

I'm not sure if this is thru the BRA lottery? Because its the whole building is it first come first serve?
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

I have to admit that my rental experience (in Boston) is 20 plus years out of date. But back then, it was pretty common to have one anchor tenant on a lease, and various combinations of roommates cycle through, even during a single lease period. (Not affordable units, just market rate.)

But also one decently employed individual could qualify for the rent back then. Today you would need the credit scores/incomes of all the roommates to qualify.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

My experience with roommate rentals was that landlords used to want one responsible party on the lease, not multiple people. They might want the roommates identified, but not on the lease. (Single point of responsibility/liability.)

Wouldn't it be in the landlord's best interest to legally obligate all residents living in the premises to the terms of the lease by having everyone execute the lease? That way if one tenant disappears, stops paying, causes damage etc. legal recourse can be sought against not only the one tenant on the lease but everyone living in the unit.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

Wouldn't it be in the landlord's best interest to legally obligate all residents living in the premises to the terms of the lease by having everyone execute the lease? That way if one tenant disappears, stops paying, causes damage etc. legal recourse can be sought against not only the one tenant on the lease but everyone living in the unit.

I'm repeating a bit from what others have said, but:

In regulated affordable housing units, all leases stipulate that each adult in the household is obliged, under threat of eviction in the case of non-compliance, to notify the landlord of ANY change to household composition and/or income. Someone leaves or arrives? That changes the household size and can have all sorts of domino effects, even if the moving person is not employed (such as a newborn baby, or a teenager who goes to live with the other parent). And if an employed person either arrives or departs, that changes household income, the entire household has to get put through the qualifying calculation afresh (obviously more of a risk of non-qualifying if an employed person arrives as compared to when one leaves).

Every management agent in affordable housing has to be quite ruthless in enforcing this. We all know of market-rate situations like what JeffDowntown describes, where one tenant stays and others cycle through. Still happens all the time in smaller unregulated rental buildings. Aside from the headaches it can cause on the household qualification side, this can be a nightmare on other fronts: career criminals use this sort of arrangement all the time, sometimes because they know they're in the system and know they can't pass a background check.

Exactly how this gets handled by the management agent can vary slightly by different affordable programs. I'm not familiar with what program this property's under, so I'm speaking generally. But the take-home message is: every way you can think of to cheat has been thought of by any competent affordable housing manager, and they're also aware of tons of other ways to cheat that you haven't thought of. This doesn't mean they catch all cheaters: it means they've thought of all the ways there are to cheat and know the warning signals.

All this does NOT mean groups of single people cannot ever rent a three-bedroom regulated affordable unit together. Sometimes there might be a set-aside on a percentage of large units to go to large families: then roommate shares are prohibited, clearly. And affordable managers find the shared roommate situation a hassle, and generally aren't enthusiastic. However, if that's who shows up in droves, which might be the case in this building, they can make it work. The entire group of roommates counts as one household, and their collective income is what has to be below the threshold when they sign the lease.

Given the known reality that roommates come and roommates go, any competent manager will read the pertinent parts of the lease out loud that describe how critical it is to re-certify if someone new comes, and every single roommate will sign the lease and will have it made clear that the eviction threat pertains to everyone in the unit - no blaming it on just one person. The Riot Act will also be read to them. On the gentler side, the managers will tell them to just bring proposed new roommates in for a pre-qualification before the departing roommate is gone, etc - it can all be dealt with in advance, so that if a proposed new roommate takes them over the limit, they can start over.

It's not common for there to be unrelated roommate situations in affordable housing units, but it's not unheard of. Handled correctly, it is absolutely legal in most units of most programs. (ETA: You'll even see pairs of widows go in as roommates in senior properties that have the occasional two-bedroom units instead of the more typical one-bedroom units.)

Market-rate landlords are sometimes much more slack in how they handle this, as are some roommates; it seems more common as you go down the size scale and down the quality scale. As fattony noted peviously, this is crazy and stupid all around. The horror stories abound, for roommates and for landlords.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

^ West. That all makes sense to me.

Roommate situations in affordable housing are probably pretty rare, as you indicated (complex to orchestrate). I really think the large units are targeted at families; they are usually referred to that way.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

Fantastic work.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

I've been out of the country for the past five months or so and just drove into Boston from the north on 93 for the first time in a while: with this and Lovejoy Wharf assuming their final shapes, going into the tunnels right underneath them finally feels like you're driving into a city-- especially at night, when there used to be just darkness above you and now there is light and glass and structures. I'm guessing all the other towers about to go in around here will only make this an even clearer feeling in the next few years. It's good to be home.
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

second crane is being dismantled
 
Re: The Merano (Parcels 1B & 1C) | Bulfinch Triangle | West End

 

Back
Top