Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

SkiingAway t1_iu0dmqv wrote

So, does that mean the city is going to stop constantly rejecting permits/approvals for places to be open late?

Because that's what's been happening to date.

498

TheHonorableSavage t1_iu0i5hr wrote

The local residents protested insomnia cookies of all places staying open later.

I can’t imagine the progress they will have if the local cookie shop is considered a den of debauchery after midnight.

I don’t even know who lives in DTC. They could put a 24 hour circus there and 10 people would notice. Walking around at night feels like I am Legend.

383

bostonaliens t1_iu0xk9t wrote

DTX is made up of college students, millionaires in the millennium tower and homeless crackheads. Truly the best Boston has to offer.

192

AceyPuppy t1_iu1hvpi wrote

Exactly what makes Boston the most diverse city in America.

47

Eire4ever37 t1_iu3c6xh wrote

Don’t forget the 11 and 12 year olds that are kicking the crap out of people

14

[deleted] t1_iu10wt1 wrote

[deleted]

133

snoogins355 t1_iu24zk8 wrote

With housing prices they way it is, it's getting there

18

TurnsOutImAScientist t1_iu43rez wrote

Elderly lady next door to me is probably permanently in “rehab”, can’t make it up a flight of stairs, and probably isn’t ever gonna sell the triple decker she owns. Her next of kin will have to do it. I’m thinking there must be tons of situations like this across town where seniors who by all means should be moving out for health/accessibility reasons just won’t.

8

Laureltess t1_iu4o2jl wrote

A few months ago there was an article where a bunch of retirees were complaining that they had nowhere to “downsize” to because all the small houses were bought by developers and demolished, and they refuse to live in apartments, so they’re refusing to sell their family-sized houses. They’re complaining about a problem THEY created, and the rest of us suffer because retirees don’t want to live in anything but unattached homes.

6

TurnsOutImAScientist t1_iu4zsdg wrote

And then when the median baby boomer has died of old age in a couple of decades, the younger generations won't have built as much wealth and won't be able to compete with corporations attempting to shift the country from individual homeownership to renting.

4

whatsabrooin t1_iu0sdx3 wrote

People haven’t experienced true freedom until they’ve gone out for cookies and a slurpee at 3am.

88

MiscellaneousBeef t1_iu245j9 wrote

I am a resident of DTX. It's not the local residents as a whole, it's the weird dweebs who show up to these meetings. Dweebs have an advantage because they enjoy tracking when these meetings will happen, they enjoy going to these meetings, and they also dislike people doing other things. Meanwhile people who like to do things have to divide their time between doing things and all the energy it takes to battle dweebs.

Consider when El Jefe Tacqueria was prevented from opening until 2AM because it "may disturb students." It certainly wasn't the students, who actually live there, who stopped that from happening.

74

Otterfan t1_iu5szwq wrote

> "may disturb students."

When the Mission Brookline dispensary was under review, one of the local NIMBY's warned that it "might expose Boston University students to marijuana."

7

BOSHunterCO t1_iu214lv wrote

What sick individual would have an issue with late night cookies?

9

Chappy_Sinclair1 t1_iu1izuz wrote

Old people still have scars from the Theater District back in the day

5

SeveralKnapkins t1_iu2cy0x wrote

Wait, is that why nothing is open late in Boston?? 6 years here and I swear I just want a cafe open past 4 pm

14

Anustart15 t1_iu2ozs7 wrote

The cafe thing is because the 7:30-3 allows them to have a single set of 8 hour shifts. Hard to find part time work and the staggering shifts thing doesn't work well since the busiest part of the day is right at the beginning of the shift.

21

pillboxhat t1_iu39g3t wrote

South street diner is open 24/7 so idk why they're acting like no places aren't opened late. Nothing better than their food after a night of drinking, thought this was pretty well known?

−5

powsandwich t1_iu05ces wrote

That globe font threw me off for a second. A24 Hour neighborhood, where they screen a different A24 movie each day

231

BasicDesignAdvice t1_iu0z285 wrote

Last movie I saw was Everything Everywhere All At Once and my wife posed a good question:

How come every time there is a movie we want to see it is from them?

We aren't really paying attention, but most movies we have liked for the past few years has been from them. Probably the last five movies we saw in theaters were from them. What makes A24 so different?

44

agent_tits t1_iu1madk wrote

A24 is a distribution company, so they’re tasked with finding and elevating a certain type of unique talent that can fill a perceived market need.

It makes a bit more sense when you put it that way. They’re not absurdly consistent at creating good films, they’re just absurdly consistent about finding them and fitting them into their brand (which I guess is probably easier?) They’re hitting it out of the park. I’m a huge fan of what they put out as well. I’m no film industry expert but I can’t think of a time before when casual movie fans know the name of, and have an affinity for, a distribution company.

40

waffles2go2 t1_iu25o31 wrote

Yes, they stay "on brand" and interesting in a market full of dreck...

9

rslashplate t1_iu2d3ol wrote

Yeah their branding and marketing is really, well, remarkable. I’ve seen dozens of items in real life (as well as online ads) of fashion items or other products with their logo or derived from their brand. They really do a great job.

4

We_renotonmyisland t1_iu57wrj wrote

It works so well too! If I see a movie is from A24 I'll almost always give it a chance. I think because I associate Hereditary and Midsomer with them and those are my two favorite horror movies in recent years.

3

IronworkRapunzel t1_iu2hz7b wrote

Midsommar, Hereditary, The Lighthouse were all fantastic. Now Hazbin's coming out next summer, so there's more to look out for from them.

2

HairWeaveKillers t1_iu12fuf wrote

i think theyre one of the only studios that are doing original ideas. I feel like every other movie studio is trying to chase nostalgia or just releasing movies of based off an existing IP

19

realrx123 t1_iu27353 wrote

They’re a distributor not a production company

6

attigirb t1_iu2c2hr wrote

It’s going to be a Midsommar neighborhood.

1

The_Pip t1_iu13rf0 wrote

A 24 hr neighborhood needs a 24 hr MBTA.

189

_hephaestus t1_iu1cons wrote

Yeah, I just went through their plan. They even cite Paris extending transit hours as something other cities are doing they can learn from but I couldn't find any mention of bringing back late night service.

People can complain about its ridership not being high but you absolutely cannot be a 24 hour city with trains shutting down at midnight.

80

IronworkRapunzel t1_iu2jppu wrote

Reminds me of a comment I read from another thread where someone said that Boston's nightlife suffers because the lack of adequate transportation to and from especially after midnight.

People either: A.Go out to events and have fun for a bit, but leave early so they can catch a train home

B.Go out, and limit their drinking/don't drink so they can safely drive home after

C.Don't go out all

24

_hephaestus t1_iu2kqsv wrote

Or D) drive drunk and endanger the people around them.

Or I suppose pay expensive Ubers or live somewhere they can walk, but I imagine there's lots of instances of D.

19

bobby_j_canada t1_iu5cmoh wrote

The extra "going out" commercial travel is fine, but not as important as the tends of thousands of people who have to take an expensive Uber to work because their shift at the hospital/airport/etc. starts at 4 AM and nothing is running.

3

rslashplate t1_iu2di86 wrote

I mean ridership sucks because the T sucks. I moved to nyc a few years back and am still stunned that nyc can run trains, all interconnected with as little as 2-3 minutes between trains, running nearly 24 hours if not 24 hours on varying schedules. The T is a disgrace of public transportation. No reason why most Bostonians wouldn’t want to commute on the T, but limited parking, limited trains, limited times etc

22

_hephaestus t1_iu2gmd0 wrote

I meant late night ridership. It's been tried a few times and canned because the trains aren't packed.

NYC is much better won't as argue that. But Boston is sadly in the top 5 for US public transit.

9

rslashplate t1_iu36pob wrote

Totally agree, and I sincerely hope the recent MBTA issues/spotlight will help turn them around because public transportation can really elevate a city to "world class"

I believe you its top-5, but if so thats still sad because so much needs improvements, across all of the US, NYC included.

If ridership is low during late night hours run half a train or something. there are solution.

Not having happy-hour sucks, but not having any trains past like midnight just kills a city. Boston needs to embrace is metro and really focus on accessibility, as it kind of has been progressing to, to make it a more global, affordable, enjoyable place to work or move to for work.

4

ggtffhhhjhg t1_iu3zslg wrote

They’ve been rated in the top 2 or 3 which says a lot about the sorry state of public transportation in this country.

3

CreativeLemon t1_iu4m6ea wrote

FWIW, 2-3 mins between trains is really only the case in lower manhattan during work hours. Think most trains run every half hour past like 2am or something? But the point stands, 1am shutdown on the MBTA (more like 12:15 if you want to guarantee you want get stranded going from Southie to Brighton)

3

bobby_j_canada t1_iu5cbrw wrote

Tracks do legitimately need downtime for maintenance, but the great thing about late night is that traffic is usually pretty light so buses can actually be good.

3

Sheol t1_iu56r9o wrote

It's a chicken and egg problem.

Our city nightlife is structured to wrap up around midnight, so why would we run empty trains in the middle of the night?

Our trains all end at midnight, so why would places stay open later than that?

I honestly think extending T hours is the wrong first step. It's expensive, poor service, and has big trade offs for maintenance. The easiest thing we can do is stop arbitrarily making businesses close early. If a taco place wants to serve until 4am let them.

1

TurnsOutImAScientist t1_iu4eyze wrote

No trials, no experiments, just do it. The infrastructure won't ever generate the demand if the infrastructure is going to turn into a pumpkin in 2 years.

6

The_Pip t1_iu533uj wrote

Exactly, you have to build it to re-build trust in it.

2

WhiteGrapeGames t1_iu44ies wrote

This isn't true at all though. I lived in New Orleans for a few years and would put it third behind NYC and Vegas on the list of 24 hour cities. Nobody used public transportation to get home and this was before uber. The demand for cabs in the downtown area late night always got people to where they needed to go safely. If you are going out for a late night of partying and are too far from home to walk, you budget an extra $x for the cab or have a DD. Not a big deal.

3

Otterfan t1_iu5tfe5 wrote

A 24 hour MBTA would be great, but hundreds of medium-sized towns outside of New England have more late night action than Boston without any public transit to speak of.

2

ggtffhhhjhg t1_iu3zk6s wrote

The city experimented with this 4-5 years ago after they received money from wealthy donors. As far as I know they said ridership was to low to justify the cost to keep it operating 24/7.

0

teslas_love_pigeon t1_iu1absa wrote

The T can barely run as is, this will just guarantee its failure faster.

−1

UltravioletClearance t1_iu044dr wrote

This is a really great idea. Most office workers have been priced so far out of Boston they were commuting 4+ hours a day to the Financial District. The pandemic and remote work showed us all how unnecessary it all was. The cat's out of the bag and there's no going back to that.

I just hope they actually go through with this plan. Part of the problem with these "reports" is they never actually get implemented. But the future of downtown depends on completely re-imagining it.

146

Maxpowr9 t1_iu05im3 wrote

The Age of the CBD (Central Business District) is over. You need more mixed development aka housing, so CBDs don't become ghost towns. They're already empty on the weekends and now they're pretty empty on the weekdays. Those restaurants/retailers aren't gonna stay in business if people are WFH.

I'm sure someone will make a snide comment but I am also 100% fine with the housing in Financial District being all luxury housing.

113

Snoo_97625 t1_iu096y3 wrote

Put all the luxury housing in the financial district so the rest of us can have our neighborhoods back

124

crazicus t1_iu19scr wrote

Every neighborhood needs to change to adapt to a growing city, and no single neighborhood should bear the burden of all of the change needed.

15

No_Judge_3817 t1_iu0pwdb wrote

"the rest of us can have our neighborhood back" way to gatekeep Boston and shit on transplants, sorry my life wasn't hard enough to meet your gritty standards of a true Boston resident

−30

LinkLT3 t1_iu0ywar wrote

They’re not talking about people moving to Boston, weirdo. They’re talking about tearing down sections of neighborhoods to build overpriced “luxury” condos that force people out of their neighborhood. You not having a gritty life doesn’t mean you can’t move to the city, but it doesn’t mean you can push the people already there out either.

13

TouchDownBurrito OP t1_iu0zsg9 wrote

> standards of a true Boston resident

>flair says Somerville

Don’t mean to gatekeep but I’d say the requirements would, at a minimum, include actually living in the city limits of Boston…

13

Snoo_97625 t1_iu170a2 wrote

Wonder if that guy even remembers when Somerville was 'gritty'

4

FitzwilliamTDarcy t1_iu174iv wrote

>Most office workers have been priced so far out of Boston they were commuting 4+ hours a day to the Financial District

That's a little disingenuous in a thread where the initial comment says "Most office workers have been priced so far out of Boston they were commuting 4+ hours a day to the Financial District"

1

TouchDownBurrito OP t1_iu1o5py wrote

Not when Somerville rivals some of Boston’s more expensive neighborhoods in price.

3

FitzwilliamTDarcy t1_iu4wvi9 wrote

Huh? You were gatekeeping the guy by saying more or less that being a Boston resident was a requirement. I pointed out that this part of thread is explicitly about people having been priced out of Boston, the implication being that no, other people (non Boston residents) get to play too.

Not remotely sure what Somerville's cost has to do with the price of fish except bolstering the point made at the top of this thread that people have been priced out of Boston.

1

TouchDownBurrito OP t1_iu4y4mn wrote

> You were gatekeeping the guy by saying more or less that being a Boston resident was a requirement.

Yes, living in the city of Boston is a requirement for calling yourself a Boston resident. Idk how that is controversial.

> Not remotely sure what Somerville’s cost has to do with the price of fish except bolstering the point made at the top of this thread that people have been priced out of Boston.

If they can afford to live in Somerville they haven’t been “priced out” of Boston. The median rent in Somerville is $3k a month, that’s higher than a great deal of, if not most, neighborhoods is Boston.

0

abhikavi t1_iu1crr8 wrote

> [shitting on] luxury housing

> gatekeep Boston and shit on transplants

k

5

Snoo_97625 t1_iu17gnk wrote

I have no problems with immigrants who came here looking for a better life. Especially if they came from a country that we couped or destabilized. I DO have a problem with Amazon engineers from California who make 5x what I make renting these shitty apartments for twice what they're worth just because they can

−5

northeast0 t1_iu0ujjw wrote

The city doesn’t give a damn about mom and pop restaurants catering to a bunch of suits and skirts on lunch break. Office buildings generate a huge chunk of tax revenue from property tax assessments and take comparatively little for the city to maintain (see: prioritization of the Seaport development) New construction brings in tons of money in the form of tradespeople being employed which means those people will vote for development-friendly governments and the building contractors and unions will contribute funds to the elected officials’ campaigns to keep the gravy train rolling.

If the values of those offices tank because leases aren’t renewed and the buildings end up 50+% vacant, the city is staring down the barrel of a huge funding problem. Then, demand for new square footage vanishes, construction companies have no work, people get laid off, and demand can fall more.

This is not an easy problem to solve and it’s going to get worse before it gets better. The only saving grace is that commercial leases are 5+ year terms in most cases with renewal options, so there’s still some time to fix this problem. Not much, but some.

13

Maxpowr9 t1_iu0v9n8 wrote

Oh I agree.

On a related tangent, once you stop seeing construction cranes in the skyline, that means your city is in decline.

18

BasicDesignAdvice t1_iu0zjbr wrote

San Francisco has 20 Salesforce Towers worth of empty office space.

That is 28,000,000 sqft of empty space in a city with a similar housing crisis.

11

[deleted] t1_iu0cim0 wrote

[deleted]

29

UltravioletClearance t1_iu0wuco wrote

Looks like that data only looked at 244,346 commuters inside 495. This article says there are 160,000 "super commuters" in greater Boston in 2019, and notes that number is probably much higher in 2022 due to a 19% increase in urban to suburban/rural moves nationwide.

The Globe article doesn't say how they defined a "super commuter," but the US Census Bureau defines it as a 90-minute one-way commute. Or 180 minutes both ways. Which equals 3 hours. Not quite 4 hours but way more than 45 minutes.

As someone who spent his entire life just outside 495, I can tell you anecdotally 2-hour one-way commutes are the norm.

9

Exotic_Zucchini t1_iu04pa5 wrote

I can't see the article. But, I agree with what you just said. There are so many opportunities here to make things better for tons of people, and part of it definitely involves a buy in allowing WFH instead of the current tug of war between workers and their employers.

11

_hephaestus t1_iu1ee69 wrote

The title is a great idea, is this actually a good plan to get there? I've only skimmed it so far but in the vein of making it a 24 hour city I couldn't find anything about extending mbta hours. From other comments here zoning/late night permit logic seems to be missing some notes.

Kinda worried this 24 hour neighborhood in name approach leads to a few bodegas opening up and declaring mission accomplished

2

jjgould165 t1_iu069fh wrote

Mayor Michelle Wu unveiled a plan Thursday to revive a downtown hammered by the pandemic by making it less reliant on office workers, with ideas that include helping convert office buildings to housing, encouraging a wider variety of retail uses, and turning some city streets into pedestrian ways.
“This report ... reflects what we want downtown to be: a 24-hour neighborhood that is open to everybody,” said Segun Idowu, Wu’s chief of economic opportunity and inclusion.
The report, done for the city by Boston Consulting Group, echoes many of the themes of an action plan the Wu administration released in March, aiming to address the empty offices and dark storefronts caused by the shift to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic. But challenges abound.
Many office towers don’t lend themselves to residential conversions, and downtown remains an expensive place to build. The city will likely need to wrap up a broad downtown plan before making substantive zoning changes. There’s no huge pot of money to help. And success hinges on a rapid transit system that is often slow and unreliable, and largely beyond the city’s control.
Foot traffic downtown remains about half of its prepandemic levels, with far sharper declines seen in the Financial District than in other parts of the city. The rise of remote work is a big reason why downtown office occupancy levels are still at about one-third of prepandemic levels.
“I feel a significant sense of urgency about this,” said planning chief Arthur Jemison, who leads the Boston Planning & Development Agency. “Downtown Boston is a critical asset for the city and the region. ... There’s so much to love about it that I really want to make sure we are moving with urgency to take steps to make it easier for people to achieve their development goals downtown.”
Much of the discussion has focused on adding more housing, and thus residents. There have been a few examples of office-to-residential conversions in recent years, including along Winter Street and Temple Place. Suffolk University successfully remade the former Ames Hotel into a student dorm, while two former Suffolk buildings on Beacon Hill have been converted into luxury condos. City officials want to explore whether other institutions, such as Massachusetts General Hospital and Emerson College, can tackle conversions as well.
But the physical conversion of existing offices to residential space is a tall order. A recent study by design firm Gensler found that just 10 of 84 buildings in downtown Boston would warrant closer review to see if they could be converted. Owners have to be willing to make the investment. Jemison declined to name the downtown spots where city officials would like to see these conversions.
“We think that there’s targets and opportunities, and we think we’ve got good relationships with owners who were open to it,” Jemison said.
But Jim Rooney, chief executive of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, expressed skepticism about relying too heavily on reviving downtown via residential conversions.
“I don’t hold out much hope for that, though I’m sure there are some [properties that could work],” Rooney said. “If it was financially feasible, we would already be seeing it happening.”
Rooney applauded the efforts to bring a more local flair to the ground-floor spaces, including at Faneuil Hall Marketplace.
“One of the complaints ... is when you see ground-floor retail, it’s Anyplace USA,” Rooney said. “There’s something there to try to activate the ground floor retail and at the same time provide local businesses with opportunities.”
Toward that end, Idowu said the city has set aside $9 million of federal recovery funds to provide rent subsidies for retail businesses across the city. The focus of this program, which launches in December, will be on encouraging diverse business ownership, particularly downtown. Up to $150,000 could be available, over a three-year period, for as many as 60 small businesses.
The report recommends broadening retail zoning to include nontraditional uses such as child care, co-working spaces, and “maker spaces” where artisans work on their products and sell them. Jemison said he would prefer to hold off on zoning changes until the Boston Planning & Development Agency completes its downtown plan, but it’s possible some might be advanced at an earlier date.
The report dedicates a page to “reimagining” Faneuil Hall, the historic marketplace overseen by landlord Ashkenazy Acquisition Corp. under a long-term lease with the city. But the details are scant other than expressing a desire to shift the emphasis away from national chains to local entrepreneurs — a long-held goal for the market — and to improve the marketplace’s physical condition. When Jemison was asked if city officials are negotiating with Ashkenazy to accomplish these goals, Jemison simply said “we talk to all of our tenants frequently” and declined to expand on the bare-bones description in the report.
Michael Nichols, president of the Downtown Boston Business Improvement District, said he likes the report’s suggestion to test programs that reserve specific streets for pedestrian use. He also backs the concepts of making empty upper floors available at low-cost or no cost to startups, nonprofits, and entrepreneurs of color, and filling vacant storefronts with pop-up, or temporary, stores to try out new business ideas. The report even floats the idea of the city leasing or otherwise acquiring spaces in attractive locations to offer short-term leases for pop-ups; city officials have already identified certain locations that could work for this.
“Anytime you have a shock to the system like this, it creates an opportunity,” Nichols said of the pandemic. “The owners don’t want to have that space sit empty forever [so] they become more flexible.”
As with the Wu administration, the BID hopes to hold more event series that can draw crowds downtown and gradually change the area into a full-fledged neighborhood as opposed to a forest of office towers that goes dark on nights and weekends.
“I think the tourism, the students, the theater traffic, that stuff is back in large measure,” Nichols said. “The city is right to say we can throw gas on that fire and make it even stronger instead of waiting for an office worker who may never return given the change in the future of work.”

131

HNL2BOS t1_iu22esn wrote

No mention of the MBTA running later? How are you supped to have a "24h" anything?

14

keithabarta t1_iu2m11s wrote

Fr, that seems like the easiest fix. Just run trains like twice an hour between the current off hours. Bam.

5

djohnstonb t1_iu01ykt wrote

I was hoping for a district where bars don't have to close

75

Yak_Rodeo t1_iu04rnb wrote

not everything has to be about drinking alcohol

−57

glenvillequint t1_iu07ioi wrote

You don’t have to drink alcohol at a bar. Where else can you hang out late at night? Unless they open some 24 hour diners, that would be fun.

58

DerekMcLeod t1_iu08247 wrote

You're right, it doesn't- but it shouldn't have to be a incredible hoop to have to jump through either. Also acohol is a great way for an otherwise low margin business to make a great margin. Want to open up a board game place? Cool, do it downtown and sell a few beers on tap to make some margin.

30

VMP85 t1_iu0amv0 wrote

You're assuming that it will be geared towards people who want to drink for hours and get drunk. There are plenty of people who would like to be able to go to a bar at say 11:45 pm, and sit there for a couple of hours having 1-2 good drinks and socialize - not getting drunk. The way Boston is right now, you really cannot do that.

25

parislights t1_iu0ibxk wrote

That's what I keep complaining about. Boston just keeps adding more and more people through housing but then there's nothing to do! We just work and go home? Ugh

18

dan420 t1_iu0dntx wrote

Not everything has to be about it, but believe it or not many people enjoy drinking alcohol. It’s something that people spend money on. It’s heavily taxed so it brings in revenue for the city and state. Boston has many college aged people and young professionals who enjoy going out, buying a few drinks, dancing, and heaven forbid, staying up late. Bars closing by two doesn’t stop people from drinking, those who want too go home or to a party and get drinks from a fridge or cooler, it just stops local businesses and the state from making money off of people drinking. Bars in other major cities stay open later, so a proposal to keep things open later is a totally reasonable time to discuss bars staying open past 1:45 or whatever it is now.

16

hoopbag33 t1_iu0g6mo wrote

You want places like A4cade and bowling alleys to be open so you have activities late? Guess how they make their money. Booze.

11

sarcasticlhath t1_iu08riw wrote

Can someone informed share what specifically makes commercial-residential conversions so difficult? Are the building standards different to the point of safety concerns or is it mostly about noise concerns? Traffic/parking?

49

Skizzy_Mars t1_iu0aryy wrote

Building standards and designs are very different. Commercial buildings are usually built with central bathrooms, so plumbing needs significant changes. Then you have to consider how the floor space is laid out relative to windows. Every apartment needs windows to the outside, so you end up with long, shoe box style apartment layouts that aren't very desirable. And then you have to figure out how to transition from a floor-by-floor HVAC system to one where every apartment controls their own.

116

raabbasi t1_iu32w8t wrote

Still cheaper than building new buildings.

0

SlamwellBTP t1_iu09q2o wrote

It's the building standards mainly. Things like every room having a window don't work well with office layouts.

48

ShriekingMuppet t1_iu0ay4a wrote

Apparently HVAC and plumbing are a nightmare to redesign, changing a large building from office to residential is a-lot of engineering.

36

northeast0 t1_iu0tbxc wrote

The cost of conversion usually ends up being more expensive than a teardown and rebuild primarily due to fire code issues. Every bedroom needs 2 forms of egress/ingress so all windows would conceivably need to be converted into windows that open outward. Utilities need to be separately metered and controlled. Electrical outlets need to be reconfigured. Kitchens and bathrooms need to be built in every unit. Soundproof walls need to be put in on every floor. Fire suppression systems need to be reconfigured so that it can activate in every unit. Laundry facilities need to be made available or installed in each unit. The list goes on and on

20

FitzwilliamTDarcy t1_iu16nq8 wrote

Yup. All this, plus distance from core (elevator/stair) to edge-walls in office is usually far greater than in residential.

5

Maxpowr9 t1_iu1bjt6 wrote

Even for my own home, to do a gut job and an addition is nearly the cost of a teardown and building something new. Really the only reason to do the former is if temporarily relocating isn't an option.

4

Snoo_97625 t1_iu0egmv wrote

Lack of political will. The office owners aren't interested, it's significantly more costly than building a 4 story apartment building out in the burbs, it generates less income, it's a years long process, dealing with the city is never fun. Basically developers just aren't interested yet

−17

unclepeteusa t1_iu21oif wrote

I’ve sold many billion worth of office buildings in Boston and some combo of all of the answers are correct but I think this one is the most accurate, the people who own the “convertible” office buildings will just wait it out and never convert to residential.

1

huron9000 t1_iu12dvf wrote

Why would someone downvote this?

−4

jojenns t1_iu14txy wrote

Because its mostly inaccurate I think

4

huron9000 t1_iu19wf2 wrote

Which part? All of it?

1

jojenns t1_iu1amoh wrote

No not all. Starts with a bad point lack of political will. The article itself is about Boston’s elected leader pushing for it. They are right about cost but are off track on why. It just was articulated better a half dozen times right above it

2

huron9000 t1_iu5jfwd wrote

I read it as: These conversions are extensive, difficult, a pain in the ass, and as yet mostly unproven in the market. Therefore developers will not undertake them without govt subsidies or at least regulation streamlining. That last part is where the political will comes in.

1

Shemsuni t1_iu0ebso wrote

High rent has killed small businesses. Night life is non existent in this city. Pathetic for “world class city”. The MBTA shutters way too damn early.

Does Wu address these issues?

26

ADarwinAward t1_iu2nlvh wrote

Increased housing supply, including increased affordable housing supply is the 2nd thing mentioned in the list of proposed changes.

Nightlife is also mentioned in the report on page 10, but isn’t featured as prominently as many other items

> Create spaces, events, and programs to expand nightlife downtown, ideally to attract new populations and demographic/socioeconomic groups

2

jojenns t1_iu04tzg wrote

“though concrete steps remain a work in progress.”…..ie: not happening

24

baru_monkey t1_iu13764 wrote

Yup. This.

Political hand-waving means exactly nothing.

3

yuvng_matt t1_iu15rh9 wrote

This seems to be the mark of Wu’s career. She has so many great ideas but progress on them is so damn slow.

1

HeartFullONeutrality t1_iu1l2f6 wrote

I thought you'd say she's got great intentions but no idea on how to actually achieve them.

1

-Reddititis t1_iu12q72 wrote

(30/35+) dimly-lit after hours lounges please. Places where one doesn't have to yell over blaring music to have a conversation with others.

23

raabbasi t1_iu330u4 wrote

Is Bond still open? If I drank and worked in the Financial District, I'd have my after work drinks there. Such a dope spot.

2

-Reddititis t1_iu37src wrote

Oh man, that has been closed for a while now. I think there's a restaurant there now?? But yes, it was a really dope/different spot compared to what we have now.

3

Funktapus t1_iu0r9tp wrote

Love the idea of more nightlife and non-traditional retail. Do it!

20

Sloth_are_great t1_iu177mm wrote

So the Ts gonna run all night right?!

19

chemkay t1_iu19mo1 wrote

It can barely run during normal operating hours soooo

12

Sloth_are_great t1_iu1ach3 wrote

I should have specified I was being sarcastic. I figured the total clusterfuck the Ts been lately would have made this obvious.

1

Stronkowski t1_iu06y3i wrote

Godamn 86 pages. So I'm definitely not going to spend the time to read through that whole thing, but here's the policy goals from slide 6:

  • Ensure the continued vibrancy of office space downtown, working with both companies and building owners to maintain and grow building occupancy

  • Expand housing downtown

  • Expand the daily use of downtown beyond work by bolstering downtown's cultural, art, retail, services, and hospitality ecosystems

  • Support connectively and mobility downtown via multi-modal transportation infrastructure and protected infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists

  • Enhance economic opportunity downtown by supporting women, BIPOC, and other underserved populations, and by strengthening the small business and creative community

  • Grow Boston's footprint as a global tourism hub

Seems like a mixed bag to me, but mostly good. The housing and transportation goals seem like they'd do the heavy lifting if actually implemented.

33

mrkro3434 t1_iu0au3q wrote

> Expand the daily use of downtown beyond work by bolstering downtown's cultural, art, retail, services, and hospitality ecosystems

I just don't see this happening. 15+ years ago, you could walk around Newbury and the Back Bay and find cool niche places that would incentivize foot traffic and provide a reason to be there outside of work hours.

I don't see that ever returning unless someone has a magic wand they can wave to get rid of greed. The groups that own these building and spaces will always rent them out to banks or restaurant chains over an art gallery or mom and pop shop.

27

Maxpowr9 t1_iu0pxy7 wrote

Most of Newbury St is owned by a consortium based in South Carolina. They give no fucks about Boston.

15

man2010 t1_iu0cz5y wrote

Bank branches in major cities have been declining for years, and art galleries and small businesses still exist on Newbury St

1

[deleted] t1_iu0eexx wrote

[deleted]

18

man2010 t1_iu0otoj wrote

Franklin St isn't Newbury St which the previous commenter specifically mentioned, and I'm not sure why you're bringing it up. The city has had 39 bank closures since the pandemic started, and nationally the trend for over a decade has been more branch closures, especially in metropolitan areas and among larger banks. One street isn't representative of the larger trends.

10

yacht_boy t1_iu16vdk wrote

I mean, it IS the financial district. I expect to see all the regional and national banks have offices and branches there. It makes sense for them to be in proximity to each other.

What I didn't need was a new Chase bank on Centre St in JP where there used to be a family-owned restaurant.

8

Snoo_97625 t1_iu09g43 wrote

Bring back that one bit of the orange line, you now the part I'm talking about

0

Sayoria t1_iu0eub2 wrote

I hope things change for sure. There's less to do in the city than there should be. The more people who come back, or live there, the more likely it is to actually have a night life.

Still sad we only have one gay bar now.

14

TouchDownBurrito OP t1_iu13bqh wrote

> Still sad we only have one gay bar now.

I know there aren’t many but there are at least 2 in Dorchester and I think 1-2 in south end.

4

PajamaPete5 t1_iu0r8uv wrote

How about everything not closing at 9 pm, that might help

9

theWora t1_iu2w8oq wrote

Bring back late Coffee spots/Cafes.

Also, you know what are great businesses that work well late at night???? Taquerias, aka Taco shops!!!! Bring em to me babey!!!!!!!

5

Peeeculiar t1_iu01x8w wrote

I'd love to but I have work in the morning.

4

Mmmmffffeeerrrr t1_iu03ju5 wrote

From what i gather from the headline only because of the pay wall this is genius and much needed.

4

fakecrimesleep t1_iu0f9ja wrote

Crazy idea but maybe convert some of the office spaces into schools? So many BPS buildings are crumbling trash heaps. I’m sure some of the colleges would want those spots too. Idk but every time I go downtown now it’s depressingly empty and sad.

4

Stronkowski t1_iu0me6g wrote

Hmm, interesting idea. It would get around the big issue of converting to apartments because central plumbing and heating work fine for a school.

But that's only gonna fill up the tiniest portion of the potential office space.

3

Maxpowr9 t1_iu0qtua wrote

That's how a lot of other major cities have schools/universities. Even when I studied abroad at RMIT, I had classes way up on the 16th floor. I just chalk it up as more NIMBYism being anti-skyscraper and wanting to keep some silly provincial feeling instead of being a world class city.

3

ggtffhhhjhg t1_iu41uot wrote

There are restrictions on how high you can build in certain parts of the city and people in multiple parts of the city have immense power, wealth and influence.

1

in_finite_jest t1_iu19ja5 wrote

Kinda need 24h public transportation to be a 24h city, mayor.

3

Diora0 t1_iu1i43j wrote

24hr neighborhood isn't going to happen without mbta on board with late night service, which won't happen until there is a 24hr neighborhood to service. So it will just never happen.

3

spedmunki t1_iu1nl5p wrote

Do it, please. Make DTX more like the central areas in lively European cities

3

Gggilla614 t1_iu2awfx wrote

I’d settle for just “A Safe Neighborhood “. I work in downtown crossing and lunch hour is filled with meth heads shouting in the streets

3

Pinwurm t1_iu02227 wrote

Yes please.

2

CoolKid2326 t1_iu1amdc wrote

Now we need a 24 hour MBTA.

2

scram_jones t1_iu2kiz8 wrote

oh great, just when i'm 36 and too tired to enjoy it. thanks for nothing.

2

evilmullet t1_iu2obh1 wrote

Imagine Boston being open 24 hours per week!

2

mini4x t1_iu43kwk wrote

Make it cheaper to live there, and I'm in.

2

AutoModerator t1_iu00y4p wrote

The linked source has opted to use a paywall to restrict free viewership of their content. As alternate sources become available, please post them as a reply to this comment. Users with a Boston Public Library card can often view unrestricted articles here.

Boston Globe articles are still permissible as it's a soft-paywall. Please refrain from reporting as a Rule 5 violation. Please also note that copying and posting the entire article text as comments is not permissible.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

[deleted] t1_iu0ueyo wrote

[deleted]

1

TouchDownBurrito OP t1_iu15qxy wrote

> Turning a parking garage into housing and an office will enliven downtown. Why is Mayor Wu against the Harbor Garage redevelopment?

State Supreme Court is blocking that, nothing to do with Wu.

> Or could Mayor Wu, at least, encourage the developer not to build such a terrible building?

Lol, you want her to be an architect that caters to your standards as well?

6

[deleted] t1_iu1gx5m wrote

[deleted]

1

TouchDownBurrito OP t1_iu1nwmt wrote

> State Supreme Court told the city to resubmit a plan,

It didn’t, it completely rejected it in July because approval went through an illegal process. The process needs to start over, and it’s being done by Baker, so not on Wu.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/05/03/business/baker-hopes-revive-tossed-out-waterfront-plans/

> called them up and told them a building was an abomination they would change it.

And it’s an “abomination” because you said so?

0

man2010 t1_iu17ixb wrote

Regarding number 2, that development includes over 700 new housing units of which more than half have already been built at The Sudbury, and the entire project will include retail/restaurant space. Writing the entire project off as a hideous lab building is laughably off base.

4

[deleted] t1_iu1g5la wrote

[deleted]

−1

man2010 t1_iu1gu9w wrote

Probably because the project already has lots of residential and office space

2

[deleted] t1_iu1h5tq wrote

[deleted]

−1

man2010 t1_iu1hcsb wrote

Did you miss the part about this development including over 700 residential units?

2

[deleted] t1_iu1htls wrote

[deleted]

0

man2010 t1_iu1jirg wrote

And again, this development includes over 700 new housing units. Having high housing costs doesn't mean it's a good idea to stop all other forms of new development

2

ggtffhhhjhg t1_iu42ik1 wrote

Couldn’t they just convert existing commercial space to labs?

1

man2010 t1_iu48216 wrote

In some cases yes; it depends on the building

2

Wonka_Stompa t1_iu1sr30 wrote

Oh good!

> while two former Suffolk buildings on Beacon Hill have been converted into luxury condos

… great start, i guess.

1

His_little_pet t1_iu1txpd wrote

Everything else aside, I think she picked the wrong neighborhood. Downtown Boston is mostly just a weird mix of weekday business areas (eg. the financial district) and tourist attractions. There are lots of restaurants in that area that aren't even open on weekends, much less late into the night.

I think she should instead focus on the Allston/Brighton area. It's populated primarily by college students and young adults, plus plenty of the restaurants and other businesses are already open late at night.

I don't understand why Mayor Wu picked a half-dead neighborhood that's going to be an uphill battle to even add daytime appeal to when she could've instead just framed Allston/Brighton as the "new downtown" and maybe added some late night T service.

1

Itchy-Marionberry-62 t1_iu27c77 wrote

Downtown was on a respirator before the Covid panic…now the plug has been pulled…and the damage will probably never be reversed.

1

trimtab28 t1_iu2ownn wrote

So she had a bunch of high paid consultants come up with a broad study suggesting uses for downtown... well, problem solved

−1

theWora t1_iu2vybv wrote

I hate the Globe bc I have to pay for it. :(

−1

Wanderiing_Star t1_iu3a1gp wrote

12ft.io still works on the Globe, last I knew. If not, there's always archive.is.

2

Freshman44 t1_iu0y25k wrote

Nah we’re good thanks.

−13