Boston Housing Density (middle-class, house, neighborhoods)

[mdovell]

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/10/...ut-dorchester/

Now I"m all for multifamily homes but on this one I started to crunch the numbers. Thankfully everyone is ok

There are 15 bedrooms. 20 adults and 17 kids. I'm not going to go into any family values stuff here but there were 37 people living in the place. Each floor has five units

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3...59213363_zpid/

Ok but here's where it gets weird. There's only 1.5 bathrooms on each floor. A full bath means there's a shower, a half means it is a sink and toilet so technically it means one shower per floor.

One shower shared for 12 people per floor. As for the toilet that seems to slightly be above mass sanitation code as it would be for 36 people.

There's also no visible fire escape on the sides or back although they probably could put in stairs in the back to the ground from the deck. I'm also assuming there were no fire sprinklers as the damaged would be less.

I'm not saying the home is overpriced as it was just sold last year for 900K and spread out for that number can make sense in the area. Having said that though there should be some general expectations of having more showers, a sprinkler system and fire escape. Should the city crack down on some of these landlords?

[bostongymjunkie]

One of the negative side effects of gentrification and globalization, in a city where crony politics overrules sound planning and housing development policy. They are probably immigrants and these conditions are a significant step up from what they are used to. These days it also likely to be owned by an overseas investor.

[id77]

Originally Posted by mdovell

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/10/...ut-dorchester/

Now I"m all for multifamily homes but on this one I started to crunch the numbers. Thankfully everyone is ok

There are 15 bedrooms. 20 adults and 17 kids. I'm not going to go into any family values stuff here but there were 37 people living in the place. Each floor has five units

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3...59213363_zpid/

Ok but here's where it gets weird. There's only 1.5 bathrooms on each floor. A full bath means there's a shower, a half means it is a sink and toilet so technically it means one shower per floor.

One shower shared for 12 people per floor. As for the toilet that seems to slightly be above mass sanitation code as it would be for 36 people.

There's also no visible fire escape on the sides or back although they probably could put in stairs in the back to the ground from the deck. I'm also assuming there were no fire sprinklers as the damaged would be less.

I'm not saying the home is overpriced as it was just sold last year for 900K and spread out for that number can make sense in the area. Having said that though there should be some general expectations of having more showers, a sprinkler system and fire escape. Should the city crack down on some of these landlords?

Should they crack down on landlords? Probably, but it will come at the cost of driving costs up even more.

Bathrooms in the inner neighborhoods of Boston (think Back Bay, South End, Beacon Hill, etc here) seem to come in around $500k per bathroom; that is, you can expect to pay $500k for a place with 1 BA, $1 million for a 2 BA place, $1.5 million for 3 and so on. At that rate, mandating more plumbing and adequate, modern safety throughout will make many of these homes prohibitively expensive for many people.

The fact they can get 6 bathrooms for under $1 million in Dorchester is a relative bargain, though still expensive to a working-class family, but like the wealthier neighborhoods, adding additional bathrooms adds significant cost and would likely push these homes (which are already teetering on the edge of affordability for some families) out of their budget.

I do know that there is a requirement for regular smoke detector inspections in Boston and that fire alarms must be in sufficient working order, but I'm also confident a lot of places aren't meeting this and just slip through the cracks.

[robr2]

It's not a 15 bedroom house. It's a 9 bedroom house and the realtor who listed it noted "can be used as 5 bedrooms." Basically the living room and dining room was advertised as a bedroom. For a 3 BR, 1.5 baths is acceptable.

As for the rear steps, they are inside the house and exit out through the back door. The house never would have sold if it didn't have 2 methods of egress.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Its modern day slum housing in a low income over priced area. Simple as that.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by robr2

It's not a 15 bedroom house. It's a 9 bedroom house and the realtor who listed it noted "can be used as 5 bedrooms." Basically the living room and dining room was advertised as a bedroom. For a 3 BR, 1.5 baths is acceptable.

As for the rear steps, they are inside the house and exit out through the back door. The house never would have sold if it didn't have 2 methods of egress.

Thanks for that. I've lived in several Dot three-deckers in years past. I was wondering how the hell they managed 5 BR's on each floor, even with what appears to be a bit of an extension in the rear. Even the biggest of them usually have no more than 3-4BR and maybe a den and dining area. Shook my head and took it at face value based on the posted details.

[yesmaybe]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

Its modern day slum housing in a low income over priced area. Simple as that.

Pretty much, although given how expensive housing is in Boston, the people density is kind of necessary.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by yesmaybe

Pretty much, although given how expensive housing is in Boston, the people density is kind of necessary.

This ain’t an although. This kind kind of The crux of my point here. More housing, more affordable housing, regional planning, and a simple majority would mitigate this to a good degree.

[masssachoicetts]

This is nothing. There was a family of 24 living on a floor down the road in Edison NJ.

[id77]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

This ain’t an although. This kind kind of The crux of my point here. More housing, more affordable housing, regional planning, and a simple majority would mitigate this to a good degree.

Not that I’m disagreeing, but at current land values low-income housing is effectively a loss project, so the city will have to subsidize it, which means higher taxes, which is going to get passed on to people on the edge of affordability who this was intending to help.

The backlog of upper-middle and middle-class people need to get housing before the lower-income have much of a chance competing, and I don’t see any sweeping efforts to help the upper-middle class.