Tasteful Friends: Facing Boston Public Garden

Is this the house Sharon lived in with her mother, grandfather and snobby grandmother in The Parent Trap.

In other news that bathroom looks McMansionized.

What would you do to it OP?

Didn't the Moonies own one of those for a long time?

Hideous furnishings & decor. The kitchen needs gutting, but all in all, it’s a beautiful space.

Where's the rest of it? Lots of pics of the park and view - very little of anything else. Sus.

This is one of the worst staging jobs I have seen.

Where do folks sleep...on the ceiling????

The kitchen is fine - it’s functional, and only the help will use it.

Looks like they've had a lot of rental listings for this place - $2100 to $4100 - so there may be a separate apartment, or this may be cut up into multiple apartments.

The lack of more interior shots makes me presume the owner isn't really interested in selling - they just want to see 'what they could get'.

[quote]Currently configured as 10 apartments and 8 rooms, its 5 floors plus attic combine 19th century grandeur & 21st century convenience: elevator, private courtyard & rare parking.

FFS, read the description maybe?

And no way it "will probably need;another $10M put into it.". Gay men are hysterically bad at (over)estimating costs of restorations.

It has a superabundance of bathrooms which is good as some can be eliminated and there's no need for additional plumbing lines. Likewise if it was10 apartments, there will be numerous kitchens that can be scrapped and made over as living space, bedrooms, whatever.

What few photos there are show a house in excellent condition with care given to preserve its historic features. It's quite a nice house and probably very easily put back to a single family house, or a single family house with a guest apartment, etc.

Not enough photos of the interiors.

IMO, the kitchen looks more like a butler's pantry. The long, stainless steel counter with the lip is really more suited for restaurant prep work. Looks like there's no vertical space for a normal-sized refrigerator.

Oh, Gerg! Dear, sweet Gerg. RIP.

R10 - to be fair - they bury that. You have to click open to read the full description. Ok - yes, it's configured as apartments - but they're trying to sell it as a single home with virtually no real interior pics.

We're tasteful friends - we're here to look at pics and comment.

Has Charlotte Vale pulled up stakes and hightailed it to live with Dr. Jacquith?

That’s the DL!! ^^

It is a beautiful Neoclassic house, and neither the modern bathroom not the utilitarian kitchen in one of the apartments are unappealing. The kitchen in particular till preserves many of its most charming features and it can be easily remodelled. The decoration is extremely neutral and lifeless but, then again, this is a given for rental units, as they must be easily presented as a clean, blank slate for potential renters once the current tenant moves onto another property. However, as previously stated, this can be very easily rectified.

The only downsides I find with this house are its location, which makes it susceptible to flooding, and the fact that it doesn't have a garden. Yes, the park in front of it is extremely beautiful, but USD 20 million for a house with no garden that will have to be remodelled, is downright insulting. The only people who will be interested in this are either investment funds that will keep the property in its current setting in order to make as much money as possible through rentals, or someone who simply must have the house and will lovingly restore it, and is willing to ensure its limitations out of love for its architectural value.

Sorry, I have meant to write "endure" @R16

93 Beacon St, Boston, MA 02108 (MLS# 73290842) is a Multi-Family property with 18 units containing 18 bedrooms.

It's a fancy flophouse?

R18 The listing says it's currently configured as 10 apartments and 8 rooms. Here's Apartment 8 that was previously listed for $3,898 per month.

R19 - is charmless a word? It really feels poorly cut up - particularly the door frame on the side of the kitchen.

It would take a significant amount of money to turn it into a single family home again.

Shitty job pointing the bricks and will need to be redone to maintain them in wintery season. My guess is a family owns it and has to get some liquid cash to pay a bill.

I would like to see a luxury hotel put it back together, or super luxe drug recovery center!

R10 It's not a split-entry near the mall from 1972.

It's part of the Historic Beacon Hill District, which is a National Historic Landmark. It's one of the most tightly controlled areas in the country, in terms of any type of renovation.

It's almost 200 years old. Any work will reveal more work to be done.

It will be expensive beyond imagination.

Turning it into a boarding house prompted the fire department to come in and require that a sprinkler system be installed throughout the building. The appeal process went on for awhile (ca. 2017-18). The owner also needed additional time to get the money together to complete the project. Plus, an additional water line was going to have to be installed by the local water company to supply this system.

Within that record, it notes that the appellant's family has owned the place for 60 years.

R22 has never restored a house in an (National Register of Historic Places) historic district.

What restrictions on interior work do Beacon Hill Historic Commission (BHAC) Guidelines impose? None.

What restrictions on interior work do National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Guidelines impose? None.

What restrictions on interior work do National Historic Landmark (NHL) Guidelines impose? None - and shockingly few otherwise. The "highest" level of recognition is quite without teeth except in providing "review" against federally-funded projects such as a new federally-funded or federally-aided highway.

Look up the regulations for any of these three overlapping layers of oversight and you will see that there are no regulations affecting the interior work (except as visible from the exterior and from a public way, e.g. windows, a/c units on roofs, etc.). The restrictions are entirely upon the exterior.

There *may* be interior oversight in a case of an individually listed building building. I certainly expect there is, and probably through the Boston Landmarks Commission or a related municipal office, but this building is not individually listed and there would be no review if interior work beyond the city's usual building permit and inspection process.

I wish it were a complicated process to review plans to alter the.inyerior of contributing historic buildings within an historic district in the U.S., but the truth is that it almost never is.

5 family building? Does that mean each floor represents and apartment, and that the top floor with the dormers is the 5th apartment? Or is one or more floor subdivided?

R25 The Fire Safety Commission document at R23 explains how the building has been divided up:

[quote] The Appellant described the property as a 5 story building, containing 18 residential units. The basement level features one studio apartment and common areas, including a laundry area. The 1st floor contains three (3) apartments, the 2nd floor contains two (2) apartments, and the 3rd floor contains three (3) apartments. All of the apartments on the first three floors and the basement studio are of a non-transient nature; feature full bathrooms and kitchens and the tenants have entered into long term lease arrangements with the owner(s). The Appellant indicted that the 4th floor features one (1) full apartment and two (2) single occupancy boarding rooms, which share a bath and have no kitchen. The 5th floor features six (6) single boarding rooms, all of which share one bathroom, and have no kitchens. The Appellant testified that residents of the 4th and 5th floor have access to a rear fire escape in the case of an emergency. The 6th floor features only unoccupied attic space and is not used for storage. According to City of Boston Records, the building is licensed as a lodging and boarding house.

The fire commission report also notes that while the building is listed by the Boston Historical Commission, it is not on the National Historical Register.

[quote] [R22] has never restored a house in an (National Register of Historic Places) historic district.

Only on DL.

[query] The Appellant indicted that the 4th floor…

R26 I’ll bet the owner could have been indicted running a place like that. Imagine renting an apartment in a building that also has 6 boarding rooms sharing one bathroom and with no kitchens. Must be fun in the hallways. Do they rent by the hour?

R29 The Fire and Safety Commission wouldn't have been holding an appeal hearing about the sprinkler requirements, if the place wasn't approved to operate as a multi-use housing facility. Instead, they would have just shut the place down upon their first inspection. The report even says, "According to City of Boston Records, the building is licensed as a lodging and boarding house," so everything on that front seems legal.

Are the tenants out?

Moonies were at 46 Beacon St but they sold it last year.

The Moonies paid $475,000 for it at auction in 1976 and sold it for $20.3 million. Quite a profit.

tax free as a church. That used to be one of Boston's biggest problems. Most of its property was tax exempt for one reason or another.

Mormon churchproperty conservatively estimated at $200 billion.

Oh look at that, just a few grand below budget!

Snickering from behind my lace curtain…ha, ha.

Perfect for my home for snobby wayward boys!

I lived in an SRO with one bathroom and six shared rooms. Worse than any bathroom I saw in India…

I needed latex gloves, sandals and a tote to shower, and didn’t touch any surfaces the entire time.

I stated at a Boston short-term rental on vacation last year. They played to bait and switch where the location is advertised to be by the Boston Public Garden but it I learned days before they had me about 2 T stops away at a neighborhood further out that I was unfamiliar with. It was a subdivided building like the one above and it was supposed to be a suite, but it was really just a bedroom with a teeny kitchenette that was a converted closet and a very small bathroom. Worst vacation place I ever booked. It is basically a bunch of low quality SROs. I cancelled the next morning and booked myself into a nice hotel instead which unfortunately was the only rooms available that day, and cost more than twice what I was to pay at the other place. I doubt anybody living or renting there likes it.

I guess the 18 bedrooms and 14 bathrooms are across the street in the bushes somewhere.

Emerson can afford it. They could convert it to a dorm. It's a lot nicer than the ones I stayed in.

I visited someone who lived at 100 Beacon, then an Emerson dorm, for a couple of weeks back in the '70s. Mostly I remember is how cold it was, being right on the Charles River. And hearing that Carly Simon album with "You're So Vain" coming out of every other room.

From what few photos I can see it looks pretty nice inside. I'd leave it divided up into apartments as its far too big to be a single home, but I'd rearrange it a bit and expand some of the apartments, merging the SRO rooms into them, and build one big really nice apartment on the 5th floor rather than 6 SRO'S sharing one bathroom and no kitchen

It seems they are less focused on the property than the surroundings in the listing photos. That isuslly signals upkeep issues.

The Cheers bar is only a block away at 84 Beacon Street.

R45 This means it's a mess, not up to code. New wiring/plumbing HVAC all through.

Narrow streets with no parking that cannot be blocked.

Historical Preservation Regulations from the Boston Landmarks Commission and the Massachusetts Historical Commission.

Zoning Laws.

Community input meetings.

Lawyers and agents and permitting and fees.

And it ha=s to look exactly the same from the outside when you're finished.

This will be fabulously expensive to do anything here.

yeah my sister moved into one of those historical district houses in Connecticut. Not kidding here. She got fined for putting in a new mailbox without code clearance.

Apartment 3 has dark wood and a sectional!

What the fuck is going on in number 8?

If you look at the overhead view of the building on google maps, some of the apartments within appear to be in a long narrow section of the building in the rear with windows that face the back of the building next door. You can see this less than desirable view in some of the photos of Apartments 5 and 8 above.

all the renovations. the places are way to light and airy than they were meant to be. doesn't look right. still gorgeous but...

Millions of rats live under it. It's old and smelly.