4 ms·

How much non-campus land does Harvard own? Their troubles with dealing with their overseas land made the news earlier (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2

How much non-campus land does Harvard own? Their troubles with dealing with their overseas land made the news earlier (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-06/harvard-s-foreign-farmland-investment-mess https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-06/harvard-s...). Do other universities do this too?

greeneggs 8y ago
Most controversial are its holdings in Cambridge and Allston, across the river. > Based on data from Harvard’s building records, Harvard owns 9.56 percent of the land in Cambridge, 5.70 percent in Allston, and 0.27 percent in Boston. https://medium.com/harvard-open-data-project/how-harvards-expansion-affects-the-communities-around-it-c4e669dc9f2a https://medium.com/harvard-open-data-project/how-harvards-ex...
- giggles_giggles 8y ago
  Harvard is in Cambridge.
  - kevinventullo 8y ago
    Also, the business school is in Allston, and the engineering school will move there in a few years.
    - cowsandmilk 8y ago
      When discussing Harvard in Allston, good reporters should spend the time to deconvolute their holdings. They have lots of campus holdings, and that is growing, but they also own plenty of things that aren't campus. They're the landlord for my auto repair place (Oriental Car King) and for the shopping mall with my grocery store (Brighton Mills). These aren't becoming campus any time soon in anything that Harvard has announced.
      - zerohp 8y ago
        I stumbled across a planning map during my time at University of Illinois. It was marked showing 50, 75 and 100 year expansion possibilities. The land supporting 100 year expansion is already owned by the university and leased for commercial use. Harvard is 200 years older than UIUC. I'm sure they are also planning for 100 years in the future.
        cbm-vic-20 8y ago
        Indeed. In the past, Harvard seriously considered how to re-route the Charles River so they can "unite" their Cambridge and Allston campuses.
  - arkades 8y ago
    Allston is across the river.
mathattack 8y ago
I suspect quite a bit. Real Estate is a huge asset class and correlates well with one of their biggest costs.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> Do other universities do this too? What, own land as an investment? Yeah, when you have multibillion dollar investment fund (endowment and other funds), as most major private universities will, you probably have some of it in real estate.
reaperducer 8y ago
Do other universities do this too? University of Chicago opened a building in Hong Kong.† "Ownership" is hard to speak to, since it's my understanding that nobody "owns" land in Hong Kong, it's just leased from the government for 99 years. Or maybe I'm confusing that with the mainland. † University of Chicago to Open New Building Atop “Hong Kong’s Most Notorious Prison”: https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2016/11/30/university-of-chicago-to-open-new-building-in-hong-kong/ https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2016/11/30/university-of...
techsupporter 8y ago
By way of further example, and because quite a few universities also do this by "accident" of having land left over after either moving or redoing their campuses, the University of Washington owns approximately 10 acres in downtown Seattle, including (notably for various court cases about where the authority of the university, as a non-political arm of the State of Washington, and municipalities intersect) 4th Ave, a city-maintained street of public use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Tract_(Seattle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Tract_(Seattle)
- oasisbob 8y ago
  Off-topic, but it's very normal for private entities to own public streets in the US. At the time when these areas were platted and lots conveyed, the streets were dedicated to the public use, but were not deeded to the municipalities. As a general rule, in most US states the adjoining landowners are assumed to have fee simple ownership and reversionary rights to the land underlying the streets. As a public policy matter, courts are loathe to create situations where tiny little bits of land are separately owned and can't be put to productive use. (the strips and gores doctrine.) For WA, Holmquist v. King discusses this in depth.

greeneggs 8y ago

Most controversial are its holdings in Cambridge and Allston, across the river. > Based on data from Harvard’s building records, Harvard owns 9.56 percent of the land in Cambridge, 5.70 percent in Allston, and 0.27 percent in Boston. https://medium.com/harvard-open-data-project/how-harvards-expansion-affects-the-communities-around-it-c4e669dc9f2a https://medium.com/harvard-open-data-project/how-harvards-ex...

giggles_giggles 8y ago
Harvard is in Cambridge.
- kevinventullo 8y ago
  Also, the business school is in Allston, and the engineering school will move there in a few years.
  - cowsandmilk 8y ago
    When discussing Harvard in Allston, good reporters should spend the time to deconvolute their holdings. They have lots of campus holdings, and that is growing, but they also own plenty of things that aren't campus. They're the landlord for my auto repair place (Oriental Car King) and for the shopping mall with my grocery store (Brighton Mills). These aren't becoming campus any time soon in anything that Harvard has announced.
    - zerohp 8y ago
      I stumbled across a planning map during my time at University of Illinois. It was marked showing 50, 75 and 100 year expansion possibilities. The land supporting 100 year expansion is already owned by the university and leased for commercial use. Harvard is 200 years older than UIUC. I'm sure they are also planning for 100 years in the future.
      - cbm-vic-20 8y ago
        Indeed. In the past, Harvard seriously considered how to re-route the Charles River so they can "unite" their Cambridge and Allston campuses.
- arkades 8y ago
  Allston is across the river.

mathattack 8y ago

I suspect quite a bit. Real Estate is a huge asset class and correlates well with one of their biggest costs.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> Do other universities do this too? What, own land as an investment? Yeah, when you have multibillion dollar investment fund (endowment and other funds), as most major private universities will, you probably have some of it in real estate.

reaperducer 8y ago

Do other universities do this too? University of Chicago opened a building in Hong Kong.† "Ownership" is hard to speak to, since it's my understanding that nobody "owns" land in Hong Kong, it's just leased from the government for 99 years. Or maybe I'm confusing that with the mainland. † University of Chicago to Open New Building Atop “Hong Kong’s Most Notorious Prison”: https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2016/11/30/university-of-chicago-to-open-new-building-in-hong-kong/ https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2016/11/30/university-of...

techsupporter 8y ago

By way of further example, and because quite a few universities also do this by "accident" of having land left over after either moving or redoing their campuses, the University of Washington owns approximately 10 acres in downtown Seattle, including (notably for various court cases about where the authority of the university, as a non-political arm of the State of Washington, and municipalities intersect) 4th Ave, a city-maintained street of public use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Tract_(Seattle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Tract_(Seattle)

oasisbob 8y ago
Off-topic, but it's very normal for private entities to own public streets in the US. At the time when these areas were platted and lots conveyed, the streets were dedicated to the public use, but were not deeded to the municipalities. As a general rule, in most US states the adjoining landowners are assumed to have fee simple ownership and reversionary rights to the land underlying the streets. As a public policy matter, courts are loathe to create situations where tiny little bits of land are separately owned and can't be put to productive use. (the strips and gores doctrine.) For WA, Holmquist v. King discusses this in depth.