Tag: affordable housing

CEDACNotMentioned: Jamaica Plain’s Jackson Square — its moment has arrived

OPINION
May 08, 2012
Jamaica Plain’s Jackson Square — its moment has arrived
By Paul McMorrow
This weekend, community activists, politicians, and developers will converge on Jackson Square in Jamaica Plain. They will celebrate the imminent emergence of structural steel in the square. The stated reason for this weekend’s party is construction of a 103-unit apartment building. But the celebration is really about the triumph over urban renewal.
For more than 50 years, outdated transportation policy shaped the neighborhoods around Jackson Square. When that steel rises above 225 Centre Street, Jackson Square will finally begin being shaped by something other than a highway. It will be shaped by community development. It will finally get back to being a real place.
Jackson Square was a legitimate square for the first half of the 1900s, with shops and factories standing alongside working-class housing. That ended when city and state transportation planners began pushing plans to run an elevated highway, the Southwest Expressway, through the neighborhood.
Today, the square is more of an intersection than a square. City squares are clusters of buildings and hubs of activity; Jackson Square is the name of an Orange Line station, and also a barren spot where seven lanes of traffic collide with another five.
In the 1950s and 1960s, the Boston area was littered with highway construction plans — genuine, if failed, attempts to rescue the city from decades of economic stagnation and declining population. Roxbury and Jamaica Plain bore the brunt of land clearance efforts. Thousands of homes and businesses were razed. Blight radiated from the planned highway routes. Scars in the landscape still run from the Southeast Expressway to Ruggles, and then down to Forest Hills.
Jamaica Plain and Roxbury once met in Jackson Square; now, they’re separated by a vacant, impassable no-mans land. Highway clearance imposed an architecture that continues to promote economic disinvestment.
The new apartment building at the corner of Centre and Columbus — 225 Centre Street — is the first phase of a decade-long, $250 million effort to rebuild Jackson Square. The whole effort will re-knit Jamaica Plain to Roxbury.
A straight line runs from the early anti-highway activism in Jamaica Plain and Roxbury, through the construction of the Orange Line, and to the contemporary redevelopment of Jackson Square. At all three stages of the 50-year effort, local activists formed broad coalitions, engaged in proactive planning, and knew that saying no wasn’t good enough. The activists won because they didn’t just oppose poor land use — they articulated an alternative vision.
Early on, they demanded the same sort of highway more powerful Boston neighborhoods were getting — subsurface, not elevated. That morphed into calls to mothball the highway altogether, in favor of mass transit in the form of the Orange Line, and public open space that became Southwest Corridor Park.
Neighborhood activists have been guiding the current redevelopment effort for more than a decade — ever since Kmart tried building on a vacant lot in Jackson. The community rallied together, opposed the big-box development, and then sketched out exactly what it wanted built instead. The neighborhoods drew up plans for their own redevelopment, and then put the concept out to bid. Three non-profit builders — the Community Builders, Urban Edge, and the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Development Corporation — answered the bell. But these builders are just vessels carrying a larger, community-directed vision.
Looking back at the Kmart battle, Bart Mitchell, CEO of The Community Builders, says, “It would have been a shame, to have not taken advantage of this part of the city.” Instead of settling for any building, the neighborhood held out for transformative development. And now, 50 years since the bulldozers began rolling in, and 25 years after the Orange Line opened, Jackson Square’s moment has arrived.
Mitchell’s development at 225 Centre will mix retail and community uses with subsidized and market-rate housing. It will embody the diversity of the neighborhoods around it, and, he hopes, set a marker for the redevelopment work to follow. “I’m not necessarily an advocate for things going slowly,” Mitchell says, “but I like when they get done right.”
Paul M. McMorrow is an associate editor at CommonWealth Magazine. His column appears regularly in the Globe.

URL: http://bostonglobe.com/opinion/2012/05/08/jamaica-plain-jackson-square-its-moment-has-arrived/nRmi9zu6plxgObnS4C92gO/story.html
© 2012 The New York Times Compan

SourceBoston Globe Opinion Section

Hilltown CDC loan key to affordable housing grant

Monday, April 30, 2012
Hilltown CDC loan key to affordable housing grant
By THE DAILY HAMPSHIRE GAZETTE
Staff Writer

CHESTERFIELD – The Hilltown Community Development Corporation took a step toward obtaining a $2.4 million housing grant last week when it was awarded a $75,000 pre-development loan from the Boston-based Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation.
Hilltown CDC’s housing director, Paul Lishcetti, said landing the loan is key to being able to apply for a grant from the Department of Housing and Community Development for housing developments in Williamsburg and Chesterfield.
“We are just crossing our fingers that we get the grant, ” he said.
The assistance corporation is a community development finance institution that provides technical assistance and loans to non-profits for housing.
Before pursuing the grant from the state, the Hilltown agency must provide pre-development specifications such as architectural, technical and legal information. The $75,000 will fund this research.
The money will be used in part to help create five units for homeless households, including the first three units in the Hilltown region specifically reserved for homeless families and two units for homeless veterans. “There is a four-unit rental property on South Street in Haydenville that we are interested in buying,” Lishcetti, said. “The other properties that will be remodeled or rehabilitated are 13 South Main St., and 148 Main St. in Haydenville, and 12 Williams St. in Williamsburg. Each of those properties has three rental units.
Lishcetti said the CDC also hopes to add a unit to a building at 397 Main Road in Chesterfield which currently has 7 units.
Lishcetti said his agency has seen a marked increase in people with lower incomes over the past few years who are in danger of becoming homeless.
“More people are now in need of lower-income housing. Prior to 2008, I have no recollection of people coming in and saying they are about to be foreclosed on,” he said. “We are also seeing a lot more homeless vets that we are renting to.”
Over the last several years, the Hilltown agency has developed 17 new or rehabilitated homes in the Hilltowns. The agency owns 30 units of rental housing in the Hilltowns including apartments in renovated buildings in Haydenville, Williamsburg, Chesterfield and Huntington.
“Many people think that there really is no problem with homelessness in the Hilltowns because people typically end up in shelters in other towns like Northampton or in other communities,” he said. “This is all part of an effort to help the people with the greatest needs in the Hilltowns.”

Daily Hampshire Gazette © 2011
URL: http://www.gazettenet.com/2012/04/30/hilltown-cdc-loan-key-to-affordable-housing-grant

SourceDaily Hampshire Gazette

Second Expiring-Use Development Preserved As Affordable Housing In Cambridge

Friday, April 13, 2012, 11:10am
Second Expiring-Use Development Preserved As Affordable Housing In Cambridge
By Colleen M. Sullivan
The former Norstin Apartments near Central Square in Cambridge will be preserved as affordable housing through an $8 million deal between the Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation (CEDAC), the city of Cambridge, and Cambridge-based housing non-profit Just A Start Corp.
The 4-story property lies between Bishop Allen Drive and Norfolk Street in Cambridge, has 32 two- and three-bedroom units, and will be renamed the Bishop Allen Apartments in the wake of the purchase. The city was particularly anxious to preserve it since demand for affordable housing with multi-bedroom units considerably outstrips supply, sources familiar with the project told Banker and Tradesman.
“[Cambridge] is really committed to making sure their affordable housing is preserved over the long-term,” Roger Herzog, CEDAC’s executive director, told Banker and Tradesman.
CEDAC provided a loan in the amount of $4.3 million. The Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust provided approximately $4,000,000. The city of Cambridge added additional funds to cover carrying costs and predevelopment expenses.
The apartments are the second expiring-use project to be preserved in Cambridge. Earlier this year, the city and CEDAC, along with Homeowner’s Rehab Inc. were also involved in a deal to preserve the Chapman Arms in Harvard Square.
Both deals demonstrate the impact of the 40T statute passed by the state in 2009, Herzog argues. The law gives the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) the right of first refusal when a project that had been affordable housing is eligible to be sold or converted to market rate. The Chapman Arms project was the first where DHCD exercised that right.
“It’s two ways that 40T is working. In Chapman [Arms], we saw it work under the provision that allows DHCD to exercise a right of first refusal. In Norsten, we see an alternative approach,” said Herzog. The owners of the Bishop Allen buildings, aware that the city of Cambridge wanted to preserve the property as affordable housing, sought out the non-profit Just A Start himself and pitched the project to them.
Since putting it in Just A Start’s hands would preserve affordability, he was able to obtain an exemption from review of the sale by DHCD, Herzog said. “Either way, the project is preserved as affordable housing,” he added. “40T is making an impact.”
URL: http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/news149559.html
Banker & Tradesman ©2012 All Rights Reserved

SourceBanker & Tradesman

Second Expiring-Use Development Preserved As Affordable Housing In Cambridge

Friday, April 13, 2012, 11:10am
Second Expiring-Use Development Preserved As Affordable Housing In Cambridge
By Colleen M. Sullivan
The former Norstin Apartments near Central Square in Cambridge will be preserved as affordable housing through an $8 million deal between the Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation (CEDAC), the city of Cambridge, and Cambridge-based housing non-profit Just A Start Corp.
The 4-story property lies between Bishop Allen Drive and Norfolk Street in Cambridge, has 32 two- and three-bedroom units, and will be renamed the Bishop Allen Apartments in the wake of the purchase. The city was particularly anxious to preserve it since demand for affordable housing with multi-bedroom units considerably outstrips supply, sources familiar with the project told Banker and Tradesman.
“[Cambridge] is really committed to making sure their affordable housing is preserved over the long-term,” Roger Herzog, CEDAC’s executive director, told Banker and Tradesman.
CEDAC provided a loan in the amount of $4.3 million. The Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust provided approximately $4,000,000. The city of Cambridge added additional funds to cover carrying costs and predevelopment expenses.
The apartments are the second expiring-use project to be preserved in Cambridge. Earlier this year, the city and CEDAC, along with Homeowner’s Rehab Inc. were also involved in a deal to preserve the Chapman Arms in Harvard Square.
Both deals demonstrate the impact of the 40T statute passed by the state in 2009, Herzog argues. The law gives the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) the right of first refusal when a project that had been affordable housing is eligible to be sold or converted to market rate. The Chapman Arms project was the first where DHCD exercised that right.
“It’s two ways that 40T is working. In Chapman [Arms], we saw it work under the provision that allows DHCD to exercise a right of first refusal. In Norsten, we see an alternative approach,” said Herzog. The owners of the Bishop Allen buildings, aware that the city of Cambridge wanted to preserve the property as affordable housing, sought out the non-profit Just A Start himself and pitched the project to them.
Since putting it in Just A Start’s hands would preserve affordability, he was able to obtain an exemption from review of the sale by DHCD, Herzog said. “Either way, the project is preserved as affordable housing,” he added. “40T is making an impact.”
URL: http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/news149559.html
Banker & Tradesman ©2012 All Rights Reserved

SourceBanker & Tradesman

57 low-income elderly housing units unveiled in Dudley Square

March 23, 2012
57 low-income elderly housing units unveiled in Dudley Square
By Matt Rocheleau, Town Correspondent
ROXBURY – A $15 million housing complex with 57 one-bedroom apartment units for low-income seniors officially opened in Roxbury’s Dudley Square this week, officials said.
Developed by local nonprofit Central Boston Elder Services and built by Suffolk Construction, project officials said the 50,500 square-foot Dudley Elderly Housing Development Dudley, drew applications from more than 450 seniors who wanted to live there.
“What a heartbreaking day it was when we held the lottery to pick our new tenants and hundreds and hundreds of seniors showed up,” the elderly services organization director Catherine Hardaway said in a statement. “It truly points to the dire situation our low-income seniors in Boston find themselves in.”
The seven-story complex built next to CBES’ headquarters at 2311 Washington St. is reserved for residents 62 and older. It was formally unveiled at a ribbon-cutting Monday afternoon attended by Mayor Thomas M. Menino and other local elected officials and community leaders, officials said.
Rents range from $254 to $1,156 a month. Each apartment at the elderly housing facility is about 540 square feet with some larger handicapped-accessible units. There are private baths, kitchen and walk-in closets, the developer said. Common areas include a library and TV room.
“It has been a long-time coming,” Hardaway’s statement said. “Finally, after years of work, the day has come to watch our new tenants move in. The best part is the look on their faces when they see their new homes. What a source of pride for all of us.”
The creation included help from architect Chia-Ming Sze and five funders: the National Equity Fund, Inc.; the state’s housing and community development department; MassHousing; Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation and the city’s neighborhood development department, officials said.
“We are thrilled to help finance such a remarkable seniors’ development supported by one of Boston’s leaders in elder services,” said a statement from Deborah Burkart, vice president of specialized housing for National Equity Fund. “It’s so rewarding to partner with an agency that shares our vision of promoting seniors’ independence and quality of life.”
E-mail Matt Rocheleau at mjrochele@gmail.com.
—

© 2012 NY Times Co.
URL: http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/roxbury/2012/03/57_low-income_elderly_housing.html

SourceBoston Globe - Roxbury

CEDAC NOT MENTIONED: Easthampton City Council fails to rescind funding for Parsons Village project

Wednesday, March 07, 2012
Easthampton City Council fails to rescind funding for Parsons Village project, despite negative vote
By Diane Lederman, The Republican

EASTHAMPTON – While a majority of the city councilors present Wednesday night voted to rescind Community Preservation Act funding for the proposed Parsons Village affordable housing project on Parsons Street, there were not enough votes for the motion to pass.
Four voted in favor of rescinding the $200,000 the City Council awarded to the Northampton Valley Community Development Corp. in October 2010 and three against with two members absent. Due to a change in charter, such a motion needed five votes.
Council President Justin P. Cobb brought the proposal forward first to the Finance Committee, because he said, “a significant change has occurred,” since the funding was initially approved by a 6 to 3 vote.
At the time, the developer sought a special permit before the Planning Board, but that permit was denied. The corporation is currently seeking a comprehensive permit for the 38-unit housing project.
A comprehensive permit allows the Zoning Boards of Appeals to approve affordable housing developments under more flexible rules when a community has less than 10 percent of its housing as affordable. The city has just 6.3 percent affordable housing.
For an hour, the council took comments from those for and against rescinding.
Both Edward Quinn, the former chairman of the Community Preservation Act Committee and current chairman Robert Harrison opposed the move to rescind.
“If you rescind, you put the city in a very bad place,” Quinn said. He felt “It could make Easthampton have a bad reputation.”
“It’s an eligible project,” Harrison said. “Don’t treat the CPA as a pawn to derail the Valley CDC. That’s why we have a ZBA.” The proposal is now before the Zoning Board of Appeals. The hearing continues Thursday night.
Harrison said whether they sought the special permit or a comprehensive permit did not matter to him. Money from the Community Preservation Act can be used for affordable housing and open space and historic preservation.”
Mary Westervelt, part of the New City Neighborhood Association, who supported pulling the funding, said the project in fact would be taking away open space.
Cobb said Valley CDC’s move to proceed with a comprehensive permit after stating they would apply for a special permit “as a bait and switch.”
Resident Erica Flood who lives next to the proposed project supported rescinding and said the whole project should just begin again.
© 2012 MassLive LLC.
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/03/valley_community_developoment.html

SourceThe Republican (MassLive.com)

CEDAC NOT MENTIONED: Easthampton Zoning Board to continue Parsons Village affordable housing hearing

Saturday, February 25, 2012
Easthampton Zoning Board to continue Parsons Village affordable housing hearing at monthly sessions
By Diane Lederman,
The Republican

EASTHAMPTON – The developer for the Parsons Village project presented plans at a the first of many Zoning Board of Appeals meetings last week while, the City Council Finance Committee voted 1 to 1 to rescind community money for that project.
Valley Community Development Corp. Executive Director Joanne Campbell presented an overview of the 38-unit project and the Zoning Board of Appeals took comments.
In January, the developer filed a request for a Chapter 40B permit to build the affordable rental housing at 69 Parsons St. after the Planning Board rejected it last year. 

A comprehensive permit allows the Zoning Boards of Appeals to approve affordable housing with more flexible rules – essentially to circumvent local zoning – when a community has less than 10 percent of its housing as affordable. 

Just 6.3 percent of the city’s housing is affordable.
The process is expected to be a lengthy one, said zoning board member John Atwater. “There is no quick process,” he said.
The board will hold hearings once a month on the second Tuesday of the month for two hours beginning at 6:30 p.m. It will take comments at some but not necessarily all those meetings.
The board has up to 180 days to conduct the hearing from the day it began Feb. 21. The board then has 40 days in which to file its determination.
That takes the process into the fall before a decision would likely be made, he said.
The full City Council, meanwhile, will decide whether to rescind the $200,000 it approved for the project.
The Finance Subcommittee discussed the proposal and heard resident concerns at two meetings. But with just two of three members present last week, the vote was 1 to 1 with chairman Daniel Hagan voting to rescind the funding and Daniel Rist voting against it.
Council President and committee member Justin P. Cobb, who brought the proposal to the council, was absent from the meeting.
Both Hagen and Cobb oppose the project Rist supports it. With the tie vote, the project goes to the council without a recommendation, Hagan said in an email.
“I had numerous issues that led me to my vote, among them: language within their application, the fact that the project was turned down by the Planning Board (creating a change in the project), and the lack of clear case law in this matter.
I felt it important that all 9 Councilors have the opportunity to weigh-in and vote on this matter,” he wrote.
By a 6 to 3 vote in October of 2010, the council supported the funding recommended by the Community Preservation Act Committee. Committee members oppose the council measure to rescind it.

© 2012 MassLive LLC.
URL: http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/easthampton_zoning_board_to_co.html

SourceThe Republican (MassLive.com)

CEDAC NOT MENTIONED: Easthampton housing project opponents fight in new venue

February 24, 2012
________________________________________
Easthampton housing project opponents fight in new venue
By Rebecca Everett
EASTHAMPTON – Supporters and opponents of the proposed Parsons Village housing development were once again at odds as a second round of public hearings on the project started Tuesday.
The Valley Community Development Corp. is seeking a comprehensive permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the 38-unit affordable housing development, which was rejected by the Planning Board in September.
A state law, Chapter 40B, allows developers to bypass zoning bylaws and receive a comprehensive permit when building affordable housing projects in communities that have less than 10 percent affordable housing.
At the hearing, Valley CDC Executive Director Joanne Campbell and project designers presented their vision for the $10 million, six-building development, which includes 52 percent open space. To prove that the development is a good fit for the area, they also offered the results of a traffic impact study and a map they created to compare the density of the development to that of the surrounding neighborhood.
As at the Planning Board’s hearings, opponents argued that the development would be too dense, would not fit the character of the neighborhood and could negatively impact neighbors by increasing traffic and water runoff.
Kirsten Morra of 25 Federal St. said she and her neighbors were not thrilled to be back in the conference room at the Municipal Building fighting the developer all over again.
“We didn’t want to come back, but we’re all committed to this,” she said. “What we have to remember is that the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals haven’t heard anything that we’ve said over the past year, so we have to say it again.”
Erica Flood of 61 Parsons St. said the CDC has not made much of an effort to respond to neighbors’ concerns throughout the two-year process. “They repeatedly ignored residents’ plea to drastically reduce the density,” she said at the hearing. “Forty units to 38 units is not a reduction.”
Project designer Peter Wells, of the Berkshire Design Group, noted that while neighbors decry the project as being too dense, it is nearly half as dense as the current apartment complex abutting the parcel to the south, which has more than 16 units per acre.
Jackie Brousseau-Pereira of the Easthampton Housing Partnership said her organization supports the project because the city’s master plan says the city must create more affordable rental housing.
Morra said the master plan also mentions creating owner-occupied affordable housing, and neighbors would prefer that Parsons Village include at least some owner-occupied units.
“I feel that creating stakeholders, not only for the area, but for the city, is paramount,” she said. “We’re setting a precedent for the city.”
Amy Heflin of 10 Pepin Ave. said she is concerned about the accountability of the future owners of Parsons Village, who could be “absentee landlords.”
“Who will our neighbors be?” she asked. “We were told investors, rich investors, probably from out of the area.”
Heflin asked the board members to consider the 40B application to be “unfriendly” because more than 100 residents of the New City section of Easthampton signed a petition opposing it, and to remember that the Planning Board denied it for a reason.
“The most glaring thing is that this has been presented # and it was reviewed and rejected,” she said.
The next hearing will be March 8 at 6:30 p.m., followed by a site visit on March 10 at 9 a.m.
Board Chairwoman Margaret Solis said the public hearing will be open for no more than 180 days, and hearings will be held on the second Thursday of each month from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. until Aug. 16. After the hearing is closed, the board has 40 days to either deny the permit, approve it or approve it with conditions.
Under Chapter 40B, the board has limited authority to deny the permit. For example, the ZBA could deny it on grounds that it violated health or fire codes or state regulations, but not for violating zoning, Campbell said.
If the permit is denied or approved with conditions, the CDC can appeal it to a state board.
The City Council is also considering a motion from Council President Justin P. Cobb to withdraw the $200,000 in Community Preservation Act funds the council approved for the development in 2010. Cobb argued that because the developer is seeking a different type of permit, the project has changed enough to warrant another vote.
The City Council will hold a public hearing on withdrawing the funds at 6:15 p.m. March 7.
________________________________________
Source URL: http://www.gazettenet.com/2012/02/24/easthampton-housing-project-opponents-fight-in-new-venue
Daily Hampshire Gazette © 2011 All rights reserved

SourceGazetteNet - Daily Hampshire Gazette

Easthampton housing project may lose Community Preservation Act funds

CEDAC NOT MENTIONED
February 15, 2012
Easthampton housing project may lose Community Preservation Act funds
By Rebecca Everett
EASTHAMPTON – The City Council is considering rescinding $200,000 it pledged to the proposed Parsons Village affordable housing development, just as the project’s developer makes a second attempt to get a permit from a city board.
The Zoning Board of Appeals on Feb. 21 will review a comprehensive permit request, known as a 40B, for a 38-unit rental development proposed by Valley Community Development Corp. for a vacant lot at 69 Parsons St.
The permit would allow the Valley CDC to complete the project without the Planning Board’s approval, which is a 40A permit, and which the Planning Board denied in September.
Meantime, the project may be out $200,000, as the City Council is considering rescinding the Community Preservation Act funding the council and CPA Committee approved for it in fall 2010.
At their meeting tonight, councilors are expected to discuss City Solicitor John H. Fitz-Gibbon’s warning that such a decision could land the council in court.
Council President Justin P. Cobb suggested at a Feb. 1 meeting that the council rescind the funds, saying that the project had changed from a 40A project and become an “unfriendly” 40B project.
“I see this as a significant change from what was approved,” he said. He said he is concerned that allowing funds to go to an altered project could “set a precedent.”
But Joanne Campbell, executive director of the CDC, disagreed with the characterization of the project as unfriendly.
“A friendly 40B is one that is keeping with the needs, goals and objectives of the community,” she said. “Just because there is some opposition does not mean it’s unfriendly.”
Chapter 40B is a state law that lets developers in communities with less than 10 percent affordable housing bypass certain zoning to obtain a comprehensive permit to build subsidized affordable housing. Easthampton has 6.3 percent affordable housing.
The CDC’s 40B application is for a six-building development on the 4.3-acre parcel, estimated to cost approximately $10 million. The buildings would include 38 rental units, ranging in price from $555 for a studio apartment to $1,000 for a three-bedroom unit, for tenants in the $26,000-to-$50,000 income range.
The city solicitor advised the council it could rescind the funds, but if the CDC can prove that its rights have become “vested” in the earlier vote, there would be grounds to take the council to court.
Campbell said Tuesday that the nonprofit is counting on the funds.
“We have relied on that appropriation in accessing funding from the state and also in negotiating with the property owner,” she said. “We’ve borrowed pre-development funds, paid architects and hired designers.”
A matter of ‘process’
Fitz-Gibbon also said that the council should consider whether or not the project has changed significantly. “The fact that the current application is under 40B, rather than 40A, is a question of process rather than of substance and this alone would not be sufficient to justify a vote to rescind,” he wrote.
Campbell noted that the CPA Committee and the City Council approved the funding for “long-term affordable housing at 69 Parsons St.,” which included no other specifications.
“When they voted, it was just a concept. We didn’t even have plans drawn up yet,” she said. “So you can’t really say the project has changed.”
Mayor Michael Tautznik has the right to veto any denial of the CPA money, and he said he “probably would,” although the council could override his veto with a two-thirds majority.
Cobb said he thinks the council must consider rescinding the grant. “I think it is our responsibility, as stewards of the taxpayers’ money, to have a full and open discussion about this and if we still want to support it,” he said.
Campbell noted that the City Council, CPA Committee and Easthampton Housing Partnership have all voted in favor of the project in the past, “so it isn’t like the city is fighting it.”
She noted that Cobb, as a member of the CPA Committee, the City Council and now the City Council’s finance committee, has been a vocal opponent of the project.
Long haul
Advocating for the project has been a long ordeal, Campbell acknowledged. After receiving the support of the CPA funding, the CDC defended for nine months its proposed development at a series of Planning Board public hearings where sometimes 100 residents attended to oppose the project. They said it was too dense and violated zoning, and expressed fears that it would bring crime, traffic and flooding problems to the neighborhood.
After the permit was denied because one Planning Board member voted no, the CDC appealed the decision.
The litigation is ongoing, but the CDC filed a 40B comprehensive permit application with the city Jan. 30. That application includes one more unit than the one the Planning Board denied, and also proposes traditional pavement, as opposed to the porous pavement that neighbors raised concerns about during the public hearings.
The ZBA’s usual seven members are down to four following former Chairman Sam Charron resignation last week. According to City Clerk Barbara LaBombard, the ZBA needs a simple majority of three votes to pass comprehensive permits.
Campbell said the CDC is “slightly disadvantaged” to not have a full board, but is still feeling good about its chances.
“Chapter 40B gives the ZBA less leeway to deny the permit, as long as it meets basic regulations like health and fire,” she said. The CDC could go to the state appeals committee if it is denied.
“We’re looking forward to getting a permit for the development, which we think is a good and well-needed project,” she said.
Rebecca Everett can be reached at reverett@gazettenet.com.
______________
Daily Hampshire Gazette © 2011 All rights reserved
Source URL: http://www.gazettenet.com/2012/02/15/cpa-funds-questioned-for-project

SourceGazetteNet.com (Hampshire Gazette)

Amherst seeks funds second time for affordable housing project

February 11, 2012
Amherst seeks funds second time for affordable housing project
By smerzbach
AMHERST – A second application for state and federal tax credits that would help pay for construction of a 42-unit affordable housing project was submitted to the Department of Housing and Community Development Friday.
HAP Housing is planning the Olympia Oaks project on 13 acres of a town-owned site off Olympia Drive. If funding comes through in this round, the homes could be built and ready for occupancy in October 2013.
Peter Gagliardi, executive director of HAP, said Friday that the second application comes after HAP learned in October that its initial request for the One-Stop tax credit was not awarded.
Gagliardi said he remains confident that HAP will be successful in receiving the tax credits and funds from the state’s Affordable Housing Trust and Housing Stabilization Fund.
“We’re competing for scarce resources, but we have been in before,” Gagliardi said.
Building the housing and resurfacing Olympia Drive is expected to cost around $8.5 million, Gagliardi said, with the cost rising to $10 million when other infrastructure work being done by the town is included.
Gagliardi said state officials could make a quick decision on the funding request, within three to five months, because of the jobs housing construction provides and the spinoff benefits to local businesses that will provide materials and supplies.
The Select Board last month sent a letter of support, signed by Chairwoman Stephanie O’Keeffe, explaining that the town is committed to moving the project forward. This has been demonstrated through a 99-year ground lease, supplying $200,000 in Community Development Block Grant money and up to $140,000 in Community Preservation Act money and the issuing of a comprehensive permit by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
“The Amherst Select Board strongly encourages the Department of Housing and Community Development to approve HAP Housing’s application and award the tax incentives and other funding requested,” O’Keeffe wrote. “The Olympia Oaks projects has overwhelming local support, and your support would be most welcomed as well.”
The site where the housing will be built has been cleared and graded, with water, sewer and other uitilities, as well as drainage work, all part of an investment by the town.
Gagliardi praised Amherst for what it has done to make Olympia Oaks a reality.
“The town has been extraordinarily supportive and we’re pleased to have been selected to do work on this project for them,” Gagliardi said.
Two of the 42 units at Olympia Oaks will be set aside for homeless families as the result of a $100,000 commitment from the Interfaith Housing Corp., an organization that built and operated Village Park Apartments and has been committed to investing money into affordable and low-income projects.
Olympia Oaks has already received money from other non-town sources. Last April, $400,000 in Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation predevelopment bridge funding and $40,000 from the NeighborWorks America arrived. Keith Construction of Stoughton has been selected as the general contractor.
Olympia Oaks will be the newest affordable housing stock built under a comprehensive permit. The most recent was Butternut Farm on Longmeadow Drive, which opened last June.

Daily Hampshire Gazette © 2011 All rights reserved
Source URL: http://www.gazettenet.com/2012/02/11/amherst-seeks-funds-second-time-for-affordable-housing-project

SourceGazetteNet.com (Hampshire Gazette)