HomeMy WebLinkAboutMass Housing Correspondence re Delphic Assoc v Hudson BOA 2002.8.20 - Correspondence - 0000 Meetinghouse Road 8/20/2002 T I
lYIASSM OU SIN G
One&OM St(cn,botaM1 IAA MOON
Yh:i47.G1,1000 fnx:stif.�1.1�Z1
TaA17.IS+Ltm� I�+analA4�
i
Augu3t z0,2002
Chai�Vi►wW Y hm
�17Sklft�A}3pGt113�.O[rLSfiitlOC
Dr am of minting dE C,apmHtm nity Development
�Ctatgt�s$inter, I t�'''pluOr
Beaten,Mitts 02114
Ra; DdAlc AsrnrlattA LLC x, kAox Bawd of}lppe4b,No.02-11
Daar Cheimou Labe.
Thnute you Rw pwvidimg MassHouskS with the Ogpeauvi y to be hemd as makw in this
matta. With respect to the patio du Adva dit We betwom the paxtim—Dr:Wr.
1lasori*tea,L-C and tho Hudson I oawd of Appca1s--MegaHousi V Moo w positic►n.
ROW,wo submit O s ststamew%c194V f'ax the COMMiw o busalousimg's
1uwtnding pelicy in amnection with Ong dctd m4h ided homy owuersWp ur,f ts.
MaSSHOWing cantimm to belit ye tit this policy achieves tho beat poaAlo balm
bawam nm lbe one Lind,MaWowApsys 1tXliWon to devalop and finance more
afforOble taunting,aetd;'On tbo other,its Oblp lal to enmkt that economic d*muaW
at a ltwel weptablo to the seeoswaty market a d raoug agencies.
�ss�vits�g's Pnlicv
por mare Qum fifteen years,dating beak to tht ROM*OwnMbs p Prvg(SM("HI)P°5
edwWote red by the MassmahusaW Housing Pa m t *MWI and Me lDeputmeant of
Iloalsidg and C6MMt&nity DvvelapomMd(7DUC Y),UMHon908 lft Umced deed
meted homy bwnate�jp wits o4d act to ceau4n lhaQitalt<oma. )q tho event tbst eta Owner
of deed mWavd,unit mught to sett,the prindpall bus den is locate un adlbrdabio bays
rested with the focal cdmmihdty or,b the cast ofthe uop pn►graut„with MWORM
ne town,typically,h*d a night of first rOI W to fried as eUgible buyer for the bmo at a
aOPuWW dismunte d prise In Ow case of the HOP pmg mn.bW/DHCD had brit right
Of gust mfusal. If no buyer could be Watek aad tbo town or,under Hop,NWIDl`co
dwKucd tO earercisc ho right,tho Owra could Irt1 the wait at ma"t rote, if then were s
WiadE's11 profit from the axle—i.e.,rho diffarence bc6em tho mwdmum adl'oydablo Omic
Prim set by farMWO MW the w%W gets price--the excess would be provided to the to"
Or,=dqP HOB'.MHP/DHCD to be used for more affordable bou dug. IrmaUy,444
Jan!Sw�1l,&Mr�+rw N�duA i.Dunne.�M$,�„ tfrora�.tt 4!i!1«+,��irr u'rtcYo
� � Jr,e1YelfKC,vA1ik,Ylce�i7FeI► � riobdtH,IltWr.�YAiYtNr ,
1
1
PeUp most impolta>ttly,tha&W rretricttow aA affordability did n A sarYive
foreCloswe.
The standard rived ride and regulatory agree>raee m for tlta Hou*g Starts J smgvsm,at
issue heM Hllte Wbe impose thews restrictions. 11ndT the Houma Starts program,any
wins fiM dram;
,sumAct e3ela or hum fayreclesure i►9 paid over to dte towrn,
TIT Sotntel R9%—Q U dit MY- liU h9YD�lt_�bslt�e�l
MauwHoudng's Umptandft VoHq tbel.deed rides flat sinWti furdly home owns rlehip
vnits lido aaM swkvO fomeloxm WO"good to Waommodt to We kgms S and c4mcc Ls
Otalbrda air,bstym.ImW com mLlttWes ad lodem The vvie lom of this peReyhm bew
bow roll aver da y6mr,arad the romus for its impkmegOation couthwv today.
Firs;,tbo Abi hty to foreualow fne of Affor 6bi$ty Vt&iC6Dw is easftdW to the viability of
twdavalapnknim imp the Imo crinuk& Since MumU amingdow mtfin4aw every
atlWbbla bull in e:rrory dvvaiapmmtt,hhvurg a Praguamx that t*q operato in the bmador
iuA*d iR 0041U tO hD ffM= s. 114+aSHous iules iftent ie,quirics eonAm thm the
seer ndwy lending madwt and elated rvmmctcia lm4ng prae ice gtmmjly rmpim
tw such&Cri 1rC1r1rioti=be Ownguiahad up"fmcloswr- Mtdgsgoiasttrers,
one",Wcally will not f�ttslue a loan against def Wt is secacwdasy marital
arequiremast wbene:veer 4 borrower rt alm lea thm 20%downpaymwi)uniesa any and an
dood nstn titms twAmitr-upon foroctosm.
bitadig this sCotrnday wadwt r WrelAwt ct h meet the ability to obi smadary
tmartres fiuRwiug for Nm rdable glide, BOCMM xYtotro prisrtary lla 4MR,M]udIng
Con macisi lmdem in tin,would be willing to ftm=Pmparty tulles spy
imarlret OwaciD8 and ONVedtive irWmwerates laa svailable,the rL*of loss is wan
aWy bated thrrnaghattt the madtet aw it bawmes easier to fi a these homes.
This Wumbdpwl ofle dm allo 9mvide s the:addable bu)w with the,Woded ranges
of Amius opp 9M $oaxgwM at lower inootae lerresh no often eexierusly close to
laultAg lhr6%,and this.may be a aru did clemo t in distri trting the litnifM rttpply of
hams ovvWM*oppwmaity to ftemilRes iA twa bmcicet.s
Seaoa4 the its given to MIWA)HCD in rho HOP prng=or,in W Deco of jW
s.rrraooR H4ursi8g$tarts.Pxngrrtm,to the Own,Provide UUMOM asftguamb for the local
OtidtyIIllTliity t0 pmeot itar investment in the at MAIC uniL l:arcaampjs,Wldtst'lbc
Hotter Stub hoo!,zwt only dots the to*%We the right of FaM nh>Issd to pundLm
an afPerdahls Mgt or to$rid an affordal,Ie WM,but rise,If it declines to oacOMISo this
right,it hwt t#ie r`.igttt to Naive the wi ndfdl ifttte tit is sold,or ftvFtae4 at MUket
Ltcsslea rtOahrt hwiin&dw trtnden of dtbrdmbirty ron&-ti m for tom awttersbip adz l y Mils
vpimda bwficimy o w x0r4ble wi4-l.ev am bomo bg7a, 'tu dev*M uW Mmoo wits
trar=MM wlmpppeUty MWUdom if it 00 atNaa111 g#ad booy sa Olygm uuft Tto
WoVood"*ftrt b1a home buM may find Vat3 nv i,x m bWmu=wA tftmtdy'1wwm=W in,
thft bcllha tt#,aogat obMip e�ooatudary ta�tcst tlan�C�e 6eQa�aa of she�tiO+rr c21n�a6tamt htt cads
t�t►talybt o xiao bts>r�tlwbla� In oyeeatLoa Drat 6omp a.na t>ev�ant►MaSnutieg aooka
to xwid 1M�aO�litt.
t 3
MY I
ia
er
rate. "i 6 atnictute ollowa the town to maintain its luvostr icd `f�new lei�of
two ways; by ping the cunvm unit or mdke«ring p fit
units. At the same ti mc,bmWe the town k prlr%dpadly rosp&AWe faF findiag an
Sif00ab16 boyar,the seller is not left holding a unit that cumot be marketed.
' sRavi P tic
Masaburg is eom01ttod to jm xwwon+ofdmddoping ad Qreserft atffordabla
hmuVg in the CGn=QnwaaltL,To that cad,we brtve mviewed our poGoy it light of the
Lsftcg Tsisod in a&dtgutm We have also tWked with pAvate mortgage instuats,
seeandary market purogmO,pxivatc tc ndw ertd bond rating aPad6s to tlatarmiuc
wheftr Wo mjrket hW oltangcd aa.to haw such deed restricted units would be viewed.
To a parson,they told to than it had not chmtgod,
Additionally,based on pt'eftbmy ingt os-4 tth the bond rAng egenuaes,it lass beetr
xepcam d to ma that our band ratings cpuld be advexsety tut b*:d wen we to alter our
policy and fin*" a 1010 With deed xashietitm that Nm-ylvc fvmloBlrm Such a chmgc
wwWd bspaet bunt abilty to mdee Aim in the capital markets And weld,iA t^
jmp"ze ell oftha pmgm=administanA by tbt Ag to"y. In brdat fac Ma ApWy to
Wnti nuo to fum its stau tozy mien.it cannot%ka on lisp vpwdo aata risk in the
ma*ciplacc. Stroh anRdwouldendcrcot our bmvdarpals. Toboviable.any changes
in tha doodIons for aitardable home ovvaett*units must be We to=Vivo and
be fma=ed in the broader=etkat^001 simply because one leader is Viepwed to accept
Them.
Thane you cheat for pxovIUS us arith the vppoartunity to aornmeat
R"vectf+dty mbnmftd,
lG,a a L Wallac>d
(knersl Counwi
Co: xahn C.Sagl ry,7r„Esq.
Alb A,Cijx 0t ,R9q-
fsms A.Goads Esq,
1
NOTICE OF DECISION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
FOR A MINOR MODIFICATION OR COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT
#2001-033
NAME OF APPLICANT: DATE: December 14,2004
Meetinghouse Commons LLC
ADDRESS: for Premises at PETITION: 2001-033
South Bradford Street
Meeting Date: December 14,2004
HISTORY AND 13ACKGROUND
On December 14,2004, by a vote of _-_, the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals
(tile`Board")approved the request of Meetinghouse Commons LLC(tile"Applicant") for
approval of an amendment to the Comprehensive Permit(Petition#2001-033)as a minor
modification udder the provisions of Mass. General Laws Ch. 40B, sec.'s 20-23(the"Act').
Previously,on May 24,2002,by a vote of 4-0,the Board approved the application of the
Applicant for a.Comprehensive Permit pursuant to the Act to construct a development consisting
of 88 units all situated on a 32-acre parcel of land located at the intersection of Dale and South
Bradfotd Streets. The Comprehensive Permit decision(tile"Comprehensive Permit")was
recorded with the Essex North Registry of Deeds in Book 8941,Page 289.
By letter,dated December 2,2004,the Applicant(through its legal counsel)requested a
modification to Condition Numbers 11 and 12 of the Comprehensive Permit in order to clarify the
conditions under which the affordable housing restriction can be terminated as to a particular
affordable unit. As the basis for the request,the Applicant has indicated that under the recent
Housing Appeals Committee("[IAC")decision captioned Delphic Associates,LLC v. Hudson
Board of ApAppeals HAC No, 02-11 (December 23,2002), the HAC has held that a condition in a
deed rider requiring that the affordable housing restriction be preserved in the event of a
foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure would render a project"uneconomic"and is
"inconsistent with local needs"as defined under MG.L,c, 40B and Rules of the Housing Appeals
Committee(760 CM 30.00,31.00).
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Board has reviewed the December 2,2004 letter from tine Applicant's legal counsel
and deliberated at its meeting on December 14,2004. Accordingly,the Board of Appeals finds
that it would be impractical for the Applicant to comply with the perpetual restriction
requirements under Conditions 11 and 12 of the Comprehensive Permit Decision in light of the
Delphic decision described above,and therefore has determined that a modification of Conditions
1
f
i
I
i
i
11 and 12 of the Comprehensive Permit Decision(as provided below)would constitute a minor
modification,
CONDITIONS
The Board modifies Condition Numbers 11 and 12 of the Comprehensive Permit as
follows:
11, Prior to the sale or re-sale of any affordable unit in the Project,a
proposed form of Deed Rider shall be submitted to the Board for review and approval.
The Deed Rider will be attached to and recorded with the deed for each affordable unit in
the Project for each such sale or to-sale. The Deed Rider shall mandate that affordable
units be sold and resold subject to the Affordability Requirement for the longest period
allowed by law or in perpetuity,except that the affordability restriction shall be
terminated in the circumstance of foreclosure or similar remedial action under the
n�roxisions of a first mortgayze,or deed in lieu«f foreclosure. The Board's approval of the
Deed Rider shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be issued in no later than thirty
(30)days after submission of such Deed Rider.
12. Prior to submitting the proposed Deed Rider to the Board for
Approval,MHC shall use its best efforts to obtain any necessary governmental
approvals so that the term of the Affordability Requirement in the Deed Rider is in
perpetuity,subject to the exception described in Paragraph I l above the Perpetual
Restriction"), In the event such a Peryclual Restriction is not approved by the
governmental entity or is not otherwise permitted by law,the Deed Rider shall include an
Affordability Requirement for the longest period allowed by law,but in no event less
than ninety-nine(99)years,except that the_affordability restriction shall he terminated in
the cirgumstaimAtopqrplourc or similar remedial action under the provisions of a first
tmortgap,e,or deed in lieu_Qf foreclosure. Moreover,in the event that the Affordability
Requirement is not in the form of a Perpetual Restriction,MHC shall submit to the
Board written evidence of its efforts to secure approval of the Perpetual Restriction and
any written denial thereof and grant to the Town of North Andover or its designee in
the Deed Rider a right of first refusal upon the expiration of the Affordability
Requirement to the extent permitted by law, in a forma rrtutually acceptable to counsel for
MHC and Town Counsel,for all affordable units.
Town of North Andover
Zoning Beard of Appeals
By:
Ellen McIntyre,
Chair
Dated. December 2004
II
I,Joyce Bradshaw,Town Clerk of the Town of North Andover,Massachusetts,do hereby certify
that twenty(20)days after elapsed since the above-referenced decision of the Beard of Appeals
which was filed in the Office of the Town Clerk on December ,2004,and no appeal has been
filed with the Town Clerk.
Joyce Bradshaw
Town Clerk
North Andover, Massachusetts
i
Glennon,Michel
From: John Smolak [jsmolak@smolakvaughan.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 62, 2004 7:24 PM
To: 'Michel Glennon'
Subject: FW: Meetinghouse Commons(File 2 of2)
00I,Pdf XeroxRttach,txt
Mich:
Attached is the correspondence sent to Attorney Urbelis this evening, The
attached should be included with the Town file but does not necessarily need
to be distributed to Board members. Call me if you have questions. Thanks.
H/John
-----Original Message-----
From:jsmolak@smolakvaughan.com [mallto:jsmolak@smolakvaughen.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:25 PM
To: jsmolak@smolakvaughan.com; jsmolak@smolakvaughan.com
Subject:
Please open the attached document. it was scanned and sent to you using a
Xerox WorkCentre.
Attachment file type PDF
.Device Name
'Device Location
For more information on Xerox products and solutions, please visit
http://www.xerox.com.
DFC
2004
BOARD OF APPEALS