On June 10, the Municipal Affordable Housing Trust (MAHT) ended its involvement in a project that might have seen the trust partner with a private developer to build more than 100 apartments at 361 Ayer Road, near the rotary, under the Chapter 40B affordable housing law. Though only 25 percent of the rentals would have been state-defined affordable, all the units would have counted toward Harvard’s affordable stock.
Proponents saw the large project as something of a panacea for Harvard’s affordable housing shortage, where fewer than 3 percent of the town’s year-round homes are affordable to families of moderate income. The state-mandated goal is 10 percent affordable. If the complex were approved by the Department of Housing and Community Development and the Harvard ZBA, it could have satisfied—perhaps in combination with other, ongoing 40B projects—the town’s requirement to build 16 new units of affordable housing each year. Hitting that mark would entitle Harvard to summarily reject new 40B developments. However, projects either already approved or in the pipeline could not be dismissed. For instance, the ZBA-approved, 32-unit condominium complex at 262 Ayer Road could not be stopped. The 140-home plan for the Shaker Hills golf course could also not be avoided by virtue of the apartment complex, because its application has already been accepted by the state.
Opponents viewed the project with skepticism, wondering whether the large complex was right for a town that had committed itself in its Master and Housing plans to the “small and scattered” approach to affordable housing.
In the end, and according to those trustees interviewed for this article, a combination of factors contributed to the rejection of this project: too little time, unwanted legal exposure, and too much project. Over the last two weeks, all the trustees except Steve Rowse spoke with the Press. Rowse resigned from the trust on the day of the final vote, June 10, and did not respond this week to requests for comment.
Some background
The 14-acre, $1.2 million property was, until last week, under option with Selectman Leo Blair, who had signed a purchase and sale agreement with owners, intending to transfer the option to the trust. Blair first presented the idea at a November 2007 meeting of the Planning Board, when he was an associate member. The Planning Board and selectmen encouraged Blair to approach the trust. From the start, Blair said he would not develop the property himself and would let the option lapse if the trust didn’t want to take it.
The trust’s June 10 vote declined to assume Blair’s option to buy the property, which would have required the trust to pay, in $25,000 increments, a total deposit of $100,000 by the end of Sept. (Blair had paid the first installment himself and was to be reimbursed by the trust if it accepted the option). The deposit was fully refundable until Sept. 30, according to the most recently updated copy, May 30, of the purchase and sale agreement. Closing would have been in late December.
Today, the property at 361 Ayer Road is back on the market, listed with Harvard Realty. Trustees contacted for this article say the trust’s involvement with this property is over, and Blair released his option, according to listing broker Rhonda Sprague.
Too little time
The project posed challenges from the get-go, beginning with the timeline. The trust had, arguably, from March (when the marketing study was completed) to September (when the deposit on the land became nonrefundable) to accomplish some complicated tasks. The leap of faith required was insurmountable to most trustees. This week, trustee Scott Hayward explained.
“We didn’t have enough time in the [purchase and sale] contract to do what needed to be done,” he said.
Hayward ticked off a list of jobs that needed doing before the clock ran out on the refundable deposit: getting input from the community; developing a request for proposal that would satisfy townspeople and still appeal to developers; sending the proposals to developers; responding to and selecting a developer; and conducting engineering studies.
Potential liability
A June 4 letter sent to the trust by Myrick Lane resident and attorney Patrick Hart did not encourage trustees, either. The letter cited “serious issues and concerns” of attendees at the June 2 “citizen input” meeting of the trust and flagged issues where trustees could be “individually in breach of fiduciary duty.”
This week, MAHT Chairman Victor Normand confirmed that the letter factored into his “no” vote, explaining that even baseless allegations can tarnish good names, incur personal expenses, and take an undue toll on town volunteers. Although Hayward said a fear of legal action was not his primary reason for voting against the project, he allowed that getting sued as part of a real estate company, where corporate legal services are available, was quite different from being targeted as an individual trustee.
“And here we were, trying to do something good for the town, with the town,” he said, adding that he believes the letter’s assertions to be untrue.
Too much project
Other members of the trust were, in the end, simply opposed to the size and character of the project. This week, in separate interviews, trustees Chris Ready and Lucy Wallace said that the large apartment buildings that the marketing study dictated contradicted the Master Plan’s vision of affordable housing in Harvard: small, scattered sites that blend nicely with Harvard neighborhoods.
“A large apartment complex goes against what I believe affordable housing should be for Harvard,” said Ready, who said she has been part of two Master Plan updates in town.
Ready cited the Harvard Green development on Lancaster County Road as a 40B project more compatible with the town’s needs, noting that Harvard residents seeking to downsize from a house are unlikely to be attracted to an apartment complex.
Ready and Wallace’s objection to the size of the project arose from the marketing study that MAHT commissioned from the multi-family real estate marketing firm CB Richard Ellis of Boston. The report, completed in late February, recommended between 160 and 220 units for a viable project, with three-fourths at market rate. It also advised building amenities such as a pool and clubhouse to attract tenants to a “remote suburb like Harvard.”
This week trustee Mort Miller could not be reached. But last week, he told the Press he thought the process was cut short by the June 10 vote (from which he abstained) and that the project deserved further public airing. Myrick Lane resident Michelle Catalina, a critic of the project’s size, said she had also anticipated more discussion, and that she was “dissatisfied with the answers she received” at the June 2 hearing.
“What would this project give us that any other 40B development wouldn’t give?” she asked in a phone interview on Monday. “This is not the first time a magic bullet approach has been tried. I don’t think they work,” she said.
Referring to the kind of apartment complex recommended by the CB Richard Ellis study, Catalina said the apartments “look worse and worse if occupancy goes down.”
Sewer connection to Ayer
To be economically viable, the apartment complex would need a connection to Ayer’s sewer pipes, which are not too far from 361 Ayer Road. According to Shaun Suhoski, Ayer’s town administrator, Ayer selectmen were not willing to consider a connection unless Harvard agreed upfront to capital improvements to the Ayer infrastructure.
“Ayer is protective of its water and sewer,” confirmed Harvard Town Administrator Tim Bragan.
Suhoski said he broached the topic with Ayer selectmen at one of their early spring meetings, after an informal meeting with Bragan, Ayer Selectman Gary Luca, and Harvard selectmen Tim Clark and Lucy Wallace. Suhoski said the Ayer selectmen did not vote on the topic, but discussed it briefly.
The marketing study said that a private sewer plant would cost more than $1 million.
This week, Normand reflected on the vehement opposition of citizens who attended a June 2 trust meeting held to solicit input. Normand said he was chagrined at the neighbors’ “level of suspicion of the trust in general,” and identified it as a problem to be addressed. “The trust will ask the entire community to suggest sites—a ‘you tell us’ meeting,” he said. Both Wallace and Normand said the trust will continue to focus on feasibility studies for senior housing on Hildreth House property.
Review of MAHT minutes show that the trust will also pursue its buy-down program for in-progress 40B projects. For example, if the ZBA approves the 24-unit Pine Hill Village on Stow Road, the trust will buy covenants on four units, which will increase the project’s percentage of affordable homes from 25 to 40 percent.
