John A Keith Real Estate - Boston Real Estate » affordable housing

Artists-only condo housing available in South Boston

John Keith — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 21:05:58 +0000

A new condominium building in South Boston will bring housing to Boston artists who qualify.

From the Boston Redevelopment Authority:

The Signal Building is an exciting new residential development with a mix of artist live/work units and regular loft-style residential units in South Boston, just next to the Fort Point neighborhood. The units are now being marketed for sale.

The city and the BRA worked with the development team to create the much-needed artist units in this neighborhood. The project includes:

* 24 artist live/work units (4 affordable)

* 51 loft-style residential units (5 affordable)

All of the artist units will be sold to BRA Certified Artists.

From the developer’s website:

The Signal Building is newly constructed community of 75 condominiums at 154 West Second Street in South Boston’s West End.

This unique building is comprised of 51 homes, available to all buyers, as well as 24 Artist lofts for BRA Certified Artists to honor the artistic residents of the neighborhood and ensure their presence in our growing community.

Choose between studio, one and two bedroom condominiums in two distinct styles: the renovated brick-and-beam building offers modern loft-like condos or more traditionally styled condominiums in a newly built structure.

The building will enjoy low monthly condo fees, a roof deck with spectacular city views and kitchen & bathroom. Other amenities include two elevators, private courtyard, gym, bike storage and recycling center.

[geo_mashup_map]

Affordable housing units avail at Bryant Back Bay – “lottery” is right

John Keith — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:33:57 +0000

Two affordable housing condos in the 50-unit Bryant Back Bay development have been listed for sale.

For more information, contact:

Jonathan Diffenbach
Maloney Properties
130 Dartmouth Street
Boston , MA
phone: 781-943-0200 x212
Website: www.bryantlottery.com

Types:
1. Up to 80% of Median Income

Maximum Household Income:
$50,500.00 for one person
$57,750.00 for two people
One Bedroom: 1 Unit, #201
1-bed, 1-bath, 794+/- square feet
Price: $171,600

2. Up to 100% of Median Income

Maximum Household Income:
$63,150.00 for one person
$72,150.00 for two people
$81,200.00 for three people
$90,200.00 for four people
Two Bedrooms: 1 Unit, #202
2-bed, 2-bath, 1,250+/- square feet
Price: $244,100

Preferences are for Boston residents and first-time homebuyers.

In order to qualify, you must pick up an application at 130 Dartmouth Street and return by March 26, 2010.

Pick-up times:

March 12:           Time: 10am – 5pm
March 13:           Time: 12pm – 4pm
March 15:           Time: 10am- 5pm
March 16:           Time: 12pm- 7pm
March 17:           Time: 12pm- 7pm

[geo_mashup_map]

Tishman Speyer returns massive NYC apartment complex back to creditors

John Keith — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:57:26 +0000

Ouch.

According to today’s New York Times:

The owners of Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village, the iconic middle-class housing complexes overlooking the East River in Manhattan, have decided to turn over the properties to creditors, officials said Monday morning.

The decision by Tishman Speyer Properties and BlackRock Realty comes four years after the $5.4 billion purchase of the complexes’ 110 buildings and 11,227 apartments in what was the most expensive real estate deal of its kind in American history.

There are a lot of lessons here, as well as a couple questions. The first lessons I can think of are:

* Never use debt to make purchases (or, at least, trust your revenue / expense estimates);
* Understand that when you buy something, it may be at the top of the market, not the bottom;

Questions:

* What is the future of similar apartment complexes? These were first built post-World War II by (or for) the government. In return for promising to keep rents low (or, below market-rate), the developers were either given money from the government and/or tax breaks. The apartment complexes were different from “housing projects” in that they were geared toward the middle class – at first, returning veterans.

Thing is, after a certain point (90 years for some), the rent restrictions expired, allowing the properties’ owners to increase rents.

So, the properties were very appealing to investors. Trouble is, obviously, the rising rents would mean many people (no longer veterans, but “regular” folk) wouldn’t qualify, or would have to pay more in rent.

What’s happened here is the worst for everyone. The families that lived there can’t afford higher rents. Meanhwile, the owner, even after investing millions of dollars in upgrades, has been unable to bring in enough in higher rents to cover its loan payments.

There are many similar apartment complexes across the US. What will happen to them?

I like the idea of allowing developers to buy these properties. Doing so keeps them in private hands (my preference) and allows the properties to be given the resources needed to upgrade the apartment units, something (I expect) wasn’t done in the past.

The property owners have fulfilled the terms of their contracts. They should be able to do whatever they want with the buildings. However, the government can get involved and persuade them to continue to offer lower rents in exchange for some other perks.

Meanwhile, the NYC property sits on the books of the complex’s creditors. Bad situation.

Is Brown the New Green? I dunno, but Green is the color of envy

John Keith — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 00:55:47 +0000

Someone has a huge chip on his shoulder.

I came across this post about the Macallen Building, a new(ish) condo development in South Boston.

From the Xconomy blog:

A 140-unit luxury condominium complex, the Macallen Building has garnered warm reviews from architecture critics, including no less a figure than Pulitzer Prize-winning Boston Globe writer Robert Campbell. It’s also the first residential building in Boston to win a Gold-level LEED rating, something that can only be achieved through serious effort on the part of architects and developers.

… But there are several aspects of the Macallen project that bother me. One is the unfortunate symbolism in the fact that Boston’s first green residential building is a luxury condo. You have to be doing pretty well, indeed, to afford a one-bedroom, one-bath unit for $600,000 or a three-bedroom for $2.1 million.

… Is it really “sustainable” to use double-flush toilets if you have to bring them all the way from Australia, on container ships that burn huge amounts of diesel fuel? Are bamboo floors still green if you have to bring the wood from China? How much sense is there in using special glues that are free of volatile organic compounds if it means that those bamboo floors buckle and have to be ripped out (and new bamboo ordered from China)?

The author puts a lot on the shoulders of the developer, Pappas Properties. He finds fault with them for building a big building, for charging what the market will bear, and for building something he doesn’t find aesthetically pleasing.

The author’s jealousy comes through loud and clear.

MA Governor’s legislation will preserve affordable housing for many

John Keith — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:33:33 +0000

Before and during the “Great Society” years of the late ’60′s, the United States government initiated several affordable housing initiatives that encouraged developers to build new, good-quality housing for many low- to moderate-income Americans. One of these programs, known to most people as the “expiring use” program, developers qualified for financing at attractive rates or terms in exchange for promising to keep rents low for an extended period of time. Like, 40 years. (The landlords need only pay off any outstanding loans in order to ‘buy out’ of the programs.)

Well, the 40 years are up and now many housing developments are aging out of the programs. As a result, the landlords have the legal right to raise rents on these units. Obviously, this will put many renters in dire straights. Faced with high-housing costs in many US cities, their options are few and none when it comes to moving into other, low-cost housing developments. (These are all privately owned, have nothing to do with the Section 8 or public housing projects.)

Federal and state governments have been getting involved to help stave off disaster.

In Massachusetts, Governor Deval Patrick has just signed legislation that will help thousands of renters.

From Banker & Tradesman:

Gov. Deval Patrick has signed a law to keep publicly-assisted rental properties affordable, and announced a $150 million loan fund to support and secure long-term affordable housing preservation efforts …

An estimated 90,000 units could be affected, with about 17,000 of those units at-risk of losing their affordability through expiring use over the next three years.

The landlords don’t miss out on anything. They can still, legally, cash out, but the government is hoping to ‘encourage’ them to take advantage of the new legislation, which gives Massachusetts, through the Department of Housing and Community Development, the right of first refusal on any property sale.

It’s not clear what would happen if and when the Commonwealth bought the properties. I think what’s being suggested is that Massachusetts wouldn’t buy it but would find new owners and help them with the purchase through financing new, low-interest loans.

Hurrah!

California ruling on affordable housing set asides may mean trouble in Boston

John Keith — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 04:10:45 +0000

A recent Superior Court ruling in California could bring new legal challenges to existing Boston housing policies.

As reported by the San Francisco Chronicle:

The ruling in the case, Palmer/Sixth Street Properties vs. City of Los Angeles, appears to mean that builders in California would prevail in challenges to local rules mandating that a percentage of units in new apartment buildings be rented at rates affordable to residents earning below the area median income.

It is unclear whether the court ruling also might apply to new condominium projects.

In Boston, Mayor Thomas M Menino has implemented guidelines that require condominium and apartment developers to set-aside a certain percentage of units as “affordable”. I believe the number is now set at 13 percent of total units. Developers have the option to pay into the city’s affordable housing fund instead of setting aside the units and/or can include the units in a development “off-site” (meaning, elsewhere). At some point, there were discussions about increasing the percentage of affordable housing units and/or not allowing developers to have units pushed off-site, but I don’t know the status of those regulations.

Developers, as you can imagine, would probably prefer there not be any restrictions on what prices they can set for their condos or apartments.

As consumers, it matters to us, too. While the concept of “affordable housing” makes sense to just about everyone (and, is something I’ve personally pushed for, in my own neighborhood), just how to make it work is an open question. Does allowing some units to be rented or sold at below-market prices mean the other, market-rate units have to be priced higher, in order to off-set the potential loss in profit? Also, does it actually make any difference to have just a couple units priced below market, when everyone else has to suffer paying full price?

I’m not sure how “legal” the Mayor’s guidelines are, in Boston. Obviously, no developer would want to get on the bad side of City Hall (meaning, the Mayor), so, most likely, no one’s ever questioned it, either in conversation or in court.

Perhaps someone will, now.

Presentations of 641 Mass Ave condos & Charlesview apartments on tap at BRA

John Keith — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 18:29:33 +0000

The Boston Redevelopment Authority will be meeting on November 17, 2009 at 5:30 PM to hear more about two high-profile residential housing proposals.

UPDATE: On Nov 17, the BRA approved the plans for 691 Mass Ave according to the Boston Business Journal.

First up is public hearing on plans for the Charlesview housing development consisting of 240 affordable rental housing units and 23,000 square feet of commercial & community space located at 355 and 400 Western Avenue and 1256 and 1266 Soldiers Field Road in Brighton.

Next is a public hearing on plans for the construction of the Urbanica 691 Project consisting of forty residential condominium units, of which four will be affordable, located at 691 Massachusetts Avenue.

Photo courtesy http://www.flickr.com/photos/gwirth/ under CC BY-NC 2.0

Castle Square to receive $43 million in renovation and preservation funds

John Keith — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:14:43 +0000

This is great news for those working to keep our neighborhoods affordable while taking care of some very badly-needed upgrades.

From the wire:

MassHousing announced loan commitments today of up to $43 million for the renovation and preservation of affordability at the 500-unit Castle Square housing community in Boston’s South End.

The Castle Square Tenants Organization and WinnDevelopment plan a number of renovations and upgrades to Castle Square’s buildings and apartments while maintaining affordability for the low-income residents who reside there.

MassHousing has committed up to $35 million in tax-exempt permanent financing and up to $8 million in tax- exempt bridge financing.

“Castle Square is an important affordable housing resource in the city of Boston and we are pleased to be working with Winn Development and the Castle Square Tenants Organization to make major improvements there while keeping 500 apartments affordable for Castle Square’s residents,’’ said MassHousing Executive Director Thomas R. Gleason.

Located at 484 Tremont St., Castle Square’s 500 apartments are located in 25 buildings on an 11.5-acre site. Of the 25 buildings, 19 are four-story brick townhouses and four are seven-story mid-rise buildings. Two single-story buildings house maintenance and laundry facilities as well as a community room and daycare centers. There are 145 one-bedroom apartments, 158 two-bedroom apartments, 132 three-bedroom apartments and 65 four-bedroom apartments.

Depressing: Boston-area housing costs still high

John Keith — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:53:19 +0000

Every year, the Kitty and Michael Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy at Northeastern University puts together the “Greater Boston Housing Report Card“. Every year, the results of the study validate what we all know to be true: it’s expensive to live in Boston and in Massachusetts.

Even after a two-year old recession has shaken our economy to the core, the cost of housing is still oppressive to many in and around Boston.

According to the report:

This recession has taken its toll on Massachusetts and the Greater Boston metropolitan area, but this time around the Commonwealth has fared better than many regions in the country. Job losses here since December 2007 [report was released before the third-quarter, 2009] amount to 3.2 percent of total employment compared to 4.8 percent nationally …

Home prices in Greater Boston have declined from their peak in September 2005, but the overall price slide has been 16 percent – half the rate for the 20 Case-Shiller metro areas combined. In some metro areas where speculative bubbles drove home prices sky-high (e.g. Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Miami), prices have fallen by 50 percent. In Greater Boston, prices have declined by little more than they did in the last housing cycle that began in 1988.

The relative burden of housing costs has lessened for many in the Greater Boston area, as the ratio of median selling price to median household income has dropped from 6.52 in 2005 to 5.42 in 2008. However, according ot the authors of the study, “in other measures, housing in Greater Boston has actually become less affordable than ever.”

… despite the recession’s impact on other prices, effective rents in Greater Boston continued to climb right through the beginning of 2009. Rents were 13 percent higher in the second quarter of 2009 than in early 2004, while median rental household income had hardly increased at all over this period …

… Boston is now tied with San Diego for second place in terms of monthly gross rent, trailing only San Francisco while being more expensive than Washington, D.C., New York, and San Francisco.

In the past few months, it seems as though rents have dropped throughout Greater Boston but perhaps not enough to make a significant difference to people’s pocketbooks.

Pine Street Inn signs settlement with Upton Street neighbors; shrinks plans

John Keith — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:55:06 +0000

I’ve just been informed that Pine Street Inn has signed a settlement agreement with Upton Street residents that will allow Pine Street to move forward with its plans for a low-income rental project planned for that street.

Pine Street Inn had purchased three contiguous buildings from Hope House, last year, planning on turning them into low-rent housing for previously-homeless individuals. Although Pine Street’s plans would have meant fewer residents in the buildings, neighbors complained that the project was overwhelming.

Pine Street Inn has apparently acquiesced to their demands and reduced their project from three buildings to two. The third building will now be sold at market rate. (Benefit here is, PSI can reap the profit, presumably.)

Hopefully, this leaves the acrimony behind and allows Pine Street Inn to build the badly-needed low-income housing.