MAGIC Housing Consulting Services

Transcription

Proposal and Qualifications for ___________________________________
MAGIC Housing Consulting Services
___________________________________
Town of Hudson, Massachusetts June 18, 2013
Submitted by:
Community Opportunities Group, Inc.
129 Kingston Street, Third Floor
Boston, MA 02111
With:
FinePoint Associates, LLC
Boston, Massachusetts 02111
(617) 542-3300
www.cogincorp.com
June 18, 2013 Executive Assistant’s Office Town Hall 78 Main Street Hudson, MA 01749 RE: MAGIC Regional Housing Consultant Services
Community Opportunities Group, Inc. (COG), together with FinePoint Associates, LLC (FPA), is pleased to submit this proposal and qualifications to assist the Towns of Hudson, Bolton, Boxborough, Littleton and Stow to provide the range of services requested in the Request for Proposals (RFP) issued on behalf of the participating town by the Town of Hudson. Following your review of our proposal, we hope you will agree that our team is ideally suited for this engagement. Should our team be selected, COG will serve as the lead consultant on this engagement. Both representatives from COG and FPA attended the pre‐proposal conference held on May 30. From that, we believe that we have a solid understanding of the services the five towns are seeking for monitoring, regional activities and local support. We understand that, currently, the local support services are the least clearly defined and will be requested “on demand” as needed services are identified. In sum, the services being procured 1) seek to ensure that the affordable housing currently available to the towns’ residents are preserved and are available to income‐
qualifying households and 2) will assist the communities in carrying out initiatives to create additional affordable housing, and to strengthen the capacity to address housing needs. Public participation and input may be required at times during the engagement, particularly in identifying new housing initiatives. We are highly experienced in public participation and have a reputation for developing interesting and engaging participation process. These may take a variety of forms such as training workshops, open forums, focus groups and targeted interviews. MAGIC Housing Consulting Services June 18, 2013 Page 2 _____________________________________________________________ Given our experience in housing, our team offers experienced and well‐qualified individuals that make our firm ideally suited for this engagement. Our key strengths include: • Widely and Deeply Experienced. Our team has a wide range of experience in assessing housing needs, developing plans, and in monitoring and compliance. This experience includes discrete plans such as a Housing Production Plan (HPP), or a housing element of a community master/comprehensive plan. An original, creative, practical approach to planning and community participation, tailored to the communities we serve. Equally important, we are experienced in conducting reviews and compliance monitoring relating to resident eligibility for occupancy of publicly‐ and privately‐owned affordable housing in both ownership and rental developments. We never take a “one size fits all” approach to our work. •
Highly Qualified Professionals. We understand our role and our responsibilities. As professionals, we have a responsibility and the ability to bring the varied skill sets required for this engagement. With our nearly exclusive municipal client base, we are well‐attuned to the dynamics encountered at the local level. As appropriate, we will bring analysis, neutrality, senior‐level experience, and the ability to work within the local traditions and culture that make each client unique. A key aspect of our role will be to provide objective and realistic advice. •
Community Development Background. COG’s background in community development makes us quite different from our competitors. COG was founded to help New England cities and towns address critical housing and community development needs. We built our excellent reputation by helping our clients design, fund, and implement projects that improved the quality of life for people who lived and worked in their communities. Community development remains a very important part of COGʹs work and it informs our approach to our municipal work. Our experience in planning and implementing CDBG housing activities makes us both well‐suited for identifying opportunities for using this important funding source, but also provides a further level of experience relating to compliance. On a daily basis, we review and qualify residents’ applications for housing program assistance. COG also has Housing Rehabilitation Specialists (HRS) on staff. Our HRS enables us to conduct physical assessments of properties to determine the scope of needed repairs and upgrades. Related to this, our HRS staff, together with our CDBG program administrators and planning staff, enables us to more broadly assess neighborhood conditions and properties’ potential for reuse and/or MAGIC Housing Consulting Services June 18, 2013 Page 3 _____________________________________________________________ redevelopment for housing development. We have completed such work for numerous abandoned and/or severely deteriorated properties that have been targeted as candidates for redevelopment for long‐term affordable housing. •
Expertise in Local Government Operations & Finance. We are local government experts. Unlike many planning consultants, COG has direct local government experience: we know how to plan and implement because we have done both. We are “hands on” consultants who understand the day‐to‐day operations of city and town halls. Our work in community development makes us keenly alert to the realities of local capacity and the challenges communities face as they juggle competing agendas and needs. We have also done innumerable fiscal impact studies for municipal clients who have real estate development projects under review. We pride ourselves on our ability to understand and work with the political culture of each community that hires us. The information that follows provides a detailed description of our team’s qualifications and experience. We confident that this information will firmly establish our suitability to assist the regional consortium. For additional information, please visit our website at www.cogincorp.com. As President of Community Opportunities Group, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation, I am authorized to submit this proposal and to bind the firm to an engagement with the Town. COG’s Vice‐President, Wayne T. Darragh, and I are the directors and sole stockholders of this corporation. We have no known conflicts of interest with respect to this project. If you have any questions, please contact me at (617) 542‐3300, ext. 304. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours, COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITIES GROUP, INC. Peter D. Sanborn President Attachs. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
MAGIC HOUSING SERVICES PROPOSAL TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Qualifications Summary
FinePoint Associates, LLC Personnel and Project Staffing Approach
Understanding
Methodology and Work Plan/Scope of Services
Availability Financial Stability Work Samples Additional Sub‐consultants References Additional Information and Qualifications of Team FEE QUOTATION IS PROVIDED IN SEPARATE ENVELOPE. 1
Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
2
Qualifications Summary
Community Opportunities Group, Inc. (COG) specializes in planning and community development services for New England cities and towns. Founded in 1979, COG is a Boston‐
based firm with widely recognized expertise in the planning, operations, and public finance concerns of local governments. We employ eight planning and community development personnel in our Boston office and five community development staff serving municipal clients in city and town halls across New England. Our staff assists communities with visioning, comprehensive plans, area studies and housing plans, feasibility studies, project planning, predevelopment services, social advocacy planning, project implementation, technical assistance and compliance services. We are zoning experts and have prepared zoning bylaws and ordinances, from comprehensive zoning revisions to zoning to support specific policy objectives, e.g., inclusionary zoning and mixed‐use overlay districts. We also offer expertise in housing policy and affordable housing, providing technical assistance, peer review support, and assisting with developer negotiations to local permitting authorities. In addition, we provide fiscal and economic impact analyses for large‐scale development projects. For three years in a row, COG won the Outstanding Comprehensive Plan Award from the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Planning Association (Dedham Master Plan, 2009; Lincoln Comprehensive Plan, 2010). In 2011, COG won an award from the Massachusetts Chapter of the APA for our work on a Community Health Needs Assessment and Action Plan for the Town of Lincoln. As specialists in the HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), we help municipal clients design, fund, and implement projects that improve the quality of life for people who live and work in their communities. We have extraordinary skills in packaging CDBG with other funding sources, and we have helped many communities reach goals that once seemed unattainable. COG’s long history of serving towns with community development needs has benefited our approach to planning. Unlike other planning and housing consultants, we have direct, “hands‐on” experience working alongside local officials in the administration and implementation of their housing programs. As a result, we are keenly aware of the degree to which local capacity and competing needs affect the outcome of municipal planning initiatives. For many clients, especially those with limited in‐house staff, we assist with design of compliance protocols, as well as actual compliance monitoring. While we have expertise in many areas, and supporting the development of affordable housing has always been at the core of our practice. The following list of projects demonstrates the breadth of our expertise in this field. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
3

Affordable Housing Plans. COG has prepared DHCD Housing Production Plans and other types of affordable housing plans for the City of Lawrence (2010), the City of Salem (2005; 2010), and the towns of Hopkinton (2004), Acton (2004), Shrewsbury (2004; 2012), Easton (2005; 2011), Hamilton (2006), Merrimac (2005), Salisbury (2006), Plymouth (2005), Stow (2003), Northborough (2005), and Kingston (2011). We are currently completing affordable housing plans for Medfield, Groton, Phillipston and Royalston.
Inclusionary Zoning. COG has prepared inclusionary zoning ordinances and bylaws for several Massachusetts cities and towns, most recently the City of Beverly, the towns of Shrewsbury, Mansfield, Merrimac, and Salisbury, and the inclusionary provisions in Needham’s new downtown overlay districts.
Housing Program and Policy Assessments. We have conducted program and policy assessments for dozens of comprehensive plans and also as stand‐alone projects. Most recently, we completed a housing policy assessment for the Cities of Lawrence, Massachusetts and Hartford, Connecticut.
Impact Assessments. We have evaluated the fiscal and community impacts of proposed development and policy changes, including affordable and mixed‐income housing development.
Monitoring of Affordable Housing Developments. We have served as monitoring agents for affordable housing developments, verifying compliance with state and local regulations. Also, we have assisted he Scituate Affordable Housing Trust in developing an affordable housing marketing plan and supported the Trust in marketing and in conducting a lottery for homeownership units. COG has considerable experience with helping communities develop specific local housing initiatives. Examples include: Hope Street/Millville. In the very small town of Millville (MA), we assisted with the disposition of a tax title property that resulted in the property’s redevelopment for six affordable rental units. On the Town’s behalf, we secured CDBG funds to provide partial development financing to make the project feasible without ongoing subsidies. We also guided the Town and developer through the LIP process (the first for each). Sitkowski School Redevelopment/Webster. COG provided intensive support to the Town of Webster (MA) for an extremely complicated disposition project involving a decommissioned public school. We prepared the Town’s Request for Proposals (RFP) for developers, assisted with proposal review, and prepared a revision to the zoning by‐law Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
4
that was needed in order to facilitate redevelopment of the school. We continued to help the Town during the developer negotiations process. The Sitkowski School elderly housing development has received an allocation of federal and state historic and low income housing tax credits. The physical conversion of the building into sixty‐six (66) units of low‐income elderly housing and a new municipal senior center is expected to commence later in 2013. LIP Comprehensive Permits. While COG consults almost exclusively to local governments, we are sensitive to the needs of developers seeking to create “friendly” comprehensive permit projects. We are particularly proud of our work for the Town of Shrewsbury (MA), as Avalon‐Shrewsbury was the state’s first LIP comprehensive permit rental development carried out by a for‐profit developer. More recently, we provided developer negotiation and other services to the Town of Needham (MA) for a large LIP development known as Charles River Landing. Denault Drive, Wilmington. We recently assisted the Town of Wilmington (MA) in assessing the physical condition and identifying the needed improvements to return an abandoned, foreclosed single family home to an affordable home for a first‐time homebuyer. The Town is negotiation with the lender who is currently in possession of the property to ensure that it will be re‐sold to an income‐qualifying household. FinePoint Associates, LLC (FPA) is a certified Massachusetts woman‐owned business, established in 2007, with offices in Westford and Brookline, Massachusetts. FinePoint is positioned to provide a range of housing and economic development services to public and private clients. It offers services in housing program monitoring, research consulting, technical assistance, training, program evaluations, feasibility and marketing analysis, and real estate development. Staff experience of twenty‐five years in all the areas noted above, together with practical experience in affordable housing, benefits FPA’s clients. Of particular importance to this proposed work is staff experience in HOME Rule monitoring, property management, affordable housing development, and non‐profit housing management. Combined with its experience in municipal and urban planning, FPA’s practical expertise provides valuable perspectives not found at many other consulting firms. FinePoint is well‐qualifed to perform join with COG to provide monitoring services for MAGIC because staff members of FinePoint have been providing similar services for fifteen years for clients such as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) and the West Metro HOME Consortium (with Newton as the lead Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
5
community). The first ten years, Elaine Nickerson provided monitoring of HOME, as well as DHCD programs HSF and HIF while working for her previous employer. FinePoint has provided HOME program monitoring for the past five years and has recently been awarded a three year contract with DHCD that includes HOME monitoring, as well as all the State Bond Affordable Housing Funds and LIP for DHCD. Elaine Nickerson, Principal, has been accepted in the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) sponsored HOME training and has achieved certifications for HOME Program Specialist in Regulations, Administration, and Rental Housing Compliance (November, 2007; December, 2008, and; August 2011, respectively). The firmʹs Affordable Housing Division’s consulting services can be summarized in three categories: Housing Program Monitoring FinePoint’s staff has specialized in monitoring for compliance with affordable housing funding sources for more than fifteen years. As a program monitor, FPA’s Affordable Housing Division approaches projects with the intent of providing technical assistance as needed. This fosters a better understanding of the often complex rules of all funding sources and the HOME Rule in particular. FPA’s experience has found that property owners and managers often face complex issues when trying to comply with the rules of various funding sources in any given project. In particular, smaller projects with a combination of HOME funds and other local sources often have technical assistance needs that are well‐served by FinePoint’s teaching approach. Training and Technical Assistance Services FinePoint staff has extensive experience in providing training to for‐profit, non‐profit, and governmental agencies, as well as other providers of affordable housing, especially practitioners of the HOME Program, including the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ HSF and HIF Programs. FPA has developed curricula and manuals for HUD, states and localities, and conducted training in property management, homeowner association management, financial management, and resident and facilities management. Staff has provided technical assistance to the same groups in tenant selection and management systems, affirmative marketing, fair housing, income eligibility determination and documentation, asset management and other program and administrative procedures. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
6
Housing Program Evaluation FinePoint staff has participated in a number of major housing research projects and program evaluations. Programs evaluated for HUD include the HOME Program, Homelessness programs and CDBG, as well as program operations of state and local agencies. The firm has had extensive direct experience in monitoring affordable housing for several clients. Staff has developed monitoring manuals, tracking systems, provided training, technical assistance and direct monitoring services for the past fifteen years. The following list of projects during the past five years provides examples of FPA’s expertise: Monitoring for the HOME Program administered by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This work has included monitoring all programs and projects, conducting desk reviews of sites, when appropriate, maintaining and modifying manuals and instruments, providing bi‐annual training sessions and overall technical assistance when needed. HOME technical assistance services to the WestMetro HOME Consortium. Since 2008, FPA has provided technical assisted to the WestMetro HOME Consortium which is headquartered in Newton, Massachusetts and includes 14 communities in the west metro region. After an initial four year contract for the Consortium, the Consortium has selected FPA to continue this work. The Consortium has provided HOME funds to for‐ and non‐profit developers and directly to low‐income households to create over 550 units of affordable housing. Elaine Nickerson, Principal, directs and manages the contract. She also provides technical assistance in several areas as requested by the Consortium and particularly as they relate to compliance monitoring. FinePoint Associates also provides technical assistance relating to the subsidy layering, financial feasibility, review of drafted agreements and other areas as requested by the Consortium. Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation (CEDAC). CEDA contracted with FinePoint Associates to provide inspections of forty (40) homes that had participated in the Home Modification Loan Program (HMLP) as part of its monitoring of the program. HIF Program Monitoring. In 2008 and again in 2011, FinePoint provided monitoring services to CEDAC for individual projects with DHCD Housing Innovation Fund (HIF). Development of Monitoring Guides and Tools. In our monitoring work over the years, FinePoint Associates has developed several monitoring guides and tools. Personnel & Project Staffing
June 18, 2013
7
Community Opportunities Group, Inc. (Lead Consultant) Peter D. Sanborn, Principal (Primary Roles: Contract Oversight and Monitoring Services) Paula Stuart (Primary Roles: Monitoring Services and Funding Strategies) Roberta Cameron, AICP (Primary Role: Local Support Services) Courtney Synowiec, AICP (Primary Role: Local Support Services) FinePoint Associates, LLC Elaine Nickerson, Principal (Primary Role: Monitoring Services) Olga Pitel (Primary Role: Monitoring Services) Kimberly O’Brien (Primary Role: Monitoring Services) Other COG staff may be assigned on an as‐needed basis, depending on the services requested. Peter Sanborn, President, will serve as Principal‐in‐Charge and will oversee the work team’s work for schedule adherence, contract management. Paula Stuart and Roberta Cameron serve as co‐Project Managers. Ms. Stuart will serve as the Project Manager for the Monitoring Services and Regional Support portions of the contract and Ms. Cameron will serve as Project Manager for the Local Support services work. However, Mr. Sanborn will serve as the point of contact for the contract. Resumes for project staff are included at the end of this proposal. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
8
Approach
Understanding of the Requested Services
Danvers has made significant progress toward creating affordable housing since a housing plan was last undertaken under the E.O. 418 Community Development program. Much of this progress is attributable to the redevelopment of the former Danvers State Hospital, although there have been numerous additional initiatives which have helped to bring the town closer to the 10% affordable housing goal under MGL Chapter 40B. Also, through the recent establishment of the Affordable Housing Trust, the Town has strengthened its capacity to guide and facilitate affordable housing that is compatible with local needs and objectives. However, it has been nearly 10 years since Danvers has conducted a formal evaluation of its housing needs and policies. In order to effectively utilize the resources managed by the Housing Trust, it must be guided by an understanding of current conditions in the local housing market and local and state regulations and policies. DHCD requirements for a Housing Production Plan provide for a process that will enable Danvers to be more proactive in encouraging future development consistent with Danvers’ needs and preferences through identifying development opportunities and regulatory strategies, obtaining control over Chapter 40B development through Housing Certification. But beyond meeting the requirements of Chapter 40B, the Housing Production Plan will also provide the Housing Trust and the Town with an implementation plan that will help to build and sustain its capacity to address housing needs. This planning process will provide a valuable opportunity to engage the public in recognizing, supporting and addressing local housing needs. On all of our municipal planning engagements, we collaborate closely with our clients to promote an open, democratic process that inspires public confidence and provides a basis for successful plan development and implementation. We create a relaxed, non‐threatening atmosphere that encourages participants to open up, communicate concerns, exchange ideas, and listen to each other. We also enlist their help to set basic “ground rules” in order to ensure that meetings run smoothly and that everyone has an equal chance to be heard. We provide interesting activities that give participants hands‐on ways to express their thoughts, and we give them materials to work with in small‐group settings, such as a scenario to respond to, and maps, drawings, models, blocks, or markers with which to represent their ideas. We encourage creative thinking and help participants confront traditional perceptions. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
9
Methodology and Work Plan
Our proposed methodology is based on our experience working with other municipalities on similar projects, the Request for Proposals, and the information provided at the pre‐proposal meeting and via Addendum #1. If selected for this engagement, we would be pleased to negotiate any work plan adjustments that need to be made in order to meet the participating Towns’ needs. A. Project Context The Minuteman Advisory Group on Inter‐local Coordination (MAGIC) is a sub‐region of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), the regional planning agency serving the communities of Greater Boston. The thirteen MAGIC communities work collaboratively on issues of regional concern, such as transportation, the environment, energy, open space, affordable housing, economic and community development, and legislative issues. Several years ago, the Town of Sudbury initiated a process to consolidate housing services for nearly half of the MAGIC communities. To date, the five towns participating in this project have not been similarly served, but now seek to follow a comparable process. The five participating towns are interested and motivated to preserve their affordable housing stock as well as to explore ways to create new affordable housing. These communities want to achieve the state 10% mandate for affordable housing. Related to this, the five communities want to preserve public subsidies as all existing units of affordable housing were created with public subsidies (such as funds, zoning bonuses or public resources). Equally important, the communities want to expand housing opportunities for low‐ and moderate‐income residents. As with most municipalities, the task of managing the affordable housing inventory is not normally a specific responsibility of municipal staff. “Affordable housing” is usually a secondary or adjunct part of the job responsibilities of planning and community development staff – if it is part of the job description at all. Adding to the challenge of preserving and increasing affordable housing, the complexity of the regulatory requirements and the many options available for local initiatives means that local staff often lack the level of expertise to adequately foster such efforts. Understandably, like the five participating towns, communities often turn to housing consultants for assistance on specific projects, or for ongoing general support. B. Goals and Objectives As explicitly stated, the purpose of this RFP is to jointly procure technical housing assistance for the participating MAGIC communities, and select a service provider who can demonstrate the experience and capacity necessary to deliver the services described below. As described throughout this proposal, we believe that the COG/FPA will be successful in providing the towns with the resources that they seek. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
10
The towns have the following goals and objectives for these services: ‐ Existing restricted units are preserved by pro‐active monitoring and the municipality becomes aware of any violations or pending affordable housing issues. ‐ Residents are served by having easier access to affordable housing opportunities, and are aware of resources to assist them ‐ Lines of communication are strengthened with the state subsidizing agencies for local projects. ‐ Knowledgeable and technical expertise is available for consultation. ‐ The towns have access to ‘best practices’ for their local initiatives. Work Plan/Scope of Services The RFP seeks three main types of services: 1) Monitoring Services (base contract) and 2) Regional Activities (base contract) and 3) Local Support (on an hourly basis as needed). The delivery of Monitoring Services will be the base element (base contract) of the project. This will be supplied to each of the five communities on an hourly billing basis. Also part of the base is the Regional Activities, which are comprised of the administrative work of the contract, and services directly needed to respond by phone and in writing to resident inquiries in all of the participating towns. The Local Support category of work will provide “value‐added” services to each of the towns that will focus on specific projects, such as locally‐sponsored unit creation development and/or Retention, or the preparation of a Housing Production Plan. Town‐by‐town, these services will vary, and will be provided as needed, once an individual town identifies activities that it wants to pursue. Although, as requested, we have estimated these on an hourly billing basis per type of activity, it may be advantageous to provide certain services on a lump sum or fixed‐fee basis. This determination can be made when the specific service has been identified. A. Monitoring Services (Base Contract) The Monitoring Services ensure and enforce compliance of existing affordable housing restrictions with the goal of preserving the affordable units. As stated in the RPF, different affordable housing programs generally require different monitoring protocols. For example, the DHCD LIP Program, used for both ownership and rental in 40B and Local Action Unit (LAU) developments, requires annual certification by the municipality to DHCD that the units comply with stated requirements. The MassHousing NEF Housing Starts Program requires a third‐
party Monitoring Agent to perform these required certifications. The MassHousing program does not currently require annual certification for homeownership units, only for rental units. Rental units, in all programs, require annual tenant recertification using updated source documents. Tenants must remain income eligible to continue occupying an affordable unit. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
11
As noted in the RFP, it is important to recognize that the Commonwealth’s monitoring requirements are changing, presumably placing a greater emphasis on compliance certification by the responsible parties. This may have the effect of requiring additional efforts by the municipalities than is currently being done. Due to the past and ongoing experience of the COG/FPA team, we have the ability to remain current with these changes as they occur. Monitoring Services also includes identifying specific local requirements for local programs and restrictions. This effort results in the development of the Annual Monitoring Plan with database and gathering of documentation. The Annual Monitoring Plan is developed based on the projects and units regulated in the municipality with activities specific to ownership units and rental units, with the objective to confirm that the development and/or owner is compliant with the affordable housing restrictions. This inventory of documents and data, along with the Annual Monitoring Plan, is updated throughout the term of service as new projects are formed, new units are created, units are bought and sold, and refinancing is transacted. The following tasks and activities will be provided under relating to Monitoring Services: 1. Create & Maintain Central Repository, Database & Plan The first task for Year 1 is to create a repository of project legal documents for all projects. These documents include initial zoning decisions (Special Permit, Comprehensive Permit, other), Regulatory Agreements (both homeownership and rental), individual unit deeds for ownership units, and other information such as mortgages or liens, land disposition agreements, 40B Cost Certification Reports and other project specific information. Years 2 ‐3 will involve maintaining and updating the database. The legal framework of each project, generally found in the Regulatory Agreement and Owner Deeds, is reviewed by the monitoring consultant and detailed conditions analyzed. The identification of the role and responsibility of the municipality is identified. The units managed by public agencies – the local housing authority or Department of Developmental Services generally do not require any supplemental monitoring or municipal oversight. The information the Consultant must collect takes the form of individual files of the documents, a consolidated inventory of each development/project complete with project address/contact information, unit size mix, affordability levels, and DHCD SHI identifications. Each project will be reconciled to the DHCD SHI listing, and required updates are made to DHCD so that the municipalities have the benefit of all eligible units being ‘counted’ on the SHI. This might also include verifying the number of units for DDS/DMR units. These efforts will result in the development of a central repository and an accurate listing on DHCD’s SHI. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
12
2. Annual Monitoring of Ownership Units This will be an annual monitoring task to confirm that the owner of record is compliant. Affordable housing restrictions can vary greatly depending on the date of recording and the regulatory program. Generally though, the restriction requires that the owner live in the unit as their primary residence and that they obtain approval for refinancing or transfer. This effort starts with the research at the appropriate Registry of Deeds to review any new information for the unit – such as refinancing (more common) or transfers (less common). Annually, we will send self‐certification letters to each owner requiring return confirmation of the restrictions. This annual correspondence with the owners is a useful opportunity for the municipality to reiterate the deed restriction requirements and to point owners to resources that can assist them to continue to maintain their property – both physically and financially. Owners of affordable housing units must follow a prescribed process when refinancing or selling their unit. If followed properly, owners and realtors initiate this process by contacting the municipality where the unit is located. We will field these calls and inquiries, and assist the municipality in reviewing all documents related to refinance. Review of appraisals prepared by a third party, and verification of procedures is an initial step with which we will assist with. The initial inquiries may lead to refinancing approvals required by the municipality, or triggering the resale provisions. We will prepare the required correspondence for the municipality. Often, outcomes result in the drafting of the refinancing approval for the municipality, or the letter of intent to exercise (or decline) the municipal right of first refusal. Loan subordination agreements may also need to be reviewed (typically initially prepared by owner’s attorney). In the case of ownership units where a rehabilitation loan was originally granted by the municipality, a similar process will be followed. We will assist in reviewing refinancing requests, processing documents, preparing or reviewing mortgage discharges, or loan subordinations, and other related correspondence. 3. Rental Units Tenant Compliance, Town is Monitoring Agent For rental units, where the municipality bears the responsibility of being the Monitoring Agent, the annual monitoring task will be to confirm that all units in the project are compliant. The effort for rental projects is mostly for the LIP projects. For these developments, the municipality is required to review the rents charged, review the certification (income eligibility) of the tenants, review that the units are maintained, to ensure that tenant selection practices comply with Fair Housing laws, and to certify all the above to DHCD. 4. Rental Units, Compliance Report, 3rd Party is Monitoring Agent For non‐LIP projects, the level of this effort is more discretionary as the municipality generally has no identified responsibility. However, a municipality may wish to obtain a general certification from the project sponsor that they are in compliant with the requirements. For these projects, where the municipality is not the monitoring agent, we will endeavor to obtain Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
13
copies of annual monitoring reports, produced by the legal monitoring agent, and review those reports to confirm the project is generally compliant. 5. Resolution of Discrepancies The monitoring reviews are typically thorough and extensive; as a result, compliance violations may be identified. These may be the result of lack of understanding of program guidelines, Fair Housing violations, general neglect or lack of oversight, and not necessarily intentional. When such occurs, we will detail the compliance violations, and outline a proposed course of action, so that a certification of compliance can be achieved. 6. Value Ownership Units for Assessment Purposes This effort provides the Assessor’s Office with annual valuations for the affordable units. As required by the Department of Revenue, property assessments must take into account deed restrictions in their valuation. This value‐added service is facilitated greatly by the complete inventory and analysis of each deed restriction and its method of resale calculation. This effort results in the delivery of a list to the Assessor’s Office of the proposed valuation of each affordable unit for tax assessment purposes. The following services related to Regional Activities: 7. Administration As stated in the RFP, the Inter‐Municipal Steering Committee will meet on a regular basis to review the project progress and discuss any issues. As requested, we will attend all inter‐
municipal steering committee meetings. It is expected that these meetings will be held more frequently during the early term of the contract. However, it is generally assumed that the steering committee will only need to meet on a bi‐annual basis. We will prepare and distribute a quarterly update report to all communities detailing services performed and updating activities underway in each community. We will provide detailed billing, with tasks allocable to each municipality. 8. Resident Support We will services as the main point of contact for residents seeking affordable housing services in any of the participating Towns. Normally we will respond to such inquiries via phone and written correspondence on an ongoing basis throughout the project duration. Occasionlly, direct one‐on‐one contact may be in order. As stated in the RFP, Hudson will arrange for a telephone number and correspondence address to be publicized to direct citizens to us. We will then be responsible for fielding inquiries, and replying to public correspondence that is general nature pertaining to the core services. C. Local Support (Hourly Contract) The other area of services requested in the RFP has been grouped under the umbrella of Local Support, as the services are provided to individual municipalities on an as‐needed, a‐la‐carte Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
14
basis. The local support provides value‐added responsibilities focusing on assisting specific projects and locally sponsored unit creation development, administration, and retention. It is contemplated that the municipalities will contract for different levels of local support, as needed, as part of the contract. 9. Project Consultation (Assist with specific development projects and unit creation) We will provide assistance for discreet site‐specific projects typically initiated by a private developer as a friendly 40B and/or projects with which a municipality is collaborating with a private or not‐for‐profit developer. Projects could also be sponsored by the local municipality. Activities could include: • Assisting Town Boards and developers evaluate parcels or Town‐owned property and soliciting developer interest; • Facilitating site and conceptual plan review, project concepts and designs; • Preparing or reviewing project pro‐forma budgets; • Analyzing developer projects using locally adopted rules, State guidelines and regulation, best practices; • Reviewing finalized plans with regard to the affordable component, including unit mix, disbursement, cost, governance, schedule, marketing; • Interacting with DHCD and Subsidizing Agency; • Providing comments on the Regulatory Agreement, and other local agreements as appropriate. • Develop pro‐forma deed restrictions for municipally sponsored projects • Preparing Local Preference justification; 10. Develop Municipal Housing Resident Assistance Programs (Program Development, Materials, Implementation) The services in this area will support creating resident assistance programs such as down payment assistance, small housing rehabilitation grants or capital improvement programs, rental assistance programs, mortgage price buy‐down programs or any other locally defined initiatives to assist new or existing residents. Activities include developing the program, guidelines including eligibility requirements, funding determination, development of application materials, and implementation assistance. Additional tasks could include: • Preparing Local‐preference justification; • Offering specific training programs for residents such as first‐time homebuyers courses, personal financial management classes, foreclosure avoidance classes, etc. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
15
11. On‐site Support for Staff, Boards and Committees This service provides on‐site support to local staff, Boards and Committees in the above services. Activities include attending meetings with presentation materials. The amount of meetings and on‐site support will vary by community. 12. Community Outreach and Planning This service provides support to local staff, Boards and Committees for planning and community outreach. Activities include preparing Housing Production Plans in accordance with DHCD requirements, supporting community outreach through housing forums and communication, and assisting with local policy initiatives. 13. Locating Eligible Buyers and Renters This service provides the municipality and its properties access to ready renter and ready buyer lists for unit leasing and resale. Activities include determining options for hard to sell units, developing marketing plans per regulation and guidelines, performing outreach and marketing units, qualifying applicants and certifying eligibility, administering lotteries, and assisting applicants through occupancy. This activity requires specialized services and training and may be required to be contracted for separately. Deliverables As requested in the RFP, we will deliver the following items at the completion of the Year 1 contract. These items shall become property of the respective community. Year 1 • A document repository and accurate listing on DHCD’s Subsidized Housing Inventory • Annual Monitoring Plan • Compliance list – certifications, violations (with course of action) • Tax Assessment proposed valuations list • Paper and electronic copies of any formal correspondence or program materials prepared under the monitoring program or local support services portion of the contract. Years 2 & 3 (if renewed) • Updates to any of the above items • Annual Monitoring Review • Compliance violation list (if any) • Tax Assessment proposed valuations list • Paper and electronic copies of any formal correspondence or program materials prepared under the monitoring program or local support services portion of the contract.
June 18, 2013
16
Timeline and Availability
We acknowledge the timeline and the performance expectation stated in the RFP and hereby state our ability to meet those. As can be seen, we have proposed a level of qualified staff persons that will enable us to meet any anticipated time demands. Financial Stability
As a firm that has operated continuously since being established in 1979, we believe that Community Opportunities Group, Inc. has the financial stability the towns are seeking. Work Samples
We have provided one (1) hard copy of the following work samples: 1) Summary Letters Relating to a monitoring of LIP rental project (Charles River Landing, Needham) 2) Capital Needs Assessment for Potential LAU homeowner units for the Town of Natick 3) Outline Work Specifications and Preliminary Opinion of Cost of Needed Repairs to restore single family home in Wilmington (18 Denault Drive) for affordable homeownership unit 4) Final Draft of Housing Production Plan for the Town of Medfield (currently pending votes of approval by Board of Selectmen and Planning Board) These work samples were selected to demonstrate the range of housing‐related services that the firm provides. Additional work samples can be provided upon request. We have provided these work samples on a separate DVD‐R. Additional Sub-Consultants
Community Opportunities Group, Inc. can arrange to contract with architectural and design consultants for additional services as needed. We find that it is often beneficial for such professionals to be availability to provide illustrations of potential housing typologies when new affordable housing development is being considered. We have existing working relationship with numerous design and allied professionals. Town of Hudson – MAGIC Housing Services
June 18, 2013
17
References
The following references represent a sample of similar and relevant projects we have completed in the past. The contacts for these projects will attest to the high quality of our work, our subject matter expertise, and our professionalism. Community/
Projects
Contact
Team
Member
Town of Easton
Housing Production
Plan
(2006 and 2011)
Martha White, Town Administrator
Natick MA
(508) 647-6410
mwhite@natickma.org
COG
NOTE: Ms. White was in Easton when the HPP was
completed in 2006.
Town of Medfield
Housing Production
Plan (nearing
completion)
City of Salem
HUD Five-Year
Consolidated Plan
and One-Year
Action Plan (2005,
2010)
Town of Needham
LIP Rental
Monitoring (2010 &
2012-13)
Khristine Treirweiler, Assistant Town Administrator
(508) 906-3011
kristinet@medfield.net
COG
Lynn Duncan, AICP, Director
Department of Planning and Economic Development
(978) 745-9595
LDuncan@salem.com
COG
Kate Fitzpatrick, Town Manager
Town of Needham
(781) 445-7512
kfitzpatrick@needhamma.gov
COG
Town of Webster
CDBG and
Numerous Housing
Initiatives
(continuously since
1995)
Town of Wilmington
PropertyAssessment
Carol J. Cyr, Director
Webster Office of Community Development
(508) 943-3800, x4004
ccyr@webster-ma.org
COG
Carole Hamilton, Director
Department of Planning and Conservation
(978) 658-8238
chamilton@town.wilmingon.ma.us
COG
June 18, 2013
MA DHCD
HOME Monitoring
WestMetro HOME
Consortium
HOME Program
Technical
Assistance
MA DHCD
HOME Monitoring
& Technical
Assistance
Jo Ann McGuirk, Deputy Associate Director
Division of Housing Development
Department of Housing and Community Development
(617) 573-1301 Trisha Kenyon Guditz
for WestMetro HOME Consortium
Newton Community Development Department
(617) 796-1156
FPA
Rebecca Frawley, Director
HOME Program
Department of Housing and Community Development
(617) 573-1318
FPA
FPA
18
Information About Community Opportunities Group, Inc.
Community Opportunities Group, Inc. (COG) was founded in 1979 to meet the housing and community development needs of cities and towns across New England. For many years, we specialized in the HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and built our excellent reputation by helping clients design, fund and implement projects that improved the quality of life for people who lived and worked in their communities. Owing to our years of experience and the varied composition of our client base – from major cities in the Northeast to the villages of Berkshire County, Connecticut and New Hampshire – we became recognized experts in packaging CDBG with other funding sources, and we helped communities reach goals that previously seemed unattainable. Being one of the core service areas that COG provides, we are proficient in all aspects of federal grant administration: recordkeeping and reporting, compliance monitoring, financial management, environmental review, program design and programmatic requirements, and cross‐cutting federal requirements. Further, COG is serving as grant manager for municipalities that received funding from CDBG‐R (Recovery). As such, we are knowledgeable of the additional reporting and compliance requirements that accompany ARRA funds. COG has also provided technical assistance and troubleshooting services to grantees with moderate to serious monitoring findings. Over the years, we have been asked by local government grantees, or referred by state agencies and HUD to conduct detailed audits of program records, document statutory and regulatory violations, develop plans to resolve findings, and provide training for local staff and officials in order to prevent a recurrence of grant management problems. COG’s experience and roles in CDBG and housing are unlike those of many consultants in that we are directly responsible for activity implementation and grant administration on a daily basis. Many of our non‐Entitlement clients contract with COG for complete project grant management and administration services. This experience ensures that we are current with policy, regulatory and compliance requirements. COG’s experience in CDBG‐ and other publicly‐funded housing projects also provides a further strength in our ability to assist clients in addressing housing goals. We have had responsibilities for carrying out a range of housing initiatives using CDBG – to support new housing development (rental and ownership), public housing modernization, (re)development of special needs housing, first time‐homeownership programs, and rehabilitation of existing single‐ and multi‐family housing. The firm has been involved in these types of projects continuously since it was established more than thirty years -1-
ago. During this time, we have managed scores of local and regional housing rehabilitation programs for municipal clients and non‐profits, providing a full array of services, from program development, to outreach and marketing, to case processing and underwriting to technical rehabilitation specialist services). These responsibilities for assisting in improving approximately 2,000 housing units have meant that we have unparalleled experience, knowledge and insight. In short, we have direct experience in applying the myriad of requirements that accompany public funding in carrying out these programs. COG’s success in the housing and community development field enabled us to expand the firm’s professional horizons. We have managed numerous public construction projects such as libraries, senior centers, parks, recreational facilities, elderly housing, neighborhood infrastructure and historic building restoration. We also offer technical assistance in downtown revitalization, housing development and regulatory compliance, and capacity‐building services to help small non‐profit organizations develop the wherewithal to grow. Today, land use planning and zoning occupy a major place in our firm’s portfolio alongside community development. Since 1996, COG’s engagements have included several master plans, district or area studies and plans, visioning, asset and liability inventories, farmland preservation studies, open space and recreation plans, fiscal impact studies, growth management plans, housing studies, feasibility studies and predevelopment services. We also have in‐house Geographic Information System (GIS) capacity. In addition, we have written zoning bylaws and wetlands protection regulations, and provided peer review services to local permitting authorities. Unlike many planning and development consultants, COG has direct local government experience: we know how to plan and implement because we have done both. We are “hands on” consultants who understand the day‐to‐day operations of city and town halls. Our work in community development makes us keenly alert to the realities of local capacity and the challenges communities face as they juggle competing agendas and needs. We pride ourselves on our ability to understand and work with the political culture of each city or town that hires us. -2-
Our Services
Project Management Historic preservation projects Neighborhood infrastructure Accessible public buildings Clerk of the works services Senior centers Designer selection, public bidding, contractor selection & contract compliance
Parks and playgrounds Planning & Public Policy Master plans Open space and recreation plans Land use plans Development review Zoning analysis & zoning bylaws Feasibility studies Downtown and neighborhood studies Capital planning Public meeting facilitation Preservation plans Growth management plans Housing & community development plans Fiscal impact studies GIS mapping services
Section 504 & ADA transition plans Community Development Community facilities Community economic development Affordable housing development Project financing Reuse/redevelopment projects Grant applications Neighborhood revitalization Grant administration Downtown development Regulatory compliance Historic preservation Housing studies
Technical Assistance & Capacity Building Peer review services Needs assessments & population surveys Organizational development Management consulting Strategic planning Compliance reviews Board training for non‐profit organizations Consensus building & conflict resolution -3-
Personnel
environmental engineer for HNTB Corporation in Boston. Mr. Darragh also holds a Master of Urban Affairs from Boston University and a Bachelor of Science in Environmental Engineering from Cornell University. He became a principal at COG in 1999. Mr. Darragh is MCPPO‐certified and an EIT (MA #10498). He has served as principal‐in‐charge of COG’s community development work in Mansfield, Wakefield, Blackstone, Rockland and Woburn, MA, and several other locations. Peter D. Sanborn, President. A founding partner of COG, Mr. Sanborn has nearly 35 years of experience in community and economic development, historic preservation, project and construction management, site and project feasibility studies, and housing studies. He provides management and development consulting services to cities and towns, housing authorities and non‐profit agencies throughout New England. Mr. Sanborn has been principal‐ in‐charge of COG’s community development efforts for all of the firm’s Connecticut client communities, as well as for numerous municipal clients in Massachusetts. He also serves as Principal‐
in‐Charge for the firm’s planning portfolio. Currently, he has direct hands‐on responsibilities as CDBG Program Manager or Director in Hampton, Stafford and Ellington, CT and recently completed similar responsibilities in Somers. He serves as the principal consultant to the town of Webster, MA, where the firm has had a wide range of community development and planning responsibilities since 1995. Mr. Sanborn’s other current work includes a master plan in Easton, MA (participating as part of a larger team), a program assessment for Grow Smart RI, a property (building) assessment and re‐use plan for a neighborhood area in Ware, MA, and a housing study for the Town of Falmouth, MA. He holds a Bachelor of Arts from the University of New Hampshire, with post‐
graduate studies there and at Boston University. Roberta Cameron, AICP, Planner, has more than seventeen years or experience as a planner, specializing in economic development, housing and fiscal impact analysis. Prior to joining COG, she worked for several years at Larry Koff & Associates. In addition to her strong quantitative analysis and data presentation skills, Ms. Cameron has played key roles in community‐wide master plans and area planning engagements, and she has co‐led public participation program as designer and facilitator. She holds a Master of City Planning form Boston University and a Bachelor of Arts in Economics and Music form Mount Holyoke College. Paula Stuart has more than 22 years experience in housing and community Development. While holding senior management positions in two Massachusetts cities, she designed, implemented and managed programs that have received HUD Best Practices awards and that were presented to the U.S. Congress as pilot programs. Ms. Stuart is a HUD‐certified Public Housing Manager (PHM) and holds both state and national certifications as a homebuyer counselor. During her time in municipal government, she was responsible for writing and implementing inclusionary housing and linkage ordinances, and for developing, implementing and managing Wayne T. Darragh, Vice President. Mr. Darragh joined COG as an associate in 1993 after completing a Master of Business Administration at the University of California at Berkeley. He previously served as town planner in Rockland, MA, and as an -4-
Patricia Conley Kelleher is a project planner and preservation specialist, with extensive experience in the field of historic and cultural resource preservation. She holds a Bachelor of Science in Historic Preservation from Roger Williams College and a Masters of Arts in Preservation and Urban Studies from Boston University. Since first joining the firm in 1997, Ms. Kelleher has been involved in numerous planning, project management and community development engagements. Recently, she was the lead staff person on a contract to prepare a community‐wide preservation plan for the Town of Barnstable. In the firm’s master planning work, she is the lead researcher and author of cultural and historic resource elements and in open space and recreation elements (Clinton, Dedham, Groton and Lincoln). She has assisted clients with grant applications to the Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund (MPPF) and in environmental review requirements for CDBG‐funded and other federally funded projects involving historically significant properties. In 2010, she completed a preservation plan for the Town of Barnstable (MA). Ms. Kelleher has served as President of Historic Salem, Inc., and as Director of the Somerville Historic Preservation Commission. one of the first locally‐funded Affordable Housing Trust Funds in Massachusetts. During the mid‐1990s she led a large Massachusetts housing authority through a major transition period, resolving issues that had stalled modernization projects, assessing management systems and preparing a transition report for the authority’s commissioners. In addition to her housing and community development experience, her background includes more than a decade of public relations, marketing and fundraising experience for large national organizations, hospitals and museums. She joined COG in 2007 has been involved in the firm’s CDBG program work in Bellingham, Blackstone, Mansfield, Templeton and Wareham (MA), in Hampton, CT. She has also developed and managed affordable housing compliance monitoring and affirmative fair housing marketing plans for Needham and Scituate, MA. Courtney Synowiec, AICP, Planner, works as a Planner specializing in zoning, land use, housing and economic development. Ms. Synowiec has more than eight years of professional planning experience in rural, suburban and urban communities. Prior to joining the firm she held municipal planning and zoning positions in Brookline, MA, Shelburne, VT and Suffield, CT. Ms. Synowiec has particular expertise in analyzing, interpreting and writing zoning and related regulatory policy, as well as for reviewing development proposals. Since joining COG, she has worked on a range of planning projects, including developing baseline data and analysis for the economic development element of the Easton, MA master plan, research relating to potential municipal fiscal impacts for a proposed resort casino in Palmer, MA and master plan assessment for Lincoln Station in Lincoln, MA. Michael D. Pingpank, Senior Project Manager has or is serving as the Program Manager for multiple CDBG grants in Bellingham, Franklin, Hubbardston, Northbridge, and Templeton, MA and in Ellington and Stafford, CT. He also served as part of a larger COG team working on an economic development plan for Ashland, MA, a master plan in Groton, MA and for the firm’s fiscal impact analysis for the proposed resort casino in Palmer, MA. He is MCPPO‐certified and is managing the disposition of a town‐owned former mill site in Bellingham, MA. Mr. Pingpank holds a -5-
Ms. Kelleher holds a B.A. in Political Geography and African Studies from Mount Holyoke College, a M. Div. from Catholic Theological Union and a Masters of Urban Planning and Policy from the University of Illinois Chicago. B.A. in Political Science with a minor in Visual Art from Union College and a Master in City Planning from Boston University. Mr. Pingpank’s prior experience includes four years working with cities and towns at the Massachusetts Municipal Association and an internship with the New York State Association of Counties. Peter Kenefick is one of the firm’s Rehabilitation/Construction Specialists. Prior to joining COG in 1995, he worked in the building trades for several years, and owned his own general contracting business. As a hands‐on contractor, he gained experience dealing with property owners, subcontractors, laborers, and building officials, and developed a comprehensive understanding of houses, building methods and materials. Mr. Kenefick has provided Construction/Rehab Specialist services for numerous projects in Webster, MA, including several substantial rehabilitation projects for long‐term affordable rental housing. He currently serves as Rehabilitation Specialist in Ellington, Suffield and Stafford, a 5‐town regional program based in Hampton CT. He recently served as Construction Specialist on a capital improvements project at 32‐unit congregate elderly housing development in Pomfret, CT and is recently served in a similar capacity for a third phase of improvements at the Snipsic Village elderly housing complex in Ellington CT. In 2012, he served as Construction Specialist overseeing the remediation of hazardous materials at the former A.J. Sitkowski School in Webster, MA, which is being redeveloped into 66 units of low‐income elderly housing and a new municipal senior center. Past experience includes serving as Construction Inspector/Clerk of Works for a senior center project in Stafford, a combined senior center/library project in Chaplin, CT, and the historic restoration of a museum house in Ellington. Kathleen Kelleher has extensive background and experience in the areas of social and economic justice, human rights and neighborhood‐based community development. She currently serves or has recently served as Program Associate implementing community development projects and planning work for several client communities in Massachusetts and Connecticut, including Abington, Avon, Rockland and Webster (MA) and Ellington (CT). Recently, she was the principal consultant and author of Healthy Communities study for the town of Lincoln, MA. This project won a 2011 APA‐
Massachusetts Chapter award for excellence. Prior to joining Community Opportunities Group, Inc., Ms. Kelleher was an Institute Justice Team Leader for the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, working on justice issues relating to human trafficking, immigration reform and the practice of nonviolence. Earlier, Kathleen worked for a community development corporation on the south side of Chicago for nine years where she collaborated with residents and the City to create green space and affordable housing options, as well as moved multi‐year community plans forward to meet City and community revitalization goals. Ms. Kelleher managed the New Homes for South Chicago single‐
family new construction project which won the LISC Non‐profit Real Estate Project of the Year award for Chicago in 2005 as well as a national green‐building award of excellence from Home Depot Foundation. -6-
Diane Fiore has nearly fourteen years experience in Small Cities CDBG Program grant management in Connecticut, including conducting client intake, and maintaining Small Cities and STEAP program files and financial records. She has served in this capacity in Ellington and Stafford, and for Program Income‐funded activities in Suffield. She has a private business background and extensive accounting experience. Catherine Bertolet has more than six years experience in Small Cities CDBG Program grant management, including conducting client intake, and maintaining CDBG program files and financial records. She is currently serving as Program Assistant for the 5‐town regional housing program in Hampton and is serving or has served in similar capacities in Bellingham and Mansfield, MA. Prior to joining COG, Ms. Bertolet served in a similar capacity for the Town of Northbridge. When entering the community development field, she brought nearly 25 years of experience in financial management and business administration for several businesses. She has attended completed coursework at Framingham State and Dean Junior Colleges. Don Bucchianeri, Principal, Bucchianeri Management Services, has a long‐term and close association with COG as a Construction/Rehabilitation Specialist/Clerk of Works. Working as subcontractor to COG, he served in this capacity on housing rehabilitation, rental housing and mixed‐
used redevelopments for numerous COG clients in Massachusetts, including Woburn, Rockland, Abington, Avon, Wakefield, Millville, Holbrook, Maynard, Northbridge, Rockland, Wilmington and Rockland. See separate resume and firm qualifications that follows after information our firm. -7-
List of Past & Current Clients
Planning & Community Development Massachusetts City of Attleboro Town of Lincoln City of Beverly Town of Mansfield City of Cambridge Town of Marshfield City of Gardner Town of Mashpee/EDIC City of Gloucester Town of Maynard City of Lawrence Town of Medfield City of Newburyport Town of Mendon City of Newton Town of Merrimac City of Salem Town of Milford City of Woburn Town of Millbury Town of Acton Town of Millville Town of Arlington Town of North Andover Town of Ashburnham Town of Northborough Town of Avon Town of Northbridge Town of Ayer Town of Petersham Town of Barre Town of Princeton Town of Bellingham Town of Plymouth Town of Belmont Town of Provincetown Town of Blackstone Town of Royalston Town of Braintree Town of Salisbury Town of Canton Town of Scituate Town of Chatham Town of Sheffield Town of Dover Town of Shirley Town of Duxbury Town of Shrewsbury Town of Easton Town of Spencer Town of Falmouth Town of Stoneham Town of Franklin Town of Stow Town of Hamilton Town of Templeton Town of Harvard Town of Tewksbury Town of Holbrook Town of Uxbridge Town of Hopkinton Town of Wakefield Town of Hubbardston Town of Watertown Town of Ipswich Town of Wayland Town of Kingston Town of Webster Town of Leicester Town of Wellfleet -8-
Town of Westford Town of Ellington Town of West Bridgewater Town of Hampton Town of West Newbury Town of Pomfret Town of Westwood Town of Putnam Town of Wilmington Town of Somers Town of Winchendon Town of Suffield Town of Winchester Town of Stafford Town of Winthrop Town of Willington ABCD/South End Neighborhood Action Project Maine Acton Community Housing Corporation City of Portland Beals and Thomas/Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority Hurricane Island Outward Bound School Office of State Planning BETA Engineering New Hampshire Brickstone Properties City of Concord CDC of South Berkshire, Inc. Lannan Co. Citizens’ Housing & Planning Association (CHAPA) Town of Derry Town of Hillsboro CityDesign Collaborative Inc. Town of Newmarket Connery Associates Town of Northfield Construct, Inc. Town of Tilton Devens Disposition Executive Board Rhode Island Environmental Partners Group Equity Company City of Cranston Mark Bobrowski, Esq. Grow Smart RI Massachusetts Housing Partnership Town of North Kingstown Merrimack Valley Economic Development Council Vermont New England Municipal Center City of Burlington Somerville Lumber & Supply Co., Inc. Vine Associates Beyond New England VHB, Inc. City of Johnstown, PA Winthrop Center Revitalization Committee City of Paterson, NJ Winthrop Chamber of Commerce Connecticut Private and Public Housing Massachusetts City of Bridgeport Bay Cove Human Services City of Hartford Bellingham Housing Authority Town of Ashford Bridgewater Housing Authority Town of Chaplin -9-
City of Beverly Town of Chaplin City of Chelsea Town of Eastford City of North Adams Town of Ellington City of Waltham Town of Hampton Cohasset Housing Authority Town of Pomfret Duxbury Housing Authority Town of Scotland Gardner Housing Authority Town of Stafford Marlborough Housing Authority Town of Willington Middleborough Housing Authority New Hampshire Northborough Housing Authority Derry Housing Authority Norton Housing Authority Project Management and Grant Administration Port Construction Co. Rockport Housing Authority Massachusetts Scituate Affordable Housing Trust City of Newburyport Sudbury Housing Authority Frederick Douglass Charter School Town of Acton Town of Ayer Town of Bolton Town of Bellingham Town of Duxbury Town of Blackstone Town of Great Barrington Town of Holbrook Town of Harvard Town of Mansfield Town of Holbrook Town of Maynard Town of Lee Town of Milford Town of Maynard Town of Millville Town of Northbridge Town of North Andover Town of Shirley Town of Northbridge Town of Spencer Town of Plymouth Town of Webster Town of Provincetown Town of Westwood Town of Sheffield Town of Williamstown Town of Shirley Town of Wilmington Town of Spencer Wareham Development Partnership Town of Sturbridge West Bridgewater Housing Authority Town of Wakefield West Brookfield Housing Authority Town of Webster Westwood Housing Authority Town of Winthrop Winchester Housing Authority Connecticut Connecticut Ashford Housing Authority Ashford Housing Authority Town of Ashford Town of Ashford Town of Chaplin -10-
City of Boston, Department of Neighborhood Development (DND) City of Newburyport Town of Ellington Ellington Housing Authority Town of Hampton Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) Town of Pomfret Pomfret Community Housing Corporation Town of Stafford Somerville Community Development Corporation, Inc. Town of Willington Town of Milford Technical Assistance and Capacity Building Chelsea Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc. CDC of South Berkshire, Inc./Construct, Inc. Town of Northbridge Wakefield Public Schools Watertown Community Housing, Inc.
-11-
Community Opportunities Group, Inc. 129 Kingston Street, Third Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02111 (617) 542‐3300 Peter D. Sanborn, President Experience A founding partner of Community Opportunities Group, Peter Sanborn has more than thirty‐five years of experience in housing, community and economic development, historic preservation, project and construction management, site and project feasibility studies and housing studies. While responsible for the management and marketing of the firm, Mr. Sanborn is also a working principal who is directly involved in COG’s day‐to‐day professional work. Mr. Sanborn has been principal‐in‐charge of scores of COG’s community development efforts, including those in Wareham, Webster, Avon, Salem, Wakefield, Maynard, Bellingham and Sheffield, Massachusetts, and in numerous communities in Connecticut. From late 2010 through March 2012, he was COG’s principal staff person serving as Acting Director of the Community and Economic Development Authority in Wareham, MA. Mr. Sanborn has expertise in grant writing and has secured CDBG and other funding for housing, infrastructure and public facilities projects, economic development, and public services for municipal clients. He has also implemented numerous other public grant programs and provided planning and construction project management to the firm’s client communities. Mr. Sanborn continues his active involvement in CDBG grant management and implementation where he remains responsible for the firm’s contracts in Connecticut and for several Massachusetts municipal clients. He serves as a CDBG and public procurement compliance specialist to clients and staff. He has been involved in the preparation of the City of Salem’s Five‐Year Consolidated Plan and in an assessment of housing programs for the City of Hartford. Mr. Sanborn has led many of the firm’s planning engagements and participates actively in the firm’s ongoing planning work. He has led public participation efforts and committee‐
level work on planning projects and participated with other staff and firms on housing studies and community‐wide master plans. Mr. Sanborn also assists clients in conducting service and facility needs assessments for targeted user groups and serves as liaison between clients and federal‐ and state‐level agencies. He has been involved in the firm’s preparation of ADA Transition Plans and 504 Assessments in the Towns of Winthrop, Rockland and Webster, MA and in Stafford, CT. Prior to forming COG, Mr. Sanborn worked as a community development and management consultant at another consulting firm, where he supervised the firm’s and contract staff in revising and unifying format of state air quality regulations for all U.S. states, territories and possessions, administered a 330‐unit Section 8 Existing housing rental program under contract to a local Massachusetts housing authority, and completed numerous grant Peter D. Sanborn, Resume Page 2 proposals and applications. Earlier in his career, he also worked as the planning coordinator at the New Hampshire Division of Public Health’s Office of Emergency Health Services. From 1991‐2007, Mr. Sanborn was a Board member (and past President) of Shelter, Inc. (now Heading Home), a Cambridge‐based organization that provides emergency shelter, transitional, and supportive permanent housing and related services to homeless individuals and families in greater Boston. During his tenure as President, Shelter completed a new five year strategic plan and moved forward in aggressively implementing it, thereby achieving a significant expansion of its housing inventory and programs. Education Masters in City Planning Program (graduate course work), Boston University. Professional Development Courses, Graduate School of Design, Harvard University. B.A., History, University of New Hampshire. Professional Panels and Presentations Massachusetts Federation of Planning Boards and Boards of Appeals, Annual Meeting, October, 1998. Boston Society of Civil Engineers, 1998. Professional Affiliations American Planning Association National Trust for Historic Preservation Connecticut Community Development Association Licensed Real Estate Broker, Commonwealth of Massachusetts Community Service City of Boston, South End Landmark District Commission, Commissioner (Alternate), Current. Worcester Square Area Neighborhood Association, Boston, Massachusetts, Member, Board of Directors, Current. Former Member, Board of Directors, and Past President, Shelter, Inc. (now Heading Home), Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1991‐2007. Community Opportunities Group, Inc. 129 Kingston Street, Third Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02111 (617) 542‐3300 Paula Stuart, Associate Experience Paula Stuart has more than twenty‐two years experience in the housing and community development field. Ms. Stuart has written Consolidated Plans, prepared Analyses of Impediments, Comprehensive Housing Strategies and Annual Performance Reports, and has managed CDBG, ESG and HOME funds for Entitlement communities. She is a NAHRO‐
certified Public Housing Manager. With this extensive experience and a background in grants writing and administration, Ms. Stuart joined Community Opportunities Group, Inc. in 2007. Since, she has prepared CDBG grant applications at COG for municipal clients in both Massachusetts and Connecticut and is currently serving as a grant manager for the firm’s CDBG program work in several Massachusetts communities. Before joining COG, Ms. Stuart worked as an independent consultant, assisting municipalities, private developers, and non‐profit agencies seeking to build mixed‐income housing in cities and towns across the Commonwealth. Earlier, she was the Director of Housing at the Office of Planning and Development in Lawrence, Massachusetts, where she developed housing and homelessness policies and programs, and was responsible for new construction, first time homebuyer, and housing rehabilitation programs. She managed a Lead Paint Consortium of five High Risk Massachusetts Communities under a grant from the HUD Healthy Home Program, providing lead abatement to 500 housing units. While in Lawrence, she also led the City’s Continuum of Care Committee, which had responsibility for preparing, submitting, and managing McKinney and ESG Grant funding and working with not‐for‐profit housing and service providers. She was responsible for designing and implementing programs that were integrated into the City’s Annual Action Plans as part of the 5‐Year HUD Consolidated Plan. During this time, Lawrence received a HUD Best Practices Award for being the first city in the nation to implement a Homeless Management Information System. As Director of Housing, Ms. Stuart was also responsible for integrating state‐level housing initiatives and resources into the city’s larger housing and community development efforts. Ms. Stuart had an extended period of professional experience in Somerville, Massachusetts, where she served in several positions over a ten year period. She worked as a grants administrator within the Executive Office of the Mayor, as Interim Executive Director for the Somerville Housing Authority, and as the Director of Housing in the Somerville Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD). She was also appointed Chairman of the City’s Fair Housing Commission. While Chair, Somerville was chosen by the Massachusetts Paula Stuart, Resume Page 2 Commission on Discrimination (MCAD) as one of a select number of communities to hear fair housing complaints locally (under contract with MCAD). While the OHCD’s Director of Housing, Ms. Stuart had responsibility for an array of planning, programs and policies relating to housing. She researched and wrote the City’s Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing and implemented actions to remove identified barriers. Additional responsibilities included administering the City’s ESG and McKinney funds and developing the Continuum of Care Committee and Strategy. Policy changes at HUD during her tenure resulted in McKinney funds being awarded on a formula basis. To ensure an integrated approach to addressing homelessness, Ms. Stuart oversaw the creation of the Somerville Providers Group – an association of the city’s shelter and services providers who worked with city government to craft comprehensive strategies for addressing homeless persons’ needs and to prioritize local funding needs. As Director of Housing, Ms. Stuart managed funding from four federal housing programs (CDBG, HOME, ESG and McKinney), the state‐funded Weatherization and Heating Assistance Program, and the locally‐funded Somerville Affordable Housing Trust Fund program. Ms. Stuart often worked closely with the City’s Economic Development Director on joint housing/economic development initiatives involving reuse of city property, brownfields redevelopment and creation of live‐work space. Community Service Member (City of Somerville Representative), Urban Ring Community Advisory Committee, Current. Member, Merrimack Valley AIDS Advisory Committee, 2001‐2003. Awards CASPAR, Inc. (Cambridge and Somerville Program for Alcoholism and Drug Rehabilitation), Heart‐In‐Hand Community Service Award, 2001. VNA of Eastern Massachusetts, Community Service Award, 2000. Community Opportunities Group, Inc.
(617) 542-3300
Roberta Mitchell Cameron, AICP Planner Experience SAMPLE PROJECTS A planning consultant for over 17 years, Roberta Cameron has assisted in the preparation of community‐wide master plans and targeted planning strategies in communities throughout Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Ms. Cameron has examined complex issues facing communities in the region and innovative alternatives for achieving community goals, especially in the areas of land use, housing, economic development, and zoning. She is skilled with using quantitative and evaluative analysis to creatively synthesize data from a variety of sources, as well as facilitating public process to respond to an understanding of relevant concerns. Recent projects have included impact assessments of proposed policy changes and development projects, and market analyses for improvement of town centers and other mixed use districts. MASHPEE/FALMOUTH EDIC PRINCETON MASTER PLAN PARTNERSHIP FIVE YEAR PLAN ASHLAND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT VISION AND ACTION PLAN TOWN OF BELMONT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TOWN OF ARLINGTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN TOWN OF MIDDLEBOROUGH HOUSING PRODUCTION PLAN Before joining COG, Ms. Cameron worked with Larry Koff & Associates where she contributed to projects including master plans, housing and economic development strategies, zoning and fiscal impact analyses, and other targeted plans. Ms. Cameron coordinated quantitative analysis, research, and GIS mapping; conducted public outreach; and evaluated policy and market conditions, integrating a comprehensive perspective with an understanding of specific areas of concern. During this time, Ms. Cameron also collaborated with other consulting firms in the region, including Planners Collaborative Inc., John Brown Associates, Taintor Associates, and Todreas Hanley Associates, providing support in the preparation of numerous master plans, economic development, and downtown revitalization strategies. Education Master of City Planning, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts Bachelor of Arts in Economics and Music, Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Massachusetts Professional Affiliations American Planning Association Community Service Medford Green Line Neighborhood Alliance and Medford Street Tree Advocacy Group Community Opportunities Group, Inc.
(617) 542-3300
Courtney Synowiec, AICP Planner Experience Courtney Synowiec joined COG in 2013 and works as a planner specializing in zoning, land use, housing, and economic development. Ms. Synowiec has over 8 years of experience working in urban, suburban, and rural communities in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Vermont. Ms. Synowiec has experience working in support of major planning projects such as master plans, comprehensive plans, district plans, and economic development plans. In support of these projects, she has provided public outreach, graphic design and architectural renderings for visual aids, quantitative research and data analysis, and GIS. In addition, Ms. Synowiec has extensive experience in permitting development and has a unique understanding of the legal, financial, public, and private concerns related to development that assist in the creation of insightful and realistic market analyses. She also has extensive experience working with the public and excels at disseminating complex concepts in an accessible and meaningful manner to all types of participants and stakeholders. Prior to joining COG, Ms. Synowiec worked as a Zoning Administrator in Shelburne, Vermont and a Regulatory Planner in Brookline, Massachusetts. In both positions, Ms. Synowiec was responsible for reviewing development proposals for conformance with zoning, building, and preservation codes as well as for drafting language for zoning articles for Town Meeting. Through these experiences, Ms. Synowiec has developed excellent presentation skills and is well versed in government administration. In addition, Ms. Synowiec has also worked as a GIS Administrator in Suffield, Connecticut. Education Master of Regional Planning, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts Bachelor of Arts in Geography and Urban Studies, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan Professional Affiliations American Planning Association FinePoint Associates, LLC
PROJECT EXAMPLES
• Housing
Program
Compliance
Monitoring
(HOME Program) for Statewide Agencies -- Monitoring
for all housing development projects and programs that
receive HOME Program financing to ensure that the
requirements of the HOME Rule (24CFR Part 92) are met
and continue to be met during the affordability period. This
includes the development and continuous updating of the
monitoring guide, on-site review and site inspections of all
funding recipients, development and maintenance of
database for all projects using HOME funds and technical
assistance provided to property developers, owners and
managers. The projects include homeownership and rental
that typically also contain Low Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC) funding and Section 202 and/or Section 8 rental
subsidies.
• Housing Program Compliance Monitoring for
Housing Stabilization Fund (HSF) and Housing
Innovations Fund (HIF) for State Agency
• Technical Assistance and Monitoring for
Several Cities and HOME Consortiums -- Reviewing
project proposals for conformance with HOME eligibility and
other regulatory requirements. Providing advice on all
HOME regulatory requirements. Review and assists in the
preparation of HOME project funding documents. Reviewing
project development and operational pro formas to
determine compliance with HOME requirements. Oversight
of Subsidy Layering Reviews (SLR). Monitoring projects and
programs for compliance with HOME requirements.
• HOME and HSF Program Training -- Technical
assistance and training sessions on the use of the HOME
and HSF programs and compliance with HOME and HSF
Rules. Subjects include: HOME/HSF Rental Occupancy,
HOME/HSF First Time Homebuyer Project and Programs as
well as other Federal issues such as Fair Housing and
Affirmative Marketing, Procurement Regulations, and
Development Considerations.
• Financial Management Manual and Training
Program -- Covered the financial management and
reporting for condominiums.
• Management
Training
for
Professional
Organization of Homeowner Associations -- Topics
included:
professional
organizations,
business
plan
development, by-law development and general operating
procedures.
HOUSING PROGRAM INFORMATION
HOME Program Summary - HOME is a federal program authorized under Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez
National Affordable Housing Act, as amended. Program regulations are at 24 CFR Part 92. The HOME Program
provides formula grants to States and localities that communities use (often in partnership with local nonprofit
groups) to fund a wide range of activities that build, buy, and/or rehabilitate affordable housing for rent or
homeownership or provide direct rental assistance to low-income people.
Housing Innovation Fund (HIF) Summary - HIF is a Massachusetts program that provides funding for the
creation and preservation of alternative forms of affordable housing. These forms include, but are not limited to,
single room occupancy (SRO) units; limited equity cooperative housing; transitional housing for the homeless;
battered women's shelters; mutual housing; employer assisted housing; and lease to purchase housing.
Housing Stabilization Fund (HSF) Summary - The Housing Stabilization Fund (HSF) is a Massachusetts state
funded bond program that assists in the production and preservation of affordable housing for low-income families
and individuals. For-profit developers, non-profit developers, local housing authorities and municipalities in
cooperation with for-profit or non-profit developers are eligible to apply for HSF funds. HSF monies may be used
for the acquisition and/or rehabilitation of existing structures for sale to income-eligible first-time homebuyers,
including distressed or failed properties, or the new construction of homeownership projects.
Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Summary - The LIHTC Program is used to finance the development
of affordable rental housing for low-income households. Federal housing tax credits are awarded to developers of
qualified projects. Developers then sell these credits to investors to raise capital (or equity) for their projects, which
reduces the debt that the developer would otherwise have to borrow. Because the debt is lower, a tax credit property
can in turn offer lower, more affordable rents.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT TYPES
Housing Finance Program Compliance Monitoring
Technical Assistance and Training
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SERVICES
Housing Program Compliance
Monitoring of affordable housing projects and
programs on behalf of financing agencies for
compliance with funding rules and regulations for
rental housing and first time homebuyer
programs (including HOME, LIHTC, HSF, HIF,
CIPF). In addition, we can provide consulting
services to improve compliance.
Training and Technical Assistance
Consulting assistance for housing
developers/owners in asset management, tenant
selection, waitlist management, affirmative
marketing, income eligibility, financial
management, homeowner association development, and property management. Training
sessions designed for audiences from as few as ten students up to seventy-five.
Program Evaluation and Studies
Services related to best practices research, performance measurement and program
effectiveness.
FinePoint Associates, LLC is a Massachusetts-based consulting firm with clients throughout
the United States. Our economic development consultants and affordable housing finance
experts provide specialized technical services to public agencies, nonprofits, real estate
developers, financial institutions, business organizations and social enterprises.
Drawing from many years of experience, FinePoint consultants can help plan, design and
implement effective economic development and affordable housing programs. We bring
specialized skills, extensive project experience and the value of unbiased third party market
research, program evaluation and monitoring. We can provide research and analysis to
guide the strategic investment of resources into successful projects that will generate the
most benefits for target communities and project sponsors.
We have technical expertise in areas such as market research, feasibility studies, small
business development, downtown and neighborhood commercial revitalization, property
management and the successful use and monitoring of finance programs (including CDBG,
HOME, LIHTC, HSF, HIF, CIPF and others).
We have experience working in a wide array of communities ranging from large urban
centers to small rural areas and from very economically distressed and ethnically diverse
neighborhoods to affluent markets. We work collaboratively with community residents,
business and property owners, non- profits and local government to develop the most
appropriate strategies, plans and policies.
FinePoint Associates, LLC is a Certified Woman Owned Business Enterprise (WBE)
© 2011 FinePointAssociates, LLC
ELAINE KING NICKERSON
PO Box 1242 Westford, Massachusetts, 01886 / 617-543-2204
PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY
Elaine Nickerson, Principal, has provided consulting in housing through technical
assistance and training, management assessments, program/rule monitoring and
evaluations for non-profit and for-profit companies, towns and cities in the US and
abroad in Ukraine and Russia.
As Senior Manager of housing program compliance monitoring from 1997-2007, Ms.
Nickerson has offered her expertise in variety of areas including; income eligibility
determination and documentation, fair housing, affirmative marketing, housing
lotteries, relocation, waitlist management, tenant selection and management plans,
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Housing Quality Standards
(HQS), M/WBE outreach and Section 3. In addition she is experienced in construction
management and financial management including budgeting and asset
management.
Ms. Nickerson is a founding Member of FinePoint Associates, LLC. FinePoint
Associates LLC was established in May, 2007. The firm’s partners and staff work in the
areas of Economic Development and Affordable Housing. Ms. Nickerson and Ms.
Peg Barringer are the Managing Partners.
Ms. Nickerson is an experienced analyst, project manager and administrator having
managed several multi-year consulting contracts for a variety of clients for over
$1million. Ms. Nickerson has managed as many as 25 staff members in scattered
offices.
Selected experience and qualifications are organized into the following categories:
•
•
•
Housing Program Compliance
Technical Assistance and Training
Research
•
•
•
Management
Education
Employment History
SELECTED EXPERIENCE: HOUSING PROGRAM COMPLIANCE
HOME Technical Assistance and Rule Monitoring for Massachusetts Department of
Housing and Community Development. Monitors participants in the HOME Rule
(24CFR Part 92) to ensure requirements of the rule are met. DHCD HOME awards are
focused primarily in Rental Development (including subsequent occupancy
regulations throughout the affordability period), Homeownership Programs, and
Homeownership Projects. Developed and modified the monitoring guide surveys,
conducts on-site monitoring and site inspections of all State Recipients and provides
technical assistance to participants in the implementation of the HOME Program
Rule. Provide compliance reports to DHCD for each participant. Designs and
delivers training sessions throughout the Commonwealth.
In addition to the HOME Funds, the projects reviewed generally also have LIHTC
funding, in addition to Section 202 and/or Section 8 rental subsidies. (since 1997)
HOME Technical Assistance and Rule Monitoring, West Metro HOME Consortium,
Newton, MA. Monitored participants in the HOME Rule (24CFR Part 92) to ensure
requirements of the rule are met. West Metro HOME Consortium HOME awards
include Rental Development, Homeownership Programs, and Homeownership
Projects and Homeowner Rehab projects. Provided technical assistance to
participant in the implementation of the HOME Rule and provide training in all areas
of HOME and associated regulations. In addition to monitoring, the Team provided
technical assistance for pre-development issues as well as subsidy layering analyses
and general financial analysis for HOME development projects. (since 2008)
HOME Rule Monitoring, North Shore HOME Consortium, Peabody, MA. Monitored
participants in the HOME Rule (24CFR Part 92) to ensure requirements of the rule are
met. North Shore HOME Consortium HOME awards are focused primarily in Rental
Development (including subsequent occupancy regulations throughout the
affordability period), Homeownership Programs, and Homeownership Projects and
Homeowner Rehab projects. Conducted on-site monitoring and provided technical
assistance to participants in the implementation of the HOME Rule. (3 years)
HOME Rule Monitoring for Livable City Initiative (LCI), City of New Haven,
Connecticut. Monitored participants in the HOME Rule (24CFR Part 92) to ensure
requirements of the rule are met. LCI HOME awards are focused primarily in Rental
Development (including subsequent occupancy regulations throughout the
affordability period), Homeownership Programs, and Homeownership Projects.
Provided technical assistance, and provided a training session on preparation for
monitoring and compliance with the HOME Rule. Developed the HOME Rule
monitoring guide survey, conducts on-site monitoring of all LCI Sub- Recipients and
provides technical assistance to participants in the implementation of the HOME
Rule. (4 years)
HIF / HSF Rule Monitoring for Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community
Development. Monitored participants in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Housing Innovation Fund (HIF) and Housing Stabilization Fund (HSF) to ensure
requirements of the rule are met for all rental and homeownership awards. Assisted in
the development of a monitoring guide survey, conducts on-site monitoring of all
State Recipients and provides technical assistance to participants in the
implementation of the rules. In addition to the state funding rules, the projects
reviewed generally also have either HOME or LIHTC funding, in addition to Section
202 and/or Section 8 rental subsidies. In the case of HIF, the Department of Mental
Health and the Department of Mental Retardation are often contributors of grants or
loans. (7 years)
HOME Monitoring Guides, Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community
Development. Assisted in the development of HOME program monitoring guides for
Tenant Based Rental Programs, Owner Occupied Rehab, and Homebuyer
Assistance for recipients as well as Project monitoring guides for Homeownership,
Rental and Occupancy Projects.
Monitoring of HUD’s Single Family Property Disposition Demonstration, U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development. Monitored participants in the
SFPDD program to ensure requirements of the program are met. Assisted in the
development of a compliance survey, conducted telephone surveys and performed
on-site monitoring of the highest risk sites.
SELECTED EXPERIENCE: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING
HUD CDTA HOME Technical Assistance. Part of the team from Massachusetts that
participated in the Community Development Technical Assistance (CDTA) Grant for
HOME Technical Assistance (TA). Provided TA and delivered training workshops for
managers of recipients and management companies on the methods necessary for
compliance with the HOME Rule. Subjects included; determining and documenting
income eligibility, asset management, tenant selection plans, fair housing and
affirmative marketing, and housing lotteries. (2010-2012)
HOME Program and HIF/HSF Program Training for Massachusetts Department of
Housing and Community Development. As part of the current HOME and previous
HIF/HSF Monitoring contracts, provide technical assistance, and annual training
sessions on preparation for monitoring and compliance with the HOME, HIF and HSF
Rules. Subjects typically included; HOME/HSF Rental Occupancy, HOME/HSF First
Time Homebuyer Project and Programs as well as other general issues such as Fair
Housing and Affirmative Marketing, Procurement Regulations, and Development
Considerations.
HOME Program Training for North Shore HOME Consortium, Peabody, MA.
As part of the HOME Monitoring contract, provided technical assistance, and
training sessions on preparation for monitoring and compliance with the HOME Rule.
Subjects typically included; HOME Rental Occupancy, HOME First Time Homebuyer
Project and Programs as well as other general issues such as Fair Housing and
Affirmative Marketing, Procurement Regulations, and Development Considerations.
Property Management Services and Training of Board Members, Massachusetts
Housing Finance Agency (MassHousing). Provided technical assistance and training
to a portfolio of small, troubled condominium associations scattered throughout the
City of Boston. Responsible for the management of the associations as well as
providing each association with board member training, management training, and
technical assistance in long-range strategic planning.
Massachusetts HOME Recipient Workshops, Massachusetts Department of Housing
and Community Development. Assisted project director in administering the delivery
of workshops for HOME recipients to assist them in designing and administering
HOME-funded programs and projects.
New York HOME Recipient Workshop, State of New York Division of Housing and
Community Renewal. Assisted project director in administering the delivery of
quarterly workshops for HOME recipients to assist them in designing and
administering HOME-funded programs and projects. Performed logistic
arrangements for workshops and completed necessary progress reports for client.
SELECTED EXPERIENCE: RESEARCH
Evaluation of the HOME Program, Urban Institute and U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development. Participated in the evaluation of the HOME Program in
three phases of data collection. On-site and telephone collection focused on local
administrative practices, owners and beneficiaries.
HOME Reference Manual, Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community
Development. Assisted in the development of a reference manual to be distributed
to all Massachusetts HOME Recipients and Awardees. Included the compilation of all
pertinent rules, regulations, memos and other documents concerning the HOME
Program for a Manual as well as implementation of modifications to the manual as
requested by potential users.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Evaluation, U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development with the Urban Institute. Assisted with the
collection of data to evaluate the CDBG program from its inception. Responsible for
eight of fourteen sites, including logistical arrangements, telephone and on-site
interviews with CD staff, local officials and major sub-recipients and data analysis.
SELECTED EXPERIENCE: MANAGEMENT
Comprehensive Management Assessments. For six private management companies,
managing public housing for the Puerto Rico Public Housing Authority, conducted
comprehensive management assessment of operations and developed
management recommendation. Responsible for assessment of three of the six
companies, including on-site interviews with property staff, tenants and with the
central office staff and administrators.
Director of Condominium Management, OKM Associates. As Director of
Condominium Management, Ms. Nickerson was responsible for overseeing the
management of OKM's condominium portfolio. Responsible for the supervision of
the division and its staff. Initiated, supervised, coordinated and followed through on
a variety of projects and responsibilities which ran concurrent with one another.
Developed, implemented and evaluated management procedures and policies.
Oversaw, and coordinated staff training and educational programs. Marketed
OKM's property management services.
Property Manager, OKM Associates, Inc. As a property manager, oversaw budgets,
maintenance, accounts receivable and accounts payable for up to eight properties
at a time in the Boston Area. Oversaw major improvement projects as property
manager; including new roofs, a new heating system serving thirty-five units,
environmental remediation of a leaking underground oil tank, and repairs of a
building after a fire that caused extensive fire, smoke and water damage to six units.
CERTIFICATIONS
HUD-Certified HOME Program Specialist- Technical Assistance Provider- Regulations,
November 2007
HUD-Certified HOME Program Specialist- Technical Assistance ProviderAdministration, December 2008
HUD-Certified HOME Program Specialist- Technical Assistance Provider- Rental
Housing Compliance, August 2011
EDUCATION
JMB Real Estate Academy, Lowell MA, USPAP (Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice)
Harvard University Extension, Cambridge MA, Massachusetts; Institute of Affordable
Housing: (Development Process, Financing, Design, and Management)
Bentley College, Waltham, MA, Adult Education, Accounting
Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vermont, History B.A.
OLGA PITEL
Compliance Analyst
2011-present
Monitor affordable housing projects for compliance with HUD’s HOME program
(24 CFR Part 92) and State Bond Funding Programs on behalf of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts’s Department of Housing and Community
Development (DHCD)
Conduct monitoring site visits to determine compliance with the HOME
Program
Evaluate tenant eligibility and income verification completed by the
managing agent (HUD’s Part 5 (Section 8)) and all other aspects of
compliance elements
Physically inspect properties with respect to HUD’s Housing Quality
Standards (HQS)
Generate reports summarizing compliance issues
Provide technical assistance to agencies and managers managing
affordable housing projects with federal funds
Create forms, guides and various monitoring tools to assist recipients
Maintain database and tracking systems
Assist with training presentations
Finance Specialist/Senior Finance Officer
1991-2009
City of Newton, Newton, MA
Analyzed and approved applicant process for Newton Homeowners to
receive US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding.
(HOME and CDBG)
Conducted detailed eligibility evaluations for compliance with requirements
of each program.
Performed financial underwriting analysis
Completed comprehensive and complex loan packages
Monitored affordable rental housing projects for compliance of HUD’s CDBG
program and Massachusetts’s Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) program
ensuring continuous funding and Serviced City’s loan portfolio
Junior Finance Officer
1985-1991
City of Newton, Newton, MA
Administer HUD’s CDBG funds for public service and economic development
agencies
Monitor performance and compliance with federal regulations
Provide technical assistance to various CDBG recipient agencies
Review budget and payment vouchers for drawdown
Prepare loan closing documents
KIMBERLY O’BRIEN
Compliance Analyst
May 2013-present
Monitor affordable housing projects for compliance with HUD’s HOME program
(24 CFR Part 92) and State Bond Funding Programs on behalf of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts’s Department of Housing and Community
Development (DHCD)
Conduct monitoring site visits to determine compliance
Evaluate tenant eligibility and income verification completed by the
managing agent (HUD’s Part 5 (Section 8)) and all other aspects of
compliance elements
Physically inspect properties with respect to HUD’s Housing Quality
Standards (HQS)
Generate reports summarizing compliance issues
Provide technical assistance to agencies and managers managing
affordable housing projects with federal funds
Create forms, guides and various monitoring tools to assist recipients
Maintain database and tracking systems
Assist with training presentations
Director of Real Estate Operations
July 2001 – April 2013
Cascap, Inc. Somerville, MA
Supervise the Real Estate Operations of Cascap Realty, Inc. consisting of 4+
staff, 240 units and 31 sites plus the oversight of all projects currently in
development.
Provide Asset Management of the scattered sites and monitoring system for
compliance issues.
Evaluate potential real estate development sites and opportunities, financial
feasibility analysis, and prepared recommendations and reports as needed.
Prepare real estate development financing applications for public and
private lenders, investors, and/or donors; procured surveys, permits, deeds,
appraisals and other documents for financing negotiations and closings as
needed.
Negotiate contracts for professional services as needed including the services
of attorneys, architects, General Contractors and consultants.
Provide coordination and oversight of development teams, whose members
included attorneys, architects, contractors, city, state and federal officials.
Managed project budgets, cash flow, schedules, and team members;
Prepare periodic reports on project status to funders, auditors, and Cascap’s
Board as needed.
Arrange, attend and run community meetings and events representing
Cascap, Inc.

Build and maintained successful relationships with development partners,
funders, community members, local and state officials.
Developed Cascap’s Green Goals and Objectives for Property Development
and Property Management.
Housing Development Planner
April 1999 – July 2001
City of Newton Planning and Development Dept., Newton, MA
Managed CDBG and HOME funded housing development and rehabilitation
projects.
Developed first-time homebuyer and Purchase/Rehabilitation program
including, financing development and implementation plan.
Sat on the Executive Board of the Women’s Enterprise Initiative that works
closely with women business entrepreneurs and organize three business plan
review forums a year.
Worked on the Consolidated Plan, special projects including a HUD Section 202
development, and provide technical assistance to the public and community
organizations around housing, development, and planning issues.
Community Organizer
June 1997 – April 1999
Northwest Indiana Federation of Interfaith Organizations, Gary, IN
Involved in the development of a metro-regional strategy for addressing
sprawl in Northwest Indiana.
Worked directly with local, state and federal government leaders and
agencies.
Involved in one-on-one outreach campaign to community leaders, business
owners, and government officials.
Organized a regional transportation conference, trainings for leadership, and
wrote grants.
Americore Volunteer
1996 –1997
Hilltown Community Development Corporation, Chesterfield, MA
Provide economic development planning and community organizing for 15town region.
Facilitated meetings, coordinated fund raising, and wrote press releases.
Coordinated the production of the Hilltown Business Directory with extensive
outreach to local businesses.
Assisted in writing several successful grants and formal proposals, including
CDBG Grants.
SELECTED EXPERIENCE: EDUCATION
M.A. Regional Planning, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
May, 1996
Concentrations in Housing & Community Development and Economic Development
B.A. Geography, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT
May, 1994
Work Samples
- Needham Summary of CRL Monitoring Memo
- Natick Capital Needs Evaluation Memo
- Wilmington Specifications & Cost Estimate
- Medfield HPP
(617) 542-3300
February 6, 2013 Kate Fitzpatrick, Town Manager Town of Needham 1471 Highland Avenue Needham, MA 02492 Reference: Monitoring of Affordability Restriction, Charles River Landing Dear Ms. Fitzpatrick, As you know, Community Opportunities Group, Inc. (COG) has monitored Charles River Landing for compliance with its affordable housing restriction. A 350‐unit apartment development, Charles River Landing received support from the Board of Selectmen as a Local Initiative Program (LIP) project, and in December 2006, the Board of Appeals granted a Chapter 40B comprehensive permit to the applicant, [Redacted]. In 2007, the Board of Selectmen, the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), and CFRI executed a Regulatory Agreement (RA) that was subsequently recorded with the Norfolk Registry of Deeds. Among other provisions, the RA requires that at least 25 percent of the apartments will be low‐ or moderate‐income units. To verify that the affordable housing requirements are being met, the Town required the applicant to fund a monitoring services agreement and retained COG as monitoring agent. The monitoring we completed in December 2012 marks the second time we have reviewed this development. The monitoring process extended over many months, and it involved multiple visits to the offices of [Redacted], the owner’s lotttery
agent, and follow‐up communications by email or telephone. Although we anticipated monitoring all 88 affordable units, the income limit for recertification of existing tenants is so high (140 percent of area median income) that the risk of non‐compliance is extremely low. Accordingly, we focused our efforts on the case files of new tenants and reviewed a sample of files for returning tenants. On December 27, 2012, we issued a letter to [Redacted] with our findings and conclusions. [Redacted] cooperated throughout this process. We appreciate their timely responses to our requests for documents and clarification of the records we inspected. Unfortunately, we identified issues with several affordable units. In general, the issues included accuracy of
income calculations, adequacy of income documentation, and completeness and/or organization of the tenant case files. In many instances, we were able to resolve issues with [Redacted] before we completed the monitoring. However, three cases remain partially resolved. A fourth is not resolved, and based on all that we have seen, we do not think it can
bere solved. One of the partially resolved cases may not be an issue, but we have not received
the additional documentation we need in order to determine whether the case can be closed. Town of Needham Charles River Landing Monitoring Report February 6, 2013 Page 2 There are several items of correspondence between [Redacted] and our office concerning
these and other cases. We will provide copies of the correspondence at your request. The enclosed correspondence identifies the concerns we identified during the monitoring process. The Town and DHCD need to decide on a course of action in order to ensure that CRL provides affordable housing to eligible tenants and that it continues to qualify for listing in the Chapter 40B Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI). Please contact me to discuss this matter at your convenience. Sincerely, COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITIES GROUP, INC. Judi Barrett Planning Director Enc. Community Opportunities Group, Inc.
Phone: (617) 542-3300
Fax: (617) 542-3302
Website: www.cogincorp.com
December 27, 2012 NAME AND ADDRESS REDACTED
RE: Charles River Landing, Needham, Massachusetts Dear Name Redacted: Thank you for your November 14, 2012 email and the letters and documentation you submitted about the five remaining cases we questioned in our October 23, 2012 letter. The sixth case (Redacted) was addressed in earlier correspondence. The purpose of this letter is to conclude the compliance monitoring that we initiated several months ago and provide you with advance information about our report to the Town of Needham. Although the additional information you supplied in November helps to address many of the deficiencies we found when we reviewed the tenant income files for Charles River Landing, there are still outstanding issues. Unit Number and Name(s) Redacted
Issue: Questioned Bank Deposits and Additional Income Status: Resolved Discussion: The documentation you submitted adequately explains both the bank deposits and the apparent additional income that we questioned for this applicant. The questioned amounts are from an insurance settlement and a one‐time bonus from her employer. As non‐recurring sources, they do not have to be included in a calculation of household income. The other deposits stem from medical and dependent care reimbursements that were originally withheld from her wages and subsequently reimbursed to cover eligible expenses. As you noted, these amounts had already been included in her gross wage calculations and her pay stubs show this to be the case. Unit Number and Name(s) Redacted Issue: Questioned Bank Deposits Status: Partially Resolved
Charles River Landing Compliance Monitoring December 27, 2012, Page 2 ____________________________________________ Discussion: Based on the additional information you sent for [Redacted]’s recertification as a one‐person household in March 2012, it appears that she currently qualifies for an affordable unit. The tenant satisfactorily explained the deposits we questioned and provided back‐up documentation with her federal Schedule C. This additional information provides documentation that her income did not exceed the 140 percent recertification limit. You also provided 2011 federal tax returns for [Redacted]. The tax returns confirm our concern that when the couple first applied for an affordable unit at Charles River Landing in 2011, their income exceeded the 80 percent limit for a two‐person household, or $51,550. SEB projected [Redacted]’s annual wage or
s
salary income at $45,006. His pay stubs seem to support this estimate, but his bank statements included several large, undocumented bank deposits. [Redacted]’s 2011 tax return reports his wage and salary income for the year at $55,390. On the basis of [Redacted]’s income alone, the household did not qualify for Chapter 40B affordable housing. [Redacted] was assumed to have no income. As we understand it, [Redacted] no longer lives at Charles River Landing and he is unwilling to explain the questioned deposits. The case file does not contain enough information to demonstrate whether the deposits constituted income. However, [Redacted]
reported his wage or salary income at $10,000 more than the amout SEB originally projected and approximately $3,800 more than the HUD income limit for a two‐person household. The difference is significant. In addition, the tenant income file we reviewed did not have a certification of zero income for [Redacted] or a verification form indicating whether she received unemployment compensation. Unit Number and Name(s) Redacted Issue: Questioned Bank Deposits Status: Partially Resolved Discussion: The documentation you provided from [Redacted]’s mother and ex‐wife satisfactorily explains the deposits we questioned. The deposits include (a) his share of the refund from a joint tax return with his ex‐wife and (b) loans from his mother. As you have acknowledged, however, the additional consecutive pay stubs you submitted show that [Redacted] did not qualify for an affordable unit at the time of his initial application. This is consistent with the annual income reported on his prior year W‐2 and a follow‐up calculation you prepared with his five most recent pay stubs. You have asked whether [Redacted] should be required to vacate the affordable unit he
occupies. We cannot make that determination. The Town of Needham and DHCD will need to decide how to proceed. Charles River Landing Compliance Monitoring December 27, 2012, Page 3 ____________________________________________ Unit Number and Name(s) Redacted Issue: Questioned Bank Deposits Status: Pending Discussion: According to the additional documentation you submitted for review, [Redacted] receives a portion of her brother’s VA pensions to pay his expenses. We understand that she has requested benefit letters from the VA. In addition, she needs to document Social Security (SSA) payments as follows: 1) Copies of the benefit letters for years corresponding to the applications under review, and 2) Copies of checks written to [Redacted]’s brother in the amount of the SSA checks received and deposited to her account. We would be pleased to review this case again when we receive the additional documentation listed above. Unit Number and Name(s) Redacted Issue: Insufficient Income Documentation; Inconsistent and/or Incomplete Review Procedures Status: Unresolved Discussion. Our compliance monitoring this year began in the Spring with a risk assessment phase. We reviewed a sample of tenant income records, including [Redacted]’s
2011 recertification file, which we chose because we found problems in the original file when we monitored Charles River Landing in 2010‐2011. We discovered similar issues during our August 2012 review. The issues include unexplained deposits, unreported bank accounts, and inadequate documentation of [Redacted]’s income. The [Redacted] income file leaves unanswered questions and no way to resolve them.
For example, we questioned several deposits made in 2011, but the tenants could not document them because the bank account was closed in April 2011. Still, the account remained open when their lease renewal application was under review, yet it was not reported during the recertification process. We note that this is the same bank account we questioned when we monitored Charles River Landing more than two years ago. In addition, [Redacted] classified a $1,000 deposit in 2012 as a lump sum, nonrecurring
payment – that is, a non‐income source – because there was no record of a similar deposit in other months reported by the tenants. However, one can have sporadic income, e.g., a person who receives wage income every two weeks from a regular job and varying amounts of self‐employment income on an occasional or periodic basis. Charles River Landing Compliance Monitoring December 27, 2012, Page 4 ____________________________________________ Conclusion As we pointed out in previous correspondence, we found some inconsistencies in the methods [Redacted] uses to certify applicant eligibility including insuficient documentation and inadequate follow‐up, e.g., the unexplained deposits noted above. In general, we urge [Redacted] to take a more rigorous and systematic approach both to initial eligibility determinations and the recertification process, but especially the initial determinations. The higher income limit for renewing tenants substantially reduces the risk of non‐
compliance, but it is not that difficult for new tenants to exceed the moderate‐income limit (80 percent), especially since the tenants at Charles River Landing tend to be small, one‐ or two‐person households. Thank you for promptly responding to our letters and for your attempts to obtain the additional documentation we requested. In accordance with the Regulatory Agreement, the Development Agreement for Charles River Landing, and our contract with the Town of Needham, we need to report the results of our monitoring to the Town Manager. Sincerely yours, COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITIES GROUP, INC. Peter D. Sanborn President Community
OpportunitiesGroup,Inc.
Tel: 617-542-3300
Fax: 617-542-3302
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Martha White, Town Administrator
Beverly Estes-Smargiassi
Capital Needs Analysis for Natick Green and Deerfield Forest
October 18, 2007
Two West Natick condominium developments are being reviewed in this report:
Deerfield Forest and Natick Green. Both developments were built in the early
1980's, and have been consistently well maintained. Both developments maintain a
replacement reserve, funded through condominium fees. Most of the upgrades and
improvements planned from year to year are paid out of the reserve, and both
developments' management offices have replacement reserve/capital improvements.
plans in place. Each development anticipates some capital expenditure in their
common areas to occur within the next 5 years, beyond that which is covered by
existing reserves. These will result in special assessments to unit owners. The
estimated costs of these expenditures vary; each will be reviewed separately.
As ofthis writing, there are no units under review in a third West Natick
condominium development, Natick Village. This report does not include comments
on that development.
Deerfield Forest consists of 334 units. Four units are under consideration for the
purpose of this report:
Unit
# Bedrooms Monthly Condo Fee*
% Share
32 Walden #20
2
.34736%
$326
32 Walden #17
2
$322
.34313%
11 Walden #11
2
$311
.33198%
11 Thoreau Court #12
I
.29231%
$274
* based upon the 2007 approved operating budget for Deerfield Forest
Memorandum to Martha White
October 18,2007
Page 2 of4
The management company at Deerfield Forest identified one capital project that is
expected to necessitate a special assessment. This project -- improvements to the
Newfield Drive, the access road shared by three West Natick condominium
developments (Deerfield Forest, Natick Green and Natick Village), will be
undertaken within the next two years. The estimated cost of the project is $1.3
million. Deerfield Forest is responsible for 21% of that cost, or approximately
$273,000. The cost will be split between units using the percent interest share of
common space that each unit has been assigned. In the case of 11 Thoreau Court
#12 (a one bedroom unit), the assessment will be approximately $800, based upon
its percent interest of .29231% The other three units, all two bedroom, two bath
units, will have assessments ranging from just over $900 to $950.
A representative ofthe management company, John Wangler, indicated that there
may be one additional project of similar size within the five year period that would
be financed through a special assessment. He cautioned, however, that no one can
predict a major unforeseen problem such as a fire or other catastrophe, which could
make a much higher assessment necessary within these five years. Assessments are
not typical at Deerfield Forest, as most capital projects are paid for through the
replacement reserve or from proceeds from the condominium fees.
Condominium fees at Deerfield Forest increase yearly. There is currently a
recommendation to the Condominium Association to raise the fees by 1% in 2008.
Recommendations:
Unit Reserve: The potential for two capital projects within the next 5 years at
Deerfield Forest could result in special assessments of approximately $1600 for 11
Thoreau Court #12 to $2000 for the other three units. This needed assessment may
increase should the planned road project exceed the current estimate, and/or there
are unforeseen problems that arise within the 5 years. A "reserve" of $2,500 for the
one bedroom unit and $3,000 for the two bedroom units should provide a
comfortable cushion against unanticipated additional assessments within the first
five years of ownership.
Condominium fee calculation: Given there is an anticipated 1% increase proposed
in 2008, it is recommended that this increase be added to the base for the purposes
of calculating affordability of the units.
October 18, 2007
Page 3 of 4
Natick Green is a 318 unit development. Four units are under consideration for the
purpose of this report:
Unit
# Bedrooms Monthlv Condo Fee % Share
.3381
4 Silver Hill Lane #13
2
$239
.2742
8 Post Oak Lane #17
1
$194
.3472
2
$246
.3381
2
$239
* based upon the 2007 approved operating budget for Natick Green
The manager at Natick Green, Jennifer Saponaro, confirmed that the Condominium
Association has already begun to implement a plan for assessments to pay for the
joint road project that affects all three developments. The development has a 14.2%
share in the project, and the Condominium Association is assessing each unit the
equivalent of one month's condominium fee each February for three years, starting
in February 2007. The added condominium fee will be charged to the new owners
in both February '08 and February '09. This will range from $190 to $254 per year
depending on the size of the units. Three of the four units under consideration here
are two bedroom units and will be at the upper end of this range-about $239-246
each year for the two years. The fourth unit is a one bedroom and its obligation will
be about $194 each of the two years.
Ms. Saponaro also indicated that within the next 5 years, the development will need
to address the internal walkways and drives. The cost of this project is estimated at
$1.4 million. The assessments will range from approximately $3,840 for the one
bedroom unit (8 Post Oak Lane #1) to $4,860 for the largest two-bedroom unit (52
Silver Hill Lane #16). The units may be assessed over two or more years to pay for
this, but she expects that most or all of the assessment will need to be collected
within the next five years.
Atthis time, all other anticipated capital projects will be financed through the
development's replacement reserve fund.
Condominium fees were increased by 15% in 2006. Ms. Saponaro does not
anticipate any increase in fees for at least 2-3 years. The association has historically
resisted increasing the fees on an annual basis. This has resulted in occasional large
increases, such as the one in 2006.
Recommendations:
Unit Reserves: The approved assessment slated for implementation in 2008 and
2009 is discussed under Condominium Fees below. The anticipated assessment
required for the internal walkways and drives should be addressed through a
"reserve" account for each un~t. The final cost of the work may increase,
October 18, 2007
Page 4 014
particularly if the condominium association chooses to delay the project further.
Therefore, it is recommended that $4,500 be set aside for the one-bedroom unit at 8
Post Oak Lane, and $5,500 be set aside for each of the two-bedroom units on Silver
Hill Lane.
Condominium Fees: It is recommended that the extra month's condominium fee be
included in the affordability calculation on a unit by unit basis. That is, Condo Fee
X 13 = the annual condominium fee obligation.
---
WORK SPECIFICATIONS
DATE:
1/7/2013
ADDRESS:
18 Denault Drive
Wilmington, MA
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. It is the contractor's responsibility to be aware of all federal, state, and local codes, as well as the
requirements of zoning boards, historical and other commissions or boards. All necessary permits are to be
obtained by the contractor prior to the start of work.
2. These specifications are intended to list requirements and work scope of this particular job, and are not
intended to point out or remind trades people of their responsibilities regarding code issues or any other
federal, state, or community mandates.
3. It is assumed that all bidding contractors are aware of their responsibilities, and that any questions
regarding job-specific issues will be raised and answered at the pre-bid showing.
4. Unless otherwise stated, "Install" means that you are responsible for providing and installing the item in
question. Installation of the specified item also includes the removal and legal disposal of all of the
elements and components associated with the installation of the item specified.
5. Any products substituted as "equal" or "equivalent" must be authorized by the Owner or its agent. If
you install a product without approval you run the risk of having the product disapproved after installation,
in which case the product will need to be removed and replaced at the sole expense of the Contractor.
6. Contractors must bid on the entire work scope. Partial or incomplete bids will not be accepted.
7. Maintenance of the job site must be carefully monitored. Clean job sites include covered rubbish,
neatly stacked and covered stock reserves, daily interior and exterior site clean-up, drop clothes in work
and storage areas. Unacceptable site maintenance includes beverage cans and fast food containers strewn
about the site, stock stored haphazardly, overflowing dumpsters, disregard for the property and safety of
others.
8. In authorizing any progress payments, a 10% “hold-back” or retainage will be deducted. This cumulative
retainer will be the last payment to be released after all the paperwork has been received, the final
inspection completed and the corresponding permits have been signed off.
9. The Contractor shall include all labor, materials, and equipment necessary to complete the work
described in these specifications and scope of work.
10. Measurements/quantities are approximate and are to be verified by the Contractor.
Specification Writer Signature:
Don Bucchianeri
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 1 WORK SPECIFICATIONS
SPECIAL NOTE: This section contains the Work Specifications, which will become part of
the contract. The Contractor must price the bid based on the information provided in this
section in conjunction with any addenda or change orders issued as part of the Work
Specifications and/or contract. This section contains the full scope of work as well as
material specifications, performance standards, brand names, and added notes.
If there are alternates to the scope of work, they will be numbered and listed in the Work
Specifications. Please note, any work pertaining to an alternate is not to be included in the
base bid categories on the bid form but listed as a separate price next to the alternate
number. All bids must be submitted on the bid form provided with the work specifications.
The bid form is divided into categories of work (i.e., masonry, carpentry, electrical, etc.). If
applicable, the bid form also separates all the lead abatement work from the rehab non deleading work.
Symbol key = * means “similar or equal” with prior written approval from the Owner.
____________________________________________________
DEMOLITION
1. REMOVE DRYWALL
QUANTITY: The Contractor is responsible for counting and taking measurements to complete the entire
scope of work.
LOCATIONS LISTED BELOW:
1. First floor bathroom ceilings (include closets).
2. First floor bathroom walls (include closets).
3. Kitchen ceilings (up to and including the ceiling beam at the Kitchenette/Dining room).
4. Kitchen walls (up to the wall corners at the Kitchenette/Dining room).
5. First floor front left Living room: rear wall from the left rear corner to the right side hallway
opening (ceiling to remain).
6. First floor front Living room: left wall from the left rear corner up the left side to the window
frame/jamb (ceiling to remain).
Remove the drywall down to the exposed studs or ceiling joists; prep for the new drywall. Remove the
insulation. Vacuum the exposed surfaces to prep for the mold remediation.
2. REMOVE OIL TANK
scope of work.
1. Oil tank in the basement.
Remove and legally dispose of the existing oil tank (and any fuel within) and connections, including the
oil vent pipes and filler pipes.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 2 3. REMOVE WALL FRAMING & CEILING GRIDS
scope of work.
1. All of the basement wall and partition wood framing and dropped ceiling grids.
Remove and dispose of the wall framing, blocking, wood partitions, ceiling grids and ceiling panels up to
the bottom of the exposed basement ceiling joists. Vacuum the exposed surfaces to prep for the mold
remediation.
Note: Remove the existing basement ceiling insulation between the ceiling joists. Coordinate with the
mold remediation.
4. REMOVE DEBRIS
scope of work.
1. Debris in the basement areas, including but not limited to construction debris, work benches,
peg boards, abandoned doors, abandoned heat exhaust vent pipe and connections (include
exterior pieces), additional debris on the floors and on the walls, etc.
Remove and legally dispose debris off-site. Sweep and vacuum the basement floor. Clean debris and dust
from the exposed surfaces to prep for the mold remediation.
Note: Include removing and disposing of debris under the front porch.
5. REMOVE APPLIANCES, CABINETS & FIXTURES
scope of work.
1. Kitchen wall and base cabinets, and countertops (include kitchen sink).
2. Kitchen range, range hood, and oven.
3. Kitchen refrigerator.
4. Basement freezer.
Remove and legally dispose of the existing cabinets, appliances and fixtures. Existing fixtures, vanity and
mirror in first floor bathroom are to be removed, protected and re-installed.
6. REMOVE OIL BOILER & VENT MOTOR
scope of work.
1. Existing basement oil fired boiler.
Remove and legally dispose of the existing oil fired boiler, piping, venting, oil line, exterior Fields
Control power vent and connections.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 3 7. REMOVE ELECTRIC HOT WATER HEATER
scope of work.
1. Existing basement electric hot water heater/tank.
Remove and dispose of the existing electric hot water heater/tank and connections.
8. REMOVE BASEMENT ELECTRIC OUTLETS, SWITCHES, FIXTURES
scope of work.
BASEMENT LOCATIONS LISTED BELOW:
1. Existing basement partition wall and ceiling switches, outlets, decorative ceiling fixtures
(porcelain basement ceiling fixtures to remain).
Remove and dispose of the switches, outlets, wiring, circuits, fixtures, and connections. Make safe at the
service panel. Decorative ceiling fixture connections to be rewired and porcelain ceiling fixtures installed
instead.
Note: Contractor to provide and install one 20-amp GFI duplex outlet at the basement service panel
(include mounting board if required).
9. REMOVE FORCED HOT WATER BASEBOARD HEATING UNITS
scope of work.
1. Throughout the entire house (include the basement areas).
Remove and dispose of the existing forced hot water baseboard heating units and connections, including
the supply and return pipes, as well as the baseboard heating covers.
10. REMOVE CARPETING AND VINYL FLOORING
scope of work.
1. Throughout the entire house (include removing the carpeting on the basement stair treads).
Remove and dispose of the existing carpeting and vinyl flooring prepped for the new flooring. Vacuum
all of the floors surfaces to prep for the mold remediation.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 4 ________________________________________________
MOLD REMEDIATION
1. REMOVE AND PREVENT MOLD AND MILDEW
scope of work.
1. All of the exposed basement walls, ceilings, floor, joists, framing, stairs, windows, exposed
surfaces, etc. (remove ceiling insulation prior to remediation)
2. All of the Kitchen exposed ceiling joist and wall stud surfaces (remove insulation prior to
remediation).
3. All of the first floor Bathroom exposed ceiling joist and wall stud surfaces (remove insulation
prior to remediation).
4. All of the first floor front left room (Living Room) exposed stud walls on the rear and left
sidewalls (remove insulation prior to remediation).
5. All of the floor surfaces prior to installing the new carpet and vinyl (Include the first to
second floor stairway).
Prep and clean all surfaces. Provide sufficient quantities of the Natural mold Removal Kit by Property
Perfections*, and apply Molderizer* and Safe Shield* according to the manufacturer’s instructions to
achieve killing the mold and protecting the surface from future growth.
For reference: www.propertyperfections.net 1-800-440-3826
Note: Although the products listed above remove and remediate the presence of mold, there is no
guaranty that the mold will be completely remediated, and no guarantee that given the perfect conditions,
mold spores migrating into the environment will not bring about the return of mold in the house. No
measuring of the amount or type of mold present, nor any air quality control or sealed containment is
included in this scope of work. If certification of mold remediation and a warranty is desired, it is
recommended that the services of a licensed remediation specialist be contracted for this project.
________________________________________________
POWER PRESSURE WASHING
scope of work.
1. Exterior locations listed below:
a. All of the exterior vinyl siding.
b. All of the exterior wood painted surfaces.
c. All of the exterior surfaces of the house.
Pressure wash the surfaces with a mixed proportion of one gallon of Clorox outdoor bleach together with
one gallon of Simple Green All Purpose Cleaner added to ten gallons of water according to
manufacturer’s instructions. Pressure wash entire surfaces thoroughly and let set without rinsing for a
duration of 30-60 minutes. Pressure wash a second or third time until the mold is killed and the dirt is
dissolved and washed away. Pressure rinse all of the surfaces after the washing is completed. Clean all of
the washed debris off the ground after the rinsing is completed.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 5 Note: The exterior temperature will play a part in determining the number of washings and the setting
time that it takes for the mold to be killed and the dirt dissolved and washed away.
____________________________________________________
CARPENTRY
1. REPAIR PORCH RAILINGS
scope of work.
1. Front porch railings.
Replace any rotten or damaged pieces of the front porch columns, railing caps, top and bottom rails,
balusters, newel posts, newel post caps, etc. with wood to match the existing prepped for paint.
2. NEW PVC PRIVACY LATTICE
scope of work.
1. Perimeter of the front porch from the deck
framing down to 1-inch above the ground surface.
Install new white vinyl Diamond Privacy Lattice (0.5” grid opening size). Include installing new treated
framing and blocking to structurally support the new lattice at all edges.
3. EXTERIOR STAIRS & LANDING
scope of work.
1. Entire rear egress stairs, platform, and decking.
Remove the existing stairs, railings, framing, decking, footings, and pads. Install new treated lumber stairs
and landing. Construct treated lumber deck to match existing deck size as closely as possible with 2x
stock, 16 inches on center to meet code. Construct decking and stair treads with 5/4 x 6 treated lumber,
and stair risers with treated lumber 1 x 8. Construct stairs with 2 x 12 treated pine stair stringers, 16
inches on center. Stairs shall be designed so that all risers shall be the same measurement between 6 and 7
½ inches high, and all treads shall be the same measurement between 10 and 11 inches deep. Allowable
variance for adjacent risers and treads shall be no more than 3/16”. Stairs must comply with all building
codes. Construct top and bottom railings with treated pine 2 x 4’s and 4 x 4 posts around the landing
platform and down the stairs on both sides. Include treated lumber railings and balusters on all sides of
the decking and stairs with additional Brosco* C-6040 clear fir wall railings attached to the interior of the
new treated lumber railings using Coffman* exterior finish holding brackets and fittings as required to fit
the stair system. Install 2 x 2 balusters 5½” on center (4-inch clearance between balusters) between the
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 6 top and bottom railings. Secure the balusters with two screws at the top and two screws at the bottom
(pre-drill the screw holes to prevent splitting of the wood grain). The dimensions of the stair-landing
platform shall meet code. Install footings below the frost line.
Note 1: Bottom stair tread must be treated lumber. Terminate the stair stringers on a monolithic concrete
pad with a minimum thickness of 3-inches. The top of the pad is to be ½ -inch to 1-inch higher than the
adjacent ground or surface.
Note 2: TREATED LUMBER NOTE: Fasteners and hardware for treated lumber applications must
comply with the following:
1. Lag bolts must be hot dipped and have a galvanized rating of G-90.
2. Joist hangers and metal connectors must have a galvanized coating equal to G-185. Simpson’s
ZMAX line and USP Structural Connector’s Triple Zinc line are both rated G-185. Nails used
for fastening the joist hangers and metal connectors must be hot dipped and have a galvanized
rating of G-90.
3. All flashing must be York Flashing* (copper coated with a paper backing) or Polyglass Q*
(copper coated with an ice and water shield backing).
4. Stainless steel screws must be used to fasten the decking, railings, balusters, treads, risers, etc.
Use the stainless steel screws that reverse the thread and pull the screw head down flush with
the face of the material.
5. All treated lumber framing components fastened with a framing gun using power actuated wire
collated and coil nails must use Bostitch* Thickcoat* nails that are specifically designed for
lumber treated with Alkaline Copper Quaternary (ACQ).
4. REPLACE ROTTEN EXTERIOR WOOD TRIM (prepped for coverage)
scope of work.
1. Entire house.
2. Exclude the existing front deck railings, balusters, columns, newel posts decking, etc. which
will remain painted.
Replace the rotten fascia, soffit, rake, corners boards freeze boards, window sills, window and door trim,
moldings, wood trim on the entire main house and additions prepped for new white anodized aluminum
coverage.
5. 2 x 4 BASEMENT STAIR RAILINGS
scope of work.
1. Basement stairway
Install basement railings using 2 x 4 pine. Tie into wood, masonry, or concrete using manufacturer’s
recommended wall rail brackets. Install according to manufacturer’s recommendations, and in compliance
to all building codes. Include installing Brosco* C-6040 clear fir wall railings attached to the interior of
the new railings using Coffman* holding brackets and fittings as required to fit the stair system.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 7 ____________________________________________________
DOOR
1. FIBERGLASS SMOOTHSTAR EXTERIOR DOOR (top lights)
Energy Star U-factor must be no greater than 0.28 for the door unit
QUANTITY: (1) Exact quantity must be installed.
1. Front egress door.
Remove and legally dispose of any door specified to be replaced by a new door installation.
Replace exterior door with a Thermatru* Smoothstar* top light model S236. The door unit shall be
prehung, including a primed wood frame, 2 inch brickmould casing, 2 3/8 inch standard bore backset, and
Smoothstar compression weather-stripping. Provide new interior door trim on the inside of the new
prehung unit. Install minimal expansion polyurethane foam in all the perimeter window cavities between
the door frame and the rough opening prior to installing trim. Contractor shall include all labor and
materials necessary to complete the job. Prep, prime, and paint new exterior doors with Benjamin Moore*
semi gloss oil based paint. Doors shall receive as many coats of paint as necessary to fully cover. Owner
to select from available colors. All exterior doors shall have Schlage* single deadbolts, and keyed
passage sets. The finish of all hardware shall match the finish of the locksets, and doors are to be keyed
alike per the owner’s preference.
2. STORM DOORS (Emco Deluxe Triple Track)
Install a white pre-hung Emco Deluxe Triple Track Screen storm
door shown on the right above. Materials to be installed in conformance
with manufacturer’s recommendations. Consult with the Owner to verify
the direction or swing of the door before ordering or installation. Install
the storm door according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Hang the door plumb and true to the opening
to insure the proper fit and operation of the quad seal around the door.
3. SOLID VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOOR
1. Rear egress sliding door.
Remove and legally dispose of any door specified to be replaced by a new door installation. Replace the
exterior sliding door with a Harvey* solid vinyl sliding patio door unit. The door unit shall be pre-hung,
including the sliding door frame, inside and outside trim (finished), an aluminum threshold, low E glass,
tempered safety glass, compression weather-stripping, hardware, latch and key. Provide new interior door
trim (painted or stained) on the inside of the new prehung unit. Insulate around the perimeter of the door
openings prior to the installation of the new sliding door unit. Contractor shall include all labor and
materials necessary to complete the job. Provide solid blocking between door casing and the rough
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 8 opening door frame.
Note: The Contractor shall provide adequate clearance at the top of the rough opening to insure that no
structural pressure from the header above will bear on the new vinyl door frame.
____________________________________________________
DRYWALL (includes painting)
1. DRYWALL WALLS
scope of work.
1. First floor Bathroom walls (include closet).
2. Kitchen walls (up to the wall corners a the Kitchenette/Dining room).
3. First floor front left Living room rear wall from the left rear corner to the right side hallway
opening (ceiling to remain).
4. First floor front Living room left wall from the left rear corner up the left side to the window
frame/jamb (ceiling to remain).
Install and paint new sheetrock on the wall(s) listed above. Tape and seal all seams, corners, and nail
heads with joint tape and apply 3 coats of US Gypsum* joint compound. Install galvanized steel corner
bead on all outside corners and sand all surfaces to a smooth surface. All Gypsum Board panels shall be
of the same manufacturer, 48" wide in the longest lengths possible, and no less than ½” thick. Materials
shall be United States Gypsum*. Bathrooms and wet areas shall have 5/8” moisture resistant Gypsum
board, and where code requires fire-rated 5/8" gypsum board shall be installed on all ceiling surfaces
complying with all building codes and as approved by the Fire Department. Prepare all surfaces to be
painted. Set nails, caulk and fill all imperfections, and apply Benjamin Moore AquaGlo or AquaVelvet*
primer and final coats to all surfaces according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Contractor to apply
as many coats of paint as necessary to completely cover. Match the existing color as closely as possible.
Note: Patch and fill all holes in the existing drywall (to remain) throughout the house, prepped for new
paint. Repaint.
Note: Include removing and re-installing wall fixtures, and wall mirrors, etc.
2. DRYWALL CEILINGS
scope of work.
1. First floor Bathroom ceiling (include closet).
2. Kitchen ceiling (include new drywall at the ceiling beam between the kitchen and
Kitchenette/Dining room.
Install and paint new sheetrock on the ceiling(s) as listed above. Tape and seal all seams, corners, and nail
heads with joint tape and apply 3 coats of US Gypsum* joint compound. install galvanized steel corner
bead on all outside corners and sand all surfaces to a smooth surface. All Gypsum Board panels shall be
of the same manufacturer, 48" wide in the longest lengths possible, and no less than ½” thick. Materials
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 9 shall be United States Gypsum *. Bathrooms and wet areas shall have 5/8” moisture resistant Gypsum
board, and where code requires fire rated 5/8" gypsum board shall be installed on all ceiling surfaces
complying with all building codes and as approved by the Fire Department. Prepare all surfaces to be
painted. Set nails, caulk and fill all imperfections, and apply Benjamin Moore AquaGlo or AquaVelvet*
primer and final coats to all surfaces according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Contractor to apply
as many coats of paint as necessary to completely cover. Match the existing color as closely as possible.
Note: Patch and fill all holes in the existing drywall (to remain) throughout the house, prepped for new
paint. Repaint.
Note: Include removing and re-installing ceiling fixtures, etc.
____________________________________________________
PAINTING
1. EXTERIOR PAINT
scope of work.
1. Front porch decking, railings, skirt boards, balusters, top rails, bottom rails, newel posts,
newel caps, treads risers, etc.
Prepare and scrape areas to be painted according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Caulk all gaps,
seams, and cracks and apply Benjamin Moore MoorGlo* oil based primer and final coats to all surfaces
according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Match existing paint color as closely as possible.
Contractor to apply as many coats of paint as necessary to completely cover and blend and match existing
as closely as possible.
Note: Prep surfaces according to the manufacturer’s instructions. All peeling paint must be removed,
and/or stabilized prior to painting.
2. INTERIOR PAINT
scope of work.
1. New drywall ceilings.
2. New drywall walls.
3. All existing ceilings.
4. All existing walls.
5. All new and existing wood (exclude the new kitchen cabinets).
6. All existing wood trim, including but not limited to window and door trim, baseboards, etc.
Prepare all surfaces to be painted. Remove all paint drips and loose paint. Set nails, caulk and fill all
imperfections, and apply Benjamin Moore AquaGlo or AquaVelvet* primer and final coats to all surfaces
according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Contractor to apply as many coats of paint as necessary to
completely cover. Contractor to match the existing paint color as closely as possible.
Note: Contractor must remove all excessive paint drips prior to painting, as well as all surfaces of paint
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 10 where the paint is peeling. Contractor must remove dirt and mold from all surfaces prior to preparation
and painting. Prep surfaces according to the manufacturer’s instructions. All peeling paint must be
removed, and/or stabilized prior to painting.
____________________________________________________
FLOORING
1. BERBER CARPETING
scope of work.
1. All the rooms for the entire house (exclude the Kitchen and Bathrooms).
2. Include the first to second floor stairway.
Install Mohawk Aladdin carpet equal in quality to Celestial Beauty 737 Desert Villa (Owner to have final
selection of color and series) with an 8 pound padding according to manufacturer’s recommendations.
Prepare floor so surface is flat and smooth. Provide all adhesives, edge trim, and materials required to
complete the job. Owner to choose from available colors and patterns.
Note: Exclude the basement areas (include removing the carpet from the basement stair treads and risers).
2. VINYL SHEET FLOORING
scope of work.
LOCATIONS LISTED BELOW: 1. Kitchen ( up to the existing floor division line between the kitchen and the
Kitchenette/Dining areas).
2. First floor Bathroom (include the closet).
3. Second floor Bathroom.
Remove flooring including all layers down to the sub-floor. Install new 1/4 inch multiply underlayment
and Congoleum* Xclusive or Ultima series manufactured by Congoleum Corporation. Provide metal
edging as required.
Note: Exclude the floor area under the tub and vanity.
____________________________________________________
INSULATION
1. CEILING INSULATION
scope of work.
1. Basement ceiling areas.
Insulate the new ceiling insulation between the floor joists by installing un-faced fiberglass batt type
insulation to achieve a minimum of R-30. Include installing metal support wires to hold the insulation in
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 11 place.
2. WALL INSULATION
scope of work.
1. First floor Bathroom exterior walls that have been exposed to the studs.
2. Kitchen exterior walls that have been exposed to the studs.
Insulate walls by installing craft-faced fiberglass insulation to achieve a minimum value of R-13.
____________________________________________________
KITCHEN WALL AND BASE CABINETS
scope of work.
1. Kitchen area ( match the existing footprint).
Install Hampton Bay wall and base cabinets in the kitchen counter area complete with all hardware
including door and draw knobs or handles according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Owner to have
choice between Hampton Natural Hickory, Cambria Harvest, Hampton Cognac, Hampton Medium Oak,
and Hampton Satin White, Include moldings, spacers, and accessories as required to complete the entire
scope of work. Install a new Wilsonart * radius counter top with backsplash. Owner to choose from
available colors and patterns.
Note: Provide required space for the new oven/range, range top hood, and refrigerator. Match the existing
footprint.
WINDOWS
1. VINYL REPLACEMENT WINDOW UNITS (U value of 0.30 or better & Energy Star
qualified)
QUANTITY: The Contractor is responsible for counting required quantities and taking measurements to
complete the entire scope of work.
1. Windows for the entire house.
Remove all existing non-vinyl sashes, balances, weights and pulleys. Install new K&C Industries, Inc.,
Duragard XT Series 400, Paradigm Tapestry series, or Alside Sheffield Series white vinyl replacement
windows (match existing type i.e. casement, slider, awning, double hung with sash tilt-in, etc.). Match the
existing pattern of sash mullions (e.g., 6 over 6, or 6 over 1, or 1 over 1). Include fully welded vinyl sash
and frame, half screens, Low E-glass, argon gas-filled insulated glass, weather stripping around the
perimeter of the sash, security latches, constant force balance system, sloped sill, cam action sash locks,
and vent latches. Include the warm edge spacer ClimaTech Plus with Edgetech’s SST Spacer System for
the Alside Sheffield windows, and the Duraseal* high performance warm edge spacer manufactured by
TruSeal Technologies, Inc. for the Paradigm Tapestry Series windows, and the SuperSpacer, made by
Edgetech I.G. Inc. for the K&C Industries widows. All windows must have a U value of 0.30 or better.
Install minimal expansion polyurethane foam in all the perimeter window cavities between the window
frame and the rough opening prior to installing trim. If the interior window casings are removed to install
the new window, the Contractor must paint all interior window header, interior stops, casings, sills, and
aprons. If any of the trim is damaged as a result of removal, the contractor must provide, install, putty and
paint new trim to match the existing damaged trim as closely as possible. In addition, if the interior
window casings are removed to install the new window, the contractor is responsible for associated wall
patch/ repair and paint touch-up for any damaged areas resulting from the removal of the casings. Install
coil stock on the exterior window trim after removing any storm windows. Install windows per
manufacturer’s recommendations and include all labor materials and equipment to complete the job.
Note 1: All windows must be Low-E/Argon gas filled Thermopane windows and have a U value of 0.35
or better. Energy Star Program standards require a U-value of 0.35 or better.
Note 2: A U value of 0.30 is better than a U value of 0.35. Contractor must notify the Owner in writing if
requirements for tempered glass preclude any window from qualifying for the Energy Star Program prior
to placing the order or proceeding with the work.
2. BASEMENT WINDOWS (U value of 0.30 or better & energy Star qualified)
VINYL REPLACEMENT WINDOW UNITS (U value of 0.30 or better & Energy Star qualified)
QUANTITY: The Contractor is responsible for counting required quantities and taking measurements to
complete the entire scope of work.
1. All of the basement windows.
Remove the metal basement window sashes and hardware. Cut slots in the back of new treated lumber
frames to fit over and conceal the existing concrete imbedded steel window frames. Install the new
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 13 treated lumber frames prepped for the new vinyl replacement windows. Install white anodized coil stock
on the exterior of the new treated lumber frames. Install new K&C Industries, Inc., Duragard XT Series
400, Paradigm Tapestry series, or Alside Sheffield Series white vinyl replacement windows (match
existing type i.e. casement, slider, awning, double hung with sash tilt-in, etc.). Match the existing pattern
of sash mullions (for example 6 over 6, or 6 over 1, or 1 over 1). Include fully welded vinyl sash and
frame, half screens, Low E glass, argon gassed filled insulated glass, weather stripping around the
perimeter of the sash, security latches, constant force balance system, sloped sill, cam action sash locks,
and vent latches. Include the warm edge spacer ClimaTech Plus with Edgetech’s SST Spacer System for
the Alside Sheffield windows, and the Duraseal* high performance warm edge spacer manufactured by
TruSeal Technologies, Inc. for the Paradigm Tapestry Series windows, and the SuperSpacer, made by
Edgetech I.G. Inc. for the K&C Industries widows. All windows must have a U value of 0.30 or better.
Install minimal expansion polyurethane foam in all the perimeter window cavities between the window
frame and the rough opening prior to installing trim. Install and paint new white clear pine window casing
on the interior. Install coil stock on the exterior window trim after removing any storm windows. Install
windows per manufacturer’s recommendations and include all labor materials and equipment to complete
the job.
Note: All windows must be Low-E/Argon gas filled Thermopane windows and have a U value of 0.35 or
better. Energy Star Program standards require a U-value of 0.35 or better.
____________________________________________________
STEEL BULKHEAD DOOR
QUANTITY: (1) Exact quantity must be installed
1. Exterior at the existing rear location.
Remove the existing bulkhead door. Install new concrete mortar as required to prep for a new bulkhead
door. Install new treated lumber 2x stock bulkhead sill, sized to match the width of the bulkhead door
foundation wall top. Install a new Bilco * Classic Series Steel Sided bulkhead door, door frame, and
bulkhead sides according to manufacturer’s instructions (include extension if required). Basement Door
assembly shall be constructed of .090 - .100 thickness steel with Torsion Cam Lift System. Basement
Door, frame and sides (and extension if specified) shall have flow-coated and baked-on factory prime
finish and shall be furnished complete with hardware assembly bolts and anchors for securing to masonry.
Installation shall be in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. Contractor to apply finish coat of
Benjamin Moore* or California* alkyd outdoor enamel to all interior and exterior surfaces after
installation (exclude the hardware). Owner to select from standard in stock colors. Contractor to provide
to the Owner a one year material and labor warranty on the new bulkhead door, frame and sides.
Note: Fill the hole in the ground in front of existing bulkhead concrete foundation wall with compacted
loam prepped for grass seed. Spread grass seed on the top of the new loam.
____________________________________________________
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 14 VINYL SIDING REPAIRS
scope of work.
1. Two locations on the left side of the house
shown on the right.
2. One location on the right side of the house
shown on the right.
Remove the existing two vents on the left side of the house (the Fields
Control heat vent on the right side of the house removed in demo). Install
one
new white Deflect-o Super-Vent Dryer Vent Hood vent (shown below) for the left side rear dryer vent.
Repair siding at abandoned holes by removing entire lengths of the existing siding
and installing new full replacement pieces to match the existing manufacturer and
color as closely as possible. Install Currier* 3/8” foam Insulwrap* on all surfaces
receiving vinyl. Include all material, trim, and sealants necessary to provide a complete
membrane that sheds the water out onto the exterior of the siding or flashing.
VINYL COVERAGE
QUANTITY: The Contractor is responsible for counting and taking measurements to complete the entire scope
of work.
1. Front porch ceiling (non-vented).
2. Soffits for the entire house (vented).
Vinyl coverage includes all soffits and additional elements as needed to complete the job. Install soffit vents to
provide adequate ventilation.
Note: Porch ceiling perimeter beam to be covered with white anodized aluminum coverage. Porch columns to be
scraped, stabilized and painted.
WHITE ANODIZED ALUMINUM COVERAGE
scope of work.
1. Entire house, including, but not limited to fascia, rake, window and door trim, kick boards,
wood trim (Exclude the existing front deck railings, newel posts, columns, balusters, decking,
etc., which will remain painted).
2. Porch ceiling perimeter beam sides and bottom to be covered with white anodized aluminum
coverage. Porch columns to be scraped, stabilized and painted.
Install new white anodized Alcoa* aluminum .019 gauge coil stock with Alumalure 2000* finish on the
areas and surfaces listed above according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Include all material, trim,
and sealants necessary to provide a complete membrane that sheds the water out onto the exterior of the
siding. Match original dimensions and profiles as closely as possible.
____________________________________________________
HEATING
1. FORCED HOT WATER OIL BOILER WITH BASEBOARD HEAT (Energy Star Qualified)
1. Basement at the existing location.
Remove and legally dispose of old existing boiler, piping, venting, associated wiring and connections to
be abandoned (include removing the Fields Control exterior exhaust vent and connections). Supply and
install one new hot water boiler with Beckett or equal flame retention oil burner. Boiler to be Weil
McLain, Utica, Peerless, Burnham or approved equal. New boiler must be Energy Star-qualified with an
AFUE rating of 86% or greater. Install with all necessary wiring, piping and controls. Provide a boiler
sized to maintain a 70 degree Fahrenheit temperature inside the home during a minus 10º Fahrenheit
temperature outside. Installation shall include venting of the furnace, oil piping, a new oil line, water
piping, all safety valves, 2 heating zones (one for the first floor and one for the second floor), 2 new
Honeywell* or Rite Temp* 7-day programmable digital thermostats, instrumentation, controls, wiring,
electrical hook- up, a new Extol* expansion tank, and a new Taco*circulator pump.
Installation shall also include new Slant-Fin* hot water baseboard radiation units, piping, and necessary
valves and trim located along the exterior walls of the house in accordance with ASHRAE 90A. Design
conditions shall be based on an indoor temperature of 70º Fahrenheit and an exterior temperature of a
minus 10º Fahrenheit. Repair flooring where existing units have been removed as closely as possible to
the type of material and finish of the existing floor. Where new baseboard units have been installed
provide polished metal round trim on floor at pipes.
Installation shall conform to all local and state codes. Contractor to provide to the Owner with an
inspection certificate of the heating system by the Fire Department at the completion of the heating
system installation. Unit to be tuned, tested and fully operational as part of total and complete installation.
Installer to consult with Owner concerning hot water temperature setting within code limits. Contractor
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 16 must instruct Owner in proper operation of the system and provide all product literature and guarantee
materials. All labor and materials guaranteed a minimum of one year by the contractor. Materials to be
guaranteed under separate manufacturers warranty.
2. OIL TANK
Install a new 275-gallon oil tank with filter in the basement, including a new oil fill pipe and vent at an
elevation matching the existing fill pipe.
Note: Include a new shut off valve on the oil line at the new oil tank per code.
____________________________________________________
PLUMBING
1. NEW SHUT OFF VALVES & WATER METER
LOCATIONS LISTED BELOW: 1. One shut off valve on the street side of the water meter.
2. One shut off valve on the house side of the water meter.
Install new shut off valves sized to meet the maximum flow of water for the pipe size and the pressure
from the town. Include copper pipe, connections, and fittings. Include providing and installing the new
water meter. Coordinate the work with the Town DPW as required.
2. KITCHEN SINK
LOCATIONS LISTED BELOW: 1. Kitchen at the new counter location.
Install a new Elkay* 25 x 22 inch 18 Gauge #304 stainless steel Echo ECTC252210 top mount single 10inch deep bowl sink. Include 3 holes, Lustrous Highlighted Satin finish, and a 3.5-inch drain opening. Tie
in all plumbing including but not limited to the PVC waste lines, PVC trap, the hot and cold feed lines
and the spray hose. Installation includes venting up through the roof, traps and shut off valves. All labor
and materials guaranteed a minimum of one year by the contractor. Materials to be guaranteed under
separate manufacturers warranty.
3. KITCHEN SINK FAUCET
1. At the new kitchen sink.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 17 Install a new K-15172-CP Coralais Forte Single Control Kitchen
Faucet with sides-pray including all hot and cold water piping,
hook-ups, and shut off valves.
ELECTRICAL (Electricity not turned on: Please see note at bottom of Electrical section)
1. ELECTRIC OVEN/RANGE
1. Kitchen at the existing location.
Install a new white GE 5.3 cu.ft. Electric Range with self-cleaning
oven model #JBP23DRWW according to the manufacturer’s
instructions. For reference only: Home Depot SKU 172690.
All labor and materials guaranteed a minimum of one year by the contractor. Materials to be guaranteed
under separate manufacturers warranty.
2. ELECTRIC RANGE HOOD
QUANTITY: (1 Exact quantity must be installed.
1. Kitchen above the new range/oven.
Install a new white Broan 42000 Series 30-inch Range Hood model #423001 according to the
manufacturer’s instructions. For reference only: Home Depot SKU 902342.
3. ELECTRIC REFRIGERATOR
Install a new White Amana 30-inch wide, 18.5 cu.ft. Bottom Freezer
Refrigerator model # ABB1921WEW according to the manufacturer’s
instructions. For reference only: Home Depot SKU 840157.
4. EXTERIOR WALL MOUNTED FIXTURE (Energy Star qualified)
1. Front egress door at the existing location.
2. Rear egress door at the existing location.
Install a new Hampton Bay* model number BPP1611-BLK black
1-light outdoor dusk-to dawn wall lantern. For reference only: Home Depot SKU # 240336. Install rough
to finish electric wiring to install a new wall switched exterior fixture from the list above. Switches to
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 18 conform to the current national electric code, and must meet or exceed the local and state building codes.
Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is not allowed unless approved by the Owner.
Note: The existing switches, wiring and circuits may be used if they are safe and meet code.
5. ELECTRIC HOT WATER HEATER
Remove the existing hot water heater. Supply and install new A.O Smith
Promax Plus high efficiency 60 gallon hot water heater. Install with all necessary wiring, piping and
controls for a complete and total installation.
6. CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM
ALLOWANCE: Not to exceed $59.00 dollars for each separate device.
QUANTITY: (2) The exact quantity specified must be installed (even if the quantity is more than the
Fire Department or Building Inspector requires).
1. One in the basement.
Install BRK AC/DC Hardwired carbon monoxide alarm model COS12OPDBN with digital and battery
backup as directed by the Building Inspector/Commissioner and Fire Department prior to applying for the
building permit(s) and commencement of work. Installation shall conform to the provisions set in the
NFPA most current code and ordinances, as well as all State and local codes. Exposed wire mold,
conduit or piping is not allowed unless approved in writing by the Owner. Contractor to provide an
allowance not to exceed the allowance listed above for each separate device. No substitutions allowed for
the manufacturer or model numbers specified in the specifications.
Note 1: Contractor responsible for installing dual sensor ionization & photoelectric type smoke alarms if
location is further than 20 feet from the Kitchen or a Bathroom with a shower, and photoelectric type
smoke detectors if location is within 20 feet of the kitchen or a Bathroom with a shower
Note 2: Contractor must submit a sketch/drawing of the dwelling or building showing the location and
type of detector to the Building Inspector/Commissioner for written approval prior to applying for
building permit(s) for the project. In addition, the Contractor must bring the drawing approved by the
Building Inspector to the Fire Department for additional written approval prior to applying for building
permit(s) for the project.
7. (Photoelectric) COMBINATION CARBON MONOXIDE & SMOKE ALARMS
1. One in the second floor hallway outside the bedrooms at the top of the stairs.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 19 2. One in the Kitchenette/Dining area at the top of the basement stairway.
Install BRK Hardwired smoke detector with battery back-up model SC701OBV Hardwired
photoelectric/CO combination alarm with voice as directed by the Building Inspector/Commissioner and
Fire Department prior to applying for the building permit(s) and commencement of work. Installation
shall conform to the provisions set in the NFPA most current code and ordinances, as well as all State and
local codes. Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is not allowed unless approved in writing by the
Owner. Contractor to provide an allowance not to exceed the allowance listed above for each separate
device. No substitutions allowed for the manufacturer or model numbers specified in the specifications.
smoke detectors if location is within 20 feet of the kitchen or a Bathroom with a shower.
8. (Ionization & Photoelectric) DUAL SENSOR SMOKE ALARMS
2. One on the first floor at the bottom of the stairway in the hallway.
Install BRK Hardwired Photo/Ion smoke alarm with battery back-up model SA773CN as directed by the
Building Inspector/Commissioner and Fire Department prior to applying for the building permit(s) and
commencement of work. Installation shall conform to the provisions set in the NFPA most current code
and ordinances, as well as all State and local codes. Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is not allowed
unless approved in writing by the Owner.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 20 9. (Photoelectric) SMOKE ALARMS
1. One in the second floor left rear bedroom.
2. One in the second floor right rear bedroom.
3. One in the second floor front bedroom.
Install BRK Hardwired smoke alarm eith battery back-up model 701OB as directed by the Building
Inspector/Commissioner and Fire Department prior to applying for the building permit(s) and
commencement of work. Installation shall conform to the provisions set in the NFPA 101 Life Safety
Code 1997. Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is not allowed unless approved by the Owner.
Detectors must comply with the following performance standards.
10. 20-AMP GFI OUTLETS
1. One new GFI duplex outlet in the basement at the service panel.
Install a new Leviton* 20-amp ground-fault shock resistor circuit interrupter receptacle(s). All electrical
installations must conform to the current national electric code and must meet or exceed the local or state
building codes. Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is not allowed unless approved by the Owner.
ELECTRICAL NOTE: Please note that the electricity to the house has been turned off. Although the
existing 100-amp electric service, outlets, switches, lights, fans, etc, appeared in operable condition,
it could not be determined if any of these items might need repairs. This scope of work assumes that
with the exception of the two exterior light fixtures, oven/range, range hood, and refrigerator which
are specified to be replaced, the other electrical items will work properly when the power is turned
back on.
Preliminary Work Specifications Renovation of 18 Denault Drive, Wilmington, MA Page 21 18 Denault Drive
Cost Esimate, Page 1
WORK SPECIFICATIONS - COST ESTIMATE
DATE:
1/7/13
ADDRESS: 18 Denault Drive
Wilmington, MA
TOTAL Base Estimate:
$ 103,840.00
Note: Prices based on non-prevailing wages, bid during the winter months prior to the Spring.
Item Cost
DEMOLITION
1. REMOVE DRYWALL
$
1,100.00
$
1,100.00
$
980.00
QUANTITY: The Contractor is responsible for counting and taking measurements to complete the entire scope of work.
1. First floor bathroom ceilings (include closets).
2. First floor bathroom walls (include closets).
3. Kitchen ceilings (up to and including the ceiling beam at the Kitchenette/Dining room)
4. Kitchen walls (up to the wall corners a the Kitchenette/Dining room).
5. First floor front left Living room rear wall from the left rear corner to the right side hallway opening (ceiling to remain).
6. First floor front Living room left wall from the left rear corner up the left side to the window frame/jamb (ceiling to remain).
Remove the drywall down to the exposed studs or ceiling joists prepped for the new drywall. Remove the insulation. Vacuum the exposed
surfaces to prep for the mold remediation.
2. REMOVE OIL TANK
1. Oil tank in the basement.
Remove and legally dispose of the existing oil tank and connections, including the oil vent pipes and filler pipes.
3. REMOVE WALL FRAMING & CEILING GRIDS
1. All of the basement wall and partition wood framing and dropped ceiling grids.
Remove and dispose of the wall framing, blocking, wood partitions, ceiling grids, ceiling panels up to the bottom of the exposed basement ceiling
joists. Vacuum the exposed surfaces to prep for the mold remediation
18 Denault Drive
4. REMOVE DEBRIS
$
1,100.00
$
2,100.00
$
750.00
$
350.00
1. Debris in the basement areas, including but not limited to construction debris, work benches, peg boards, abandoned doors,
abandoned heat exhaust vent pipe and connections (include exterior pieces), additional debris on the floors and on the walls, etc.
Remove debris off site. Sweep and vacuum the basement floor. Clean debris and dust from the exposed surfaces to prep for the mold remediation.
Note: Include removing and disposing of debris under the front porch.
5. REMOVE APPLIANCES, CABINETS & FIXTURES
1. Kitchen wall and base cabinets ( include kitchen sink).
2. Kitchen range, range hood, and oven.
3. Kitchen refrigerator.
4. Basement freezer.
Remove and dispose of the existing cabinets, appliances and fixtures.
6. REMOVE OIL BOILER & VENT MOTOR
1. Existing basement oil fired boiler.
Remove and legally dispose of the existing oil fired boiler, piping, venting, oil line, exterior Fields Control power vent and connections.
7. REMOVE ELECTRIC HOT WATER HEATER
1. Existing basement electric hot water heater/tank.
Remove and dispose of the existing electric hot water heater/tank and connections.
18 Denault Drive
8. REMOVE BASEMENT ELECTRIC OUTLETS, SWITCHES, FIXTURES
$
970.00
$
1,300.00
$
1,800.00
1. Existing basement partition wall and ceiling switches, outlets, decorative ceiling fixtures (porcelain basement ceiling fixtures to
remain).
Remove and dispose of the switches, outlets, wiring, circuits, fixtures, and connections. Make safe at the service panel. Decorative ceiling fixture
connections to be rewired and porcelain ceiling fixtures installed instead.
9. REMOVE FORCED HOT WATER BASEBOARD HEATING UNITS
1. Throughout the entire house ( include the basement areas).
Remove and dispose of the existing forced hot water baseboard heating units and connections, including the supply and return pipes, as well as
the baseboard heating covers.
10. REMOVE CARPETING AND VINYL FLOORING
1. Throughout the entire house ( include removing the carpeting on the basement stair treads).
Remove and dispose of the existing carpeting and vinyl flooring prepped for the new flooring. Vacuum all of the floors surfaces to prep for the
mold remediation.
18 Denault Drive
________________________________________________
MOLD REMEDIATION
1. REMOVE AND PREVENT MOLD AND MILDEW
1. All of the exposed basement walls, ceilings, floor, joists, framing, stairs, windows, exposed surfaces, etc. (remove ceiling insulation
prior to remediation)
2. All of the Kitchen exposed ceiling joist and wall stud surfaces (remove insulation prior to remediation).
3. All of the first floor Bathroom exposed ceiling joist and wall stud surfaces (remove insulation prior to remediation).
4. All of the first floor front left room (Living room) exposed stud walls on the rear and left sidewalls (remove insulation prior to
remediation.
5. All of the floor surfaces prior to installing the new carpet and vinyl (Include the first to second floor stairway).
Prep and clean all surfaces. Provide sufficient quantities of the Natural mold Removal Kit by Property Perfections*, and apply Molderizer* and Safe Shield*
according to the manufacturer’s instructions to achieve killing the mold and protecting the surface from future growth. For reference only
www.propertyperfections.net 1 800 714-6979
$
1,600.00
18 Denault Drive
________________________________________________
POWER PRESSURE WASHING
1. Exterior locations listed below:
a. All of the exterior vinyl siding.
b. All of the exterior wood painted surfaces.
c. All of the exterior surfaces of the house.
Pressure wash the surfaces with a mixed proportion of one gallon of Clorox outdoor bleach together with one gallon of Simple Green All Purpose
Cleaner added to ten gallons of water according to manufacturer’s instructions. Pressure wash entire surfaces thoroughly and let set without
rinsing for a duration of 30-60 minutes. Pressure wash a second or third time until the mold is killed and the dirt is dissolved and washed away.
Pressure rinse all of the surfaces after the washing is completed. Clean all of the washed debris off the ground after the rinsing is completed.
Note: The exterior temperature will play a part in determining the number of washings and the setting time that it takes for the mold to be killed
and the dirt dissolved and washed away.
$
1,500.00
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
CARPENTRY
1. REPAIR PORCH RAILINGS
1. Front porch railings.
$
2,300.00
$
1,800.00
$
3,900.00
Replace any rotten or damaged pieces of the front porch columns, railing caps, top and bottom rails, balusters, newel posts, newel post caps, etc.
with wood to match the existing prepped for paint.
2. NEW PVC PRIVACY LATTICE
1. Perimeter of the front porch from the deck framing down to 1-inch above the ground surface
Install new white vinyl Diamond Privacy Lattice ( 0.5 grid opening size). Include installing new treated framing and blocking to structurally
support the new lattice at all edges.
3. EXTERIOR STAIRS & LANDING
1. Entire rear egress stairs, platform, and decking.
Remove the existing stairs, railings, framing, decking, footings, and pads. Install new treated lumber stairs and landing. Construct treated lumber
deck to match existing deck size as closely as possible with 2x stock 16 inches on center to meet code. Construct decking and stair treads with
5/4x6 treated lumber, and stair risers with treated lumber 1x8. Construct stairs with 2x12 treated pine stair stringers 16 inches on center. Stairs
shall be designed so that all risers shall be the same measurement between 6 and 7 ½ inches high, and all treads shall be the same measurement
between 10 and 11 inches deep. Allowable variance for adjacent risers and treads shall be no more than 3/16 of an inch. Stairs must comply with
all building codes. Construct top and bottom railings with treated pine 2x4’s and 4x4 posts around the landing platform and down the stairs on
both sides. Include treated lumber railings and balusters on all sides of the decking and stairs with additional Brosco* C-6040 clear fir wall
railings attached to the interior of the new treated lumber railings using coffman* exterior finish holding brackets and fittings as required to fit
the stair system. Install 2x2 balusters 5 ½ inches on center(4-inch clearance between balusters) between the top and bottom railings. Secure the b
TREATED LUMBER NOTE: Fasteners and hardware for treated lumber applications must comply with the following:
1. Lag bolts must be hot dipped and have a galvanized rating of G-90.
2. Joist hangers and metal connectors must have a galvanized coating equal to G-185. Simpson’s ZMAX line and USP Structural Connector’s Triple Zinc line are both rated G-185.
Nails used for fastening the joist hangers and metal connectors must be hot dipped and have a galvanized rating of G-90.
3. All flashing must be York Flashing* (copper coated with a paper backing) or Polyglass Q* (copper coated with an ice and water shield backing).
4. Stainless steel screws must be used to fasten the decking, railings, balusters, treads, risers, etc. Use the stainless steel screws that reverse the thread and pull the screw head down
flush with the face of the material.
5. All treated lumber framing components fastened with a framing gun using power actuated wire collated and coil nails must use Bostitch* Thickcoat* nails that are specifically
designed for lumber treated with Alkaline Copper Quaternary (ACQ).
18 Denault Drive
3. REPLACE ROTTEN EXTERIOR WOOD TRIM (prepped for coverage)
1. Entire house.
2. Exclude the existing front deck railings, balusters, columns, newel posts decking, etc. which will remain painted.
$
3,500.00
$
750.00
Replace the rotten fascia, soffit, rake, corners boards freeze boards, window sills, window and door trim, moldings, wood trim on the entire main
house and additions prepped for new white anodized aluminum coverage
4. 2x4 BASEMENT STAIR RAILINGS
1. Basement stairway
Install basement railings using 2x4 pine. Tie into wood, masonry, or concrete using manufacturer’s recommended wall rail brackets. Install
according to manufacturer’s recommendations, and in compliance to all building codes. Include installing Brosco* C-6040 clear fir wall railings
attached to the interior of the new railings using coffman* holding brackets and fittings as required to fit the stair system.
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
DOORS
1. FIBERGLASS SMOOTHSTAR EXTERIOR DOOR (top lights)
Energy Star U-factor must be no greater than 0.28 for the door unit
$
900.00
$
500.00
$
2,100.00
Remove and legally dispose of any door specified to be replaced by a new door installation. Replace exterior door with a Thermatru*
Smoothstar* top light model S236. The door unit shall be prehung, including a primed wood frame, 2 inch brickmould casing, 2 3/8 inch
standard bore backset, and Smoothstar compression weather-stripping. Provide new interior door trim on the inside of the new prehung unit.
Install minimal expansion polyurethane foam in all the perimeter window cavities between the door frame and the rough opening prior to
installing trim. Contractor shall include all labor and materials necessary to complete the job. Prep, prime, and paint new exterior doors with
Benjamin Moore* semi gloss oil based paint. Doors shall receive as many coats of paint as necessary to fully cover. Owner to select from
available colors. All exterior doors shall have Schlage* single deadbolts, and keyedpassage sets. The finish of all hardware shall match the
finish of the locksets, and doors are to be keyed alike per the Owner’s preference.
2. STORM DOORS (Emco Deluxe Triple Track)
Install a white pre-hung Emco Deluxe Triple Track Screen storm door shown on the right above. Materials to be installed in conformance with
manufacturer’s recommendations. Consult with the Owner to verify the direction or swing of the door before ordering or installation. Install the
storm door according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Hang the door plumb and true to the opening to insure the proper fit and operation of
the quad seal around the door.
3. SOLID VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOOR
1. Rear egress sliding door.
Remove and legally dispose of any door specified to be replaced by a new door installation. Replace the exterior sliding door with a Harvey*
solid vinyl sliding patio door unit. The door unit shall be pre-hung, including the sliding door frame, inside and outside trim (finished), an
aluminum threshold, low E glass, tempered safety glass, compression weather-stripping, hardware, latch and key. Provide new interior door trim
(painted or stained) on the inside of the new prehung unit. Insulate around the perimeter of the door openings prior to the installation of the new
sliding door unit. Contractor shall include all labor and materials necessary to complete the job. Provide solid blocking between door casing and
the rough opening door frame.
18 Denault Drive
DRYWALL (includes painting)
1. DRYWALL WALLS
1. First floor Bathroom walls (include closet).
2. Kitchen walls ( up to the wall corners a the Kitchenette/Dining room).
3. First floor front left Living room rear wall from the left rear corner to the right side hallway opening (ceiling to remain).
$
5,800.00
$
2,700.00
4. First floor front Living room left wall from the left rear corner up the left side to the window frame/jamb (ceiling to remain).
Install and paint new sheetrock on the wall(s) listed above. Tape and seal all seams, corners, and nail heads with joint tape and apply 3 coats of
US Gypsum* joint compound. Install galvanized steel corner bead on all outside corners and sand all surfaces to a smooth surface. All Gypsum
Board panels shall be of the same manufacturer, 48" wide in the longest lengths possible, and no less than ½ inch thick. Materials shall be
United States Gypsum *. Bathrooms and wet areas shall have 5/8 inch moisture resistant Gypsum board, and where code requires fire rated 5/8"
gypsum board shall be installed on all ceiling surfaces complying with all building codes and as approved by the Fire Department. Prepare all
surfaces to be painted. Set nails, caulk and fill all imperfections, and apply Benjamin Moore AquaGlo or AquaVelvet* primer and final coats to
all surfaces according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Contractor to apply as many coats of paint as necessary to completely cover. Match
the existing color as closely as possible.
Note: Include removing and re-installing wall fixtures, and wall mirrors, etc.
2, DRYWALL CEILINGS
1. First floor Bathroom ceiling ( include closet).
2. Kitchen ceiling ( include new drywall at the ceiling beam between the kitchen and Kitchenette/Dining room.
Install and paint new sheetrock on the ceiling(s) as listed above. Tape and seal all seams, corners, and nail heads with joint tape and apply 3 coats
of US Gypsum* joint compound. install galvanized steel corner bead on all outside corners and sand all surfaces to a smooth surface. All
Gypsum Board panels shall be of the same manufacturer, 48" wide in the longest lengths possible, and no less than ½ inch thick. Materials shall
be United States Gypsum *. Bathrooms and wet areas shall have 5/8 inch moisture resistant Gypsum board, and where code requires fire rated
5/8" gypsum board shall be installed on all ceiling surfaces complying with all building codes and as approved by the Fire Department. Prepare
all surfaces to be painted. Set nails, caulk and fill all imperfections, and apply Benjamin Moore AquaGlo or AquaVelvet* primer and final coats
to all surfaces according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Contractor to apply as many coats of paint as necessary to completely cover.
Match the existing color as closely as possible.
Note: Include removing and re-installing ceiling fixtures, etc.
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
PAINTING
1. EXTERIOR PAINT
1. Front porch decking, railings, skirt boards, balusters, top rails, bottom rails, newel posts, newel caps, treads risers, etc.
$
1,200.00
$
3,900.00
Prepare and scrape areas to be painted according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Caulk all gaps, seams, and cracks and apply Benjamin
Moore MoorGlo* oil based primer and final coats to all surfaces according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Match existing paint color as
closely as possible. Contractor to apply as many coats of paint as necessary to completely cover and blend and match existing as closely as
possible.
Note: Prep surfaces according to the manufacturer’s instructions. All peeling paint must be removed, and/or stabilized prior to painting.
2. INTERIOR PAINT
1. New drywall ceilings.
2. New drywall walls.
3. All existing ceilings.
4. All existing walls.
5. All new and existing wood (exclude the new kitchen cabinets).
6. All existing wood trim, including but not limited to window and door trim, baseboards, etc.
Prepare all surfaces to be painted. Remove all paint drips and loose paint. Set nails, caulk and fill all imperfections, and apply Benjamin Moore
AquaGlo or AquaVelvet* primer and final coats to all surfaces according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Contractor to apply as many coats
of paint as necessary to completely cover. Contractor to match the existing paint color as closely as possible.
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
FLOORING
1. BERBER CARPETING
1. All the rooms for the entire house ( exclude the Kitchen and Bathrooms).
2. Include the first to second floor stairway.
$
8,100.00
$
3,800.00
Install Mohawk Aladdin carpet equal in quality to Celestial Beauty 737 Desert Villa ( owner to have final selection of color and series) with an 8
pound padding according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Prepare floor so surface is flat and smooth. Provide all adhesives, edge trim, and
materials required to complete the job. Owner to choose from available colors and patterns
2. VINYL SHEET FLOORING
1. Kitchen ( up to the existing floor division line between the kitchen and the Kitchenette/Dining areas).
2. First floor Bathroom ( include the closet).
3. Second floor Bathroom.
Remove flooring including all layers down to the sub-floor. Install new 1/4 inch multiply underlayment and Congoleum* Xclusive or Ultima
series manufactured by Congoleum Corporation. Provide metal edging as required.
18 Denault Drive
INSULATION
1. CEILING INSULATION
1. Basement ceiling areas.
Insulate the new ceiling insulation between the floor joists by installing un-faced fiberglass batt type insulation to achieve a minimum of R-30.
Include installing metal support wires to hold the insulation in place.
$
1,200.00
2. WALL INSULATION
1. First floor Bathroom exterior walls that have been exposed to the studs.
2. Kitchen exterior walls that have been exposed to the studs.
$
900.00
Insulate walls by installing craft faced fiberglass insulation to achieve a minimum value of R-13.
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
KITCHEN WALL AND BASE CABINETS
1. Kitchen area ( match the existing footprint).
Install Hampton Bay wall and base cabinets in the kitchen counter area complete with all hardware including door and draw knobs or handles
according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Owner to have choice between Hampton Natural Hickory, Cambria Harvest, Hampton Cognac,
Hampton Medium Oak, and Hampton Satin White, Include moldings, spacers, and accessories as required to complete the entire scope of work.
Install a new Wilsonart * radius counter top with backsplash. Owner to choose from available colors and patterns.
Note: Provide required space for the new oven/range, range top hood, and refrigerator. Match the existing footprint.
$
6,800.00
18 Denault Drive
WINDOWS
1. VINYL REPLACEMENT WINDOW UNITS (U value of 0.30 or better & Energy Star qualified)
1. Windows for the entire house.
$
8,000.00
$
2,800.00
Remove all existing non-vinyl sashes, balances, weights and pulleys. Install new K&C Industries, Inc., Duragard XT Series 400 , Paradigm
Tapestry series, or Alside Sheffield Series white vinyl replacement windows (match existing type i.e. casement, slider, awning, double hung with
sash tilt-in, etc.). Match the existing pattern of sash mullions ( for example 6 over 6, or 6 over one, or one over one).Include fully welded vinyl
sash and frame, half screens, Low E glass, argon gassed filled insulated glass, weather stripping around the perimeter of the sash, security
latches, constant force balance system, sloped sill, cam action sash locks, and vent latches. Include the warm edge spacer ClimaTech Plus with
Edgetech’s SST Spacer System for the Alside Sheffield windows, and the Duraseal* high performance warm edge spacer manufactured by
TruSeal Technologies, Inc. for the Paradigm Tapestry Series windows, and the Super Spacer manufactured by Edgetech I.G. Inc. for the K&C
Industries widows. All windows must have a U value of 0.30 or better.
Install minimal expansion polyurethane foam in all the perimeter window cavities between the window frame and the rough opening prior to
installing trim. If the interior window casings are removed to install the new window, the contractor must paint all of the interior window header,
interior stops, casings, sill, and apron. If any of the trim is damaged as a result of removal, the contractor must provide, install, putty and paint
new trim to match the existing damaged trim as closely as possible. In addition, if the interior window casings are removed to install the new
window, the contractor is responsible for associated wall patch/ repair and paint touch-up for any damaged areas resulting from the removal of
the casings. Install coil stock on the exterior window trim after removing any storm windows. Install windows per manufacturer’s
recommendations and include all labor materials and equipment to complete the job.
NOTE: All windows must be Low-E/Argon gas filled Thermopane windows and have a U value of 0.35 or better. Energy Star Program
standards require a U-value of 0.35 or better.
NOTE: Replacement windows change the window size slightly which might require the Owner to install new blinds and/or draperies. The
Owner is responsible for all associated costs for new blinds and/or draperies.
NOTE: A U value of 0.30 is better than a U value of 0.35. Contractor must notify the Owner in writing if requirements for tempered glass
preclude any window from qualifying for the Energy Star Program prior to placing the order or proceeding with the work.
2. BASEMENT WINDOWS (U value of 0.30 or better & Energy Star qualified)
1. All of the basement windows.
18 Denault Drive
Remove the metal basement window sashes and hardware. Cut slots in the back of new treated lumber frames to fit over and conceal the existing
concrete imbedded steel window frames. Install the new treated lumber frames prepped for the new vinyl replacement windows. Install white
anodized coil stock on the exterior of the new treated lumber frames. Install new K&C Industries, Inc., Duragard XT Series 400 , Paradigm
Tapestry series, or Alside Sheffield Series white vinyl replacement windows (match existing type i.e. casement, slider, awning, double hung with
sash tilt-in, etc.). Match the existing pattern of sash mullions ( for example 6 over 6, or 6 over one, or one over one). Include fully welded vinyl
sash and frame, half screens, Low E glass, argon gassed filled insulated glass, weather stripping around the perimeter of the sash, security
latches, constant force balance system, sloped sill, cam action sash locks, and vent latches. Include the warm edge spacer ClimaTech Plus with
Edgetech’s SST Spacer System for the Alside Sheffield windows, and the Duraseal* high performance warm edge spacer manufactured by
TruSeal Technologies, Inc. for the Paradigm Tapestry Series windows, and the Super Spacer manufactured by Edgetech I.G. Inc. for the K&C In
Install minimal expansion polyurethane foam in all the perimeter window cavities between the window frame and the rough opening prior to
installing trim. Install and paint new white clear pine window casing on the interior. Install coil stock on the exterior window trim after removing
any storm windows. Install windows per manufacturer’s recommendations and include all labor materials and equipment to complete the job.
NOTE: All windows must be Low-E/Argon gas filled Thermopane windows and have a U value of 0.35 or better. Energy Star Program
standards require a U-value of 0.35 or better.
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
STEEL BULKHEAD DOOR
1. Exterior at the existing rear location.
Remove the existing bulkhead door. Install new concrete mortar as required to prep for a new bulkhead door. Install new treated lumber 2x stock
bulkhead sill sized to match the width of the bulkhead door foundation wall top. Install a new Bilco * Classic Series Steel Sided bulkhead door,
door frame, and bulkhead sides according to manufacturer’s instructions (include extension if required).Basement Door assembly shall be
constructed of .090 - .100 thickness steel with Torsion Cam Lift System. Basement Door, frame and sides (and extension if specified) shall have
flow- coated and baked- on factory prime finish and shall be furnished complete with hardware assembly bolts and anchors for securing to
masonry. Installation shall be in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. Contractor to apply finish coat of Benjamin Moore* or California*
alkyd outdoor enamel to all interior and exterior surfaces after installation (exclude the hardware). Owner to select from standard in stock colors.
Contractor to provide to the owner a one year material and labor warranty on the new bulkhead door, frame and sides.
Note: Fill the hole in the ground in front of existing bulkhead concrete foundation wall with compacted loam prepped for grass seed. Spread gras
seed on the top of the new loam.
$
2,100.00
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
VINYL SIDING REPAIRS
$
1,200.00
$
3,800.00
$
4,500.00
2. One location on the right side of the house
shown on the right.
Remove the existing two vents on the left side of the house ( the Fields Control heat vent on the right side of the house removed in demo). Install
one new white Deflect-o Super-Vent Dryer Vent Hood vent (shown below) for the left side rear dryer vent.
Repair siding at abandoned holes by removing entire lengths of the existing siding and installing new full replacement pieces to match the
existing manufacturer and color as closely as possible. Install Currier* 3/8 foam Insulwrap* on all surfaces receiving vinyl and include all
material, trim, and sealants necessary to provide a complete membrane that sheds the water out onto the exterior of the siding or flashing.
________________________________________________________
VINYL COVERAGE
1. Front porch ceiling ( non vented).
2. Soffits for the entire house.
Vinyl coverage includes all soffits and additional elements as needed to complete the job. Install soffit vents to provide adequate ventilation.
Note: Porch ceiling perimeter beam to be covered with white anodized aluminum coverage. Porch columns to be scraped, stabilized and painted.
________________________________________________
WHITE ANODIZED ALUMINUM COVERAGE
1. Entire house, including, but not limited to fascia, rake, window and door trim, kick boards, wood trim (Exclude the existing front
deck railings, newel posts, columns, balusters, decking, etc., which will remain painted).
2. Porch ceiling perimeter beam sides and bottom to be covered with white anodized aluminum coverage. Porch columns to be scraped,
stabilized and painted.
Install new white anodized Alcoa* aluminum .019 gauge coil stock with Alumalure 2000* finish on the areas and surfaces listed above according
to manufacturer’s recommendations. Include all material, trim, and sealants necessary to provide a complete membrane that sheds the water out
onto the exterior of the siding. Match original dimensions and profiles as closely as possible.
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
HEATING
1. FORCED HOT WATER OIL BOILER WITH BASEBOARD HEAT (Energy Star Qualified)
$
8,000.00
$
1,100.00
Remove and legally dispose of old existing boiler, piping, venting, associated wiring and connections to be abandoned ( include removing the
Fields Control exterior exhaust vent and connections). Supply and install one new hot water boiler with Beckett or equal flame retention oil
burner. Boiler to be Weil McLain, Utica, Peerless, Burnham or approved equal. New boiler must be Energy Star Qualified with an AFUE rating
of 86% or greater. Install with all necessary wiring, piping and controls. Provide a boiler sized to maintain a 70 degree Fahrenheit temperature
inside the home during a minus 10 degree Fahrenheit temperature outside. Installation shall include venting of the furnace, oil piping, a new oil
line, water piping, all safety valves, 2 heating zones ( one for the first floor and one for the second floor, 2 new Honeywell* or Rite Temp* 7-day
programmable digital thermostats, instrumentation, controls, wiring, electrical hook- up, a new Extol* expansion tank, and a new
Taco*circulator pump.
Installation shall also include new Slant-Fin* hot water baseboard radiation units, piping, and necessary valves and trim located along the
exterior walls of the house in accordance with ASHRAE 90A. Design conditions shall be based on an indoor temperature of seventy degrees
Fahrenheit and an exterior temperature of a minus 10 degree Fahrenheit. Repair flooring where existing units have been removed as closely as
possible to the type of material and finish of the existing floor. Where new baseboard units have been installed provide polished metal round trim
on floor at pipes. Installation shall conform to all local and state codes.
Installation shall conform to all local and state codes. Contractor to provide to the owner an inspection certificate of the heating system by the
Fire Department at the completion of the heating system installation. Unit to be tuned, tested and fully operational as part of total and complete
installation. Installer to consult with Owner concerning hot water temperature setting within code limits. Contractor must instruct Owner in
proper operation of the system and provide all product literature and guarantee materials. All labor and materials guaranteed a minimum of one
year by the contractor. Materials to be guaranteed under separate manufacturers warranty.
2. OIL TANK
Install a new 275-gallon oil tank with filter in the basement, including a new oil fill pipe and vent at an elevation matching the existing fill pipe.
Note: Include a new shut off valve on the oil line at the new oil tank per code
18 Denault Drive
____________________________________________________
PLUMBING
1. NEW SHUT OFF VALVES & WATER METER
1. One shut off valve on the street side of the water meter.
2. One shut off valve on the house side of the water meter.
$
800.00
$
550.00
$
350.00
Install new shut off valves sized to meet the maximum flow of water for the pipe size and the pressure from the town. Include copper pipe,
connections, and fittings. Include providing and installing the new water meter. Coordinate the work with the Town DPW as required.
2. KITCHEN SINK
1. Kitchen at the new counter location.
Install a new Elkay* 25x22 inch 18 Gauge #304 stainless steel Echo ECTC252210 top mount single 10-inch deep bowl sink. Include 3 holes,
Lustrous Highlighted Satin finish, and a 3.5-inch drain opening. Tie in all plumbing including but not limited to the pvc waste lines, pvc trap, the
hot and cold feed lines and the spray hose. Installation includes venting up through the roof, traps and shut off valves. All labor and materials
guaranteed a minimum of one year by the contractor. Materials to be guaranteed under separate manufacturers warranty.
3. KITCHEN SINK FAUCET
1. At the new kitchen sink
Install a new K-15172-CP Coralais Forte Single Control Kitchen Faucet with sides-pray including all hot and cold water piping, hook-ups, and
shut off valves. All labor and materials guaranteed a minimum of one year by the contractor. Materials to be guaranteed under separate
manufacturers warranty.
18 Denault Drive
ELECTRICAL
1. ELECTRIC OVEN/RANGE
$
600.00
$
65.00
$
1,100.00
$
450.00
Install a new white GE 5.3 cu.ft. Electric Range with Self-cleaning oven model #JBP23DRWWaccording to the manufacturer’s instructions. For
reference only Home Depot SKU 172690. All labor and materials guaranteed a minimum of one year by the contractor. Materials to be
guaranteed under separate manufacturers warranty.
2. ELECTRIC RANGE HOOD
1. Kitchen above the new range/oven.
Install a new white Broan 42000 Series 30-inch Range Hood model #423001 according to the manufacturer’s instructions. For reference only home Depot
SKU 902342.
3. ELECTRIC REFRIGERATOR
Install a new White Amana 30-inch W 18.5 cu.ft. Bottom Freezer Refrigerator model # ABB1921WEWaccording to the manufacturer’s
instructions. For reference only Home Depot SKU 840157.
4. EXTERIOR WALL MOUNTED FIXTURE (Energy Star qualified)
1. Front egress door at the existing location.
2. Rear egress door at the existing location.
18 Denault Drive
• Install a new Hampton Bay* model number BPP1611-BLK black 1-light outdoor dusk-to dawn wall lantern. For reference only Home
Depot SKU # 240336. Install rough to finish electric wiring to install a new wall switched exterior fixture from the list above. Switches to
conform to the current national electric code, and must meet or exceed the local and state building codes. Exposed wire mold, conduit or
piping is not allowed unless approved by the Owner.
Note: The existing switches, wiring and circuits may be used if they are safe and meet code
5. ELECTRIC HOT WATER HEATER
$
1,200.00
$
500.00
$
500.00
Remove the existing hot water heater. Supply and install new A.O Smith Promax plus High Efficiency 60 gallon hot water heater. Install with al
necessary wiring, piping and controls for a complete and total installation.
6. CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM
QUANTITY: (2) The exact quantity specified must be installed (even if the quantity is more than the Fire Department or Building Inspector
requires).
Install BRK AC/DC Hardwired carbon monoxide alarm model COS12OPDBN with digital and battery backup as directed by the Building
Inspector/Commissioner and Fire Department prior to applying for the building permit(s) and commencement of work. Installation shall conform
to the provisions set in the NFPA most current code and ordinances, as well as all State and local codes. Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is
not allowed unless approved in writing by the Owner. Contractors to provide an allowance not to exceed the allowance listed above for each
separate device. No substitutions allowed for the manufacturer or model numbers specified in the specifications.
7. (Photoelectric) COMBINATION CARBON MONOXIDE & SMOKE ALARMS
QUANTITY: (2) The exact quantity specified must be installed (even if the quantity is more than the Fire Department or Building Inspector may
require).
1. One in the second floor hallway outside the bedrooms at the top of the stairs.
2. One in the Kitchenette/Dining area at the top of the basement stairway.
Install BRK Hardwired smoke detector with battery back-up model SC701OBV Hardwired photoelectric/CO combination alarm with voice as
directed by the Building Inspector/Commissioner and Fire Department prior to applying for the building permit(s) and commencement of work
Installation shall conform to the provisions set in the NFPA most current code and ordinances, as well as all State and local codes. Exposed wire
mold, conduit or piping is not allowed unless approved in writing by the Rehabilitation Specialist. Contractors to provide an allowance not to
exceed the allowance listed above for each separate device. No substitutions allowed for the manufacturer or model numbers specified in the
specifications.
18 Denault Drive
(Ionization & Photoelectric) DUAL SENSOR SMOKE ALARMS
requires).
2. One on the first floor at the bottom of the stairway in the hallway.
$
500.00
$
750.00
$
175.00
Install BRK Hardwired Photo/Ion smoke alarm with battery back-up model SA773CN as directed by the Building Inspector/Commissioner and
Fire Department prior to applying for the building permit(s) and commencement of work. Installation shall conform to the provisions set in the
NFPA most current code and ordinances, as well as all State and local codes. Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is not allowed unless
approved in writing by the Owner.
8. (Photoelectric) SMOKE ALARMS
requires).
1. One in the second floor left rear bedroom.
2. One in the second floor right rear bedroom.
3. One in the second floor front bedroom.
Install BRK Hardwired smoke alarm eith battery back-up model 701OB as directed by the Building Inspector/Commissioner and Fire
Department prior to applying for the building permit(s) and commencement of work. Installation shall conform to the provisions set in the NFPA
101 Life Safety Code 1997. Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is not allowed unless approved by the Rehabilitation Specialist. Detectors mus
comply with the following performance standards.
9. 20-AMP GFI OUTLETS
1. One new GFI duplex outlet in the basement at the service panel.
Install a new Leviton* 20-amp ground-fault shock resistor circuit interrupter receptacle(s). All electrical installations must conform to the current
national electric code and must meet or exceed the local or state building codes. Exposed wire mold, conduit or piping is not allowed unless
approved by the Owner.
Housing Production Plan
Town of Medfield
Community Opportunities Group
May 29, 2013
Medfield Housing Production Plan
Page |1
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this Housing Production Plan is to facilitate and guide the appropriate
development of housing that addresses the needs of local households, and to increase the
inventory of low- and moderate-income housing. While Chapter 40B defines a goal that 10
percent of the housing units in a town should be affordable to low- and moderate- income
households, understanding housing needs requires a more nuanced approach than can be
gleaned from a community's Chapter 40B "gap." 1 An assessment of housing needs and barriers
extends beyond economic terms, and encompasses characteristics of form, size, ownership,
accessibility, and location, which enable the town to sustain a high quality of life and traditional
mix of homes and people.
Prior planning efforts in Medfield have focused on reuse of Medfield State Hospital, which
represents the town’s most substantial opportunity to address affordable housing needs in the
near future. With 80 acres of land targeted for redevelopment, this site could fulfill all of the
town’s affordable housing gap under Chapter 40B, and meet critical housing needs of Medfield
residents. However, it may be five years or longer before housing is completed at this site.
Meanwhile, the town faces ongoing pressure to address housing issues. Increasing land values
in Medfield lead to development of increasingly high-end housing. Smaller homes are lost to
“mansionization” while historic single family homes have been demolished to build high-end
condos. The high cost of housing and lack of housing diversity also have fiscal consequences.
The prevalence of single family homes and the reputation of Medfield’s school district attract
families with children, thereby increasing the burden on municipal services, while seniors,
young adults, and smaller households cannot afford to stay in the community.
The recent approval of a Comprehensive Permit on an industrially zoned site has spurred
interest in developing an Affordable Housing Production Plan which will enable to town to be
proactive in defining appropriate forms and locations of affordable housing. The housing
production plan establishes goals and identifies town-wide strategies and opportunities to
address the range of housing needs for Medfield community.
HOUSING GOALS
Housing goals articulated in Medfield’s 1997 Master Plan Goals & Policies Statement 2 remain
applicable today:
-
1
2
Protect Medfield’s environmental quality, town character and fiscal condition as growth
continues. (LU-2)
Note: Words in bold throughout this report are defined in the Glossary of Terms in Appendix.
Whiteman & Taintor (May 1997), 19-21.
o
-
-
Page |2
Decisions affecting land use should be guided by an understanding of the
environmental, social, and fiscal implications of development.
Medfield will accommodate residential development that is consistent with the Town’s
character and its ability to provide high quality services. (H-1)
o
Residential development should be concentrated in areas that can accommodate
development without jeopardizing the environment and town character.
o
Ensure that densities reflect infrastructure and natural resource constraints.
New housing development will include the variety of lot sizes, unit sizes and housing
costs that contribute to Medfield’s diverse community. (H-2)
o
Plan for and support development of a wide range of housing options in order to
accommodate households with diverse housing needs, as well as changing
family structures.
o
The Town should take a direct role in provision of affordable housing in order to
protect the character of the community while meeting identified needs and
targets.
These goals formed the basis for the housing vision stated in Medfield’s 2004 Community
Development Plan: 3
Medfield will accommodate residential development that is consistent with the Town’s character and its
ability to provide high quality services while ensuring that units that are affordable to a range of incomes
are also developed.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS
The main purpose of a Housing Production Plan is to encourage affordable housing
development in cities and towns that fall below the 10 percent statutory minimum. A
Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD)-approved Housing
Production Plan opens the door to a certification process for a community that creates enough
affordable housing to meet the state’s unit production goals. During the certification period, a
board of appeals can deny comprehensive permits for one year (or two years, as applicable)
without being overturned by the Housing Appeals Committee, or continue to approve projects
based on merit. Requests for certification may be submitted at any time, and DHCD will
determine whether a community’s request complies with current Chapter 40B regulations. If
DHCD finds that a community complies with its Housing Production Plan, the certification will
take effect on the date that the numerical target was achieved for that calendar year. The
certification expires after one or two years, depending on the number of new Chapter 40Beligible units created.
3
Larry Koff & Associates, Medfield Community Development Plan (2004), 31.
Page |3
Even without achieving Housing Certification, communities can utilize the Housing Production
Plan to guide the production of affordable housing that conforms with local preferences if the
Town implements zoning changes that meet the purpose of Chapter 40B, i.e., districts and/or
requirements that provide the opportunity for affordable housing. In making a determination of
Project Eligibility (760 CMR 56.04(4)(b)), a Subsidizing Agency must take into account
consistency of a project with “previous municipal actions” to create affordable housing. Such
municipal actions could include the adoption of multi-family districts, overlay districts,
inclusionary zoning under G.L. c.40A, or overlay districts adopted under G.L. c.40R. To the
extent that zoning measures relate to sites or districts that are appropriate for residential use
and create opportunities of a scale that reasonably relate to the municipality’s need for
affordable housing they will be considered in determining project eligibility, even if the
development of affordable housing has yet to occur. Under a policy initiated in November,
2012, “Compact Neighborhood” zoning is also defined as evidence of “previous municipal
action” for purposes of determining project eligibility.
Toward the aim of Housing Certification, a Housing Production Plan’s goals are inherently
quantitative, i.e., guided (but not limited) by minimum unit creation targets that a community
must meet in order to qualify for certification. Units eligible for the Subsidized Housing
Inventory (SHI) are counted in accordance with 760 CMR 56.03(2). As of 2013, Medfield is
currently 228 units short of having 10 percent of its units included in the SHI. To seek housing
plan certification, Medfield’s minimum housing production goal would be 21 Chapter 40Beligible units for a one-year certification and 42 for a two-year certification. 4
SUMMARY OF HOUSING STRATEGIES
1. Develop local capacity to plan and advocate for, as well as to develop and manage
affordable housing units.
o Increase technical capacity
o Educate/communicate with public
o Establish an Affordable Housing Trust
o Adopt Community Preservation Act
o Explore potential partnerships with nonprofit housing developers
2. Identify sites for creation of affordable housing through new development, redevelopment,
or preservation.
o Medfield State Hospital
o Town-owned properties
o Privately-owned properties
3. Update zoning to create opportunities for development of affordable housing and to
encourage diversity in housing options.
o Adopt zoning for Medfield State Hospital, providing for a “Compact Neighborhood”,
and/or utilizing Chapter 40R.
4
DHCD, "Spreadsheet of 0.5% and 1.0% Thresholds for Each Community Based on 2010 Census Information," June 2011.
Page |4
Adopt inclusionary housing: for developments above a minimum size threshold,
requiring a portion of units to be affordable through construction of units on site, at
another site, or payment into an affordable housing fund.
o Adopt zoning incentives allowing a density bonus for housing developments which
exceed minimum requirements for affordable units.
4. Provide support to first-time homebuyers and elderly residents to overcome cost barriers.
o Increase income limit for elderly tax deferral program.
o Establish a first-time homebuyer assistance program.
o
II. BACKGROUND
COMMUNITY OVERVIEW
Medfield is an attractive, affluent suburban community located approximately 17 miles
southwest of Boston. The town’s large preservation areas, historic downtown, and
neighborhoods of single-family homes create a small-town character, despite being close to a
major metropolitan area. Many families move to Medfield for the high quality of life and strong
school system. Founded in 1651, Medfield was historically a farming community. The
manufacture of straw ladies hats later became an important industry and was the largest
industry in Medfield until the mid-20th century. 5 The Medfield State Hospital, constructed in
1896 and closed in 2003, was also a major regional employer. Today, land use is dominated by
single-family homes, and the town is largely a bedroom community to Boston with a vibrant
town center retail district, but an otherwise small commercial base.
Historic and natural resource preservation is important to the Medfield community. There are
three historic districts in town: the John Metcalf Historic District along Main Street in the
downtown area; the state hospital site; and the Clark-Kingsbury Farm Historic District along
Spring Street, which includes an eighteenth century farmhouse and associated outbuildings as
well as a pond and historic grist mill. Medfield’s Conservation Commission was established in
1962, and there are several significant state- and town-owned conservation lands in town
including the Medfield Rhododendron Reservation, which protects the habitat of the rare
Rosebay rhododendrons; the Medfield Charles River Reservation, the Rocky Woods
Reservation, and the Noon Hill Reservation. Trails run through these and other conservation
properties in town. Medfield’s water resources include the Charles River, which forms the
town’s western border with Millis and Sherborn, and several ponds. Over 21 percent of the
town is wetlands.
Town of Medfield, “History,” accessed November 1, 2012,
http://www.town.medfield.net/index.cfm/page/History/pid/21362.
5
Page |5
MEDFIELD STATE HOSPITAL
Over the past decade, the future of the Medfield State Hospital site has been the focus of
substantial analysis and planning by state and local authorities, consultants, and volunteers.
The 200 acre site on the banks of the Charles River in the northwesterly corner of the town
contains over 50 buildings. It is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and was
designated as a local historic district (the Hospital Farm Historic District) by vote of the
Medfield Town Meeting on April 25, 1994. The Massachusetts Department of Mental Health
(DMH) declared the property surplus after closing the facility in 2003, and the Division of
Capital Asset Management (DCAM) currently manages the site. 6
A Vision Plan prepared by Larry Koff & Associates was incorporated into a Community
Development Plan 7 in 2004, in conjunction with the neighboring towns of Sherborn, Dover, and
Millis. The plan focused on reuse of the Medfield State Hospital Site in the context of a regional
assessment of housing, economic development, open space, and transportation. 8 Reuse
alternatives were considered which concentrated development in the 80-acre “Core Campus”
portion of the site incorporating some new construction while aspiring to retain approximately
half of the existing structures on the site, reserving the remaining portions of the property for
conservation, recreation, and/or agricultural use. The Board of Selectmen in 2005 adopted a
Reuse Plan developed by the Medfield State Hospital Reuse Committee which included 440
units of housing (25 percent affordable) with a mix of condos, apartments, and assisted living,
with 25 percent affordable, plus approximately 30,000 square feet of office space. This plan was
amended from a previous plan with 340 units in order to satisfy the town’s affordable housing
requirement. 9 Other commercial, recreational, and institutional uses have been considered,
however the lack of access to major highways and relatively weak market for commercial
development led to the conclusion that residential use would be most feasible for this location. 10
A recent market analysis in 2012 confirmed again that residential use has greatest potential,
along with healthcare, a continuing care retirement community, and recreation. The market is
currently strongest for multifamily use. 11
Medfield Patch, June 12, 2012
Prepared under Executive Order 418, which provided funding for communities to fulfill many of the
objectives of master planning focusing on economic development, housing, natural resources and
transportation.
8 Larry Koff & Associates, EO418 Community Development Plan, 2004
9 “Meeting with Secretary Gonzalez, July 11, 2011”
10 Larry Koff & Associates, “Medfield Hospital Reuse Vision Report”(March 30, 2004)
11 Jones-Lang La Salle, Medfield State Hospital Market Analysis Report Draft (April 20, 2012)
6
7
Page |6
Source: Draft Medfield State Hospital Redevelopment Plan, Medfield State Hospital Reuse Committee,
July 2003
Zoned for Business/Industrial and Agricultural uses, the site will require rezoning to facilitate
housing development. 12 Alternatively a Comprehensive Permit under Chapter 40B could skirt
local restrictions if Town Meeting does not pass the zoning changes needed to facilitate a
marketable project. The Board of Selectmen appointed the Reuse Committee in May 2012 to
evaluate potential purchase of MSH property by Town of Medfield and develop a fiscally
sound, realistic vision for reuse. 13
DCAM has indicated it would be willing to consider the sale of the site to the town after
reserving portions of the property for open space under DCR and Town ownership. The Board
of Selectmen had previously negotiated a disposition agreement with DCAM, which was
enacted as Chapter 269 of the Acts of 2008, but for a variety of reasons it was not carried out. In
the meantime, the extent of the contamination was recognized, and actions to identify the
contaminants and clean-up the site are underway. DCAM has taken the position that it will
handle the contamination along the banks of the Charles River and, to a lesser extent, on
primarily vacant land on the westerly side of Hospital Road (the Sledding Hill). It has also
12
13
Larry Koff & Associates, Community Development Plan (2004), 6.
Medfield Patch, (June 12, 2012)
Page |7
stated that the clean-up of the contamination on the land and in the buildings to be sold will be
the responsibility of the purchaser. 14
The Vision Plan from 2004 identified preservation of a selection of historic buildings on the
“Core Campus” as a priority 15. Since then the buildings have been vacant for ten years. Reuse
potential is limited for many of the buildings as they have deteriorated significantly. Tax
credits may be available to underwrite cost of adaptive reuse, if historic preservation criteria
can be met. Nevertheless, the restoration of historic buildings for residential use, along with the
demolition and removal of asbestos and contamination on the redevelopment parcel will add
premium costs to any redevelopment scenario. Sufficient density will be necessary to make
redevelopment economically feasible. 16
Negotiations over a plan for disposition of the State Hospital property are ongoing, and
expected to be finalized in the near future. A feasible redevelopment plan cannot be established
until the terms of disposition are established relating to the land cost, responsibility for
environmental clean-up, and the willingness of the town to assume the risk associated holding
and managing the property through the development process. Assuming disposition proceeds
quickly, the minimum time frame for initiating construction at the site would be two-three
years, however many unknown factors could prolong the process considerably longer.
III. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
GEOGRAPHIC UNITS
Because housing is inherently a regional issue, there is little value in examining Medfield’s
demographic, economic, and housing characteristics without also looking at other communities
in the region. To allow for comparison, and understand the town within a larger context, each
table presented in this plan shows data from Medfield, neighboring towns and, where possible,
the state, county, and Boston metropolitan area. For this plan, we use the Boston-CambridgeQuincy Metropolitan New England Town Consolidated Area (NECTA) as the geographic unit
for the Greater Boston area. This NECTA is the largest of the New England Metropolitan areas
and encompasses over 4.5 million people from Southern Massachusetts into New Hampshire.
The metro area is referred to as “Boston-Cambridge-Quincy” or simply “Boston Metro” in this
plan.
POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS
According to the most recent U.S. Census, Medfield has a population of 12,024. Table 3.1
presents basic population data for Medfield along with the state, county, and neighboring
14
Medfield Patch (June 12, 2012)
15
Larry Koff & Associates, “Medfield State Hospital Reuse Visioning Study” (March 30, 2004), 3.
16
FXM, Evaluation of CCRC Reuse at Medfield State Hospital (2005)
Page |8
communities. 17 Since 2000, Medfield’s population decreased by 2 percent. This represents the
first time Medfield’s population has decreased between decennial censuses and is in contrast to
overall growth of approximately 3 percent in both the state and the county. 18 Although two
other towns in Medfield’s region also lost population, Medfield had the greatest loss. Three
communities in the comparison region gained population, most notably Norfolk, whose
population increased by 7.3 percent.
Table 3.1. Population Change: 2000-2010
Geography
Census 2000
Census 2010
% Change
Massachusetts
6,349,097
6,547,629
Norfolk County
650,308
670,850
3.2%
12,273
12,024
-2.0%
Dover
5,558
5,589
0.6%
Sherborn
4,200
4,119
-1.9%
MEDFIELD
Millis
3.1%
7,902
7,891
-0.1%
Norfolk
10,460
11,227
7.3%
Walpole
22,824
24,070
5.5%
Source: Census 2000 SF-1, Census 2010 SF-1
POPULATION AGE AND HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION
Medfield has a large number of school-age children. As shown in Table 3.2, more than 31
percent of Medfield’s population is under 18. This percentage is significantly higher than the
state, county, or metropolitan area, but is on par with other affluent suburbs with strong school
systems, such as Dover and Sherborn. The data seem to support the assertion made by many
Medfield residents and town staff that Medfield’s schools act as a magnet, attracting families
with children. Medfield has a slightly smaller proportion of residents over 65 (11.4 percent of
the town’s population) than the state, county, metropolitan area, and most towns in the region.
However, like most communities, Medfield’s population is aging. The number of residents over
65 increased by 20.7 percent between 2000 and 2010, even though the overall population
declined. 19
University of Massachusetts, Donohoe Institute, State Data Center, “Population of Massachusetts Cities,
Towns, & Counties: Census Counts: 1930-2010” (March 2011),
http://www.massbenchmarks.org/statedata/data.htm.
19 Census 2000, Summary File 1, Table DP-1 and Census 2010, Summary File 1, Table DP-1.
18
Page |9
Table 3.2. Current Population by Age
Geography
Total
Under 5
Total
Under 18
Pct.
Total
Over 65
Pct.
Total
Over 75
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Massachusetts
6,547,629
367,087
5.6%
1,418,923
21.7%
902,724
13.8%
446,264
6.8%
Norfolk County
670,850
37,715
5.6%
152,132
22.7%
97,304
14.5%
49,674
7.4%
4,287,782
244,064
5.7%
929,650
21.7%
560,222
13.1%
274,293
6.4%
12,024
606
5.0%
3,763
31.3%
1,372
11.4%
636
5.3%
Dover
5,589
261
4.7%
1,748
31.3%
762
13.6%
295
5.3%
Sherborn
4,119
177
4.3%
1,239
30.1%
554
13.4%
245
5.9%
Millis
7,891
469
5.9%
1,954
24.8%
937
11.9%
392
5.0%
11,227
529
4.7%
2,580
23.0%
979
8.7%
329
2.9%
Walpole
24,070
Source: Census 2012, DP-1
1,333
5.5%
6,060
25.2%
3,570
14.8%
1,877
7.8%
Boston Metro
MEDFIELD
Norfolk
As shown in Table 3.3, Medfield’s households are typically headed by older adults. More than
73 percent of Medfield’s head of households are 45 and older, with most between 45 and 54
years old. Very few households are headed by individuals under 34, which is typical of suburbs
with high property values and high taxes.
Table 3.3. Households by Age of Householder
Geography
Total
Households by Age of Householder
Under 25
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
Over 65
Massachusetts
2,512,552
3.5%
14.9%
19.8%
22.3%
17.7%
21.8%
Norfolk County
255,180
2.5%
13.2%
20.2%
23.2%
17.8%
23.2%
Boston Metro
1,626,564
3.7%
16.0%
20.2%
22.2%
19.7%
20.7%
MEDFIELD
3,954
0.0%
6.7%
19.9%
35.4%
18.1%
20.0%
Dover
1,773
0.0%
1.3%
25.1%
28.6%
21.3%
23.7%
Sherborn
1,468
0.6%
4.8%
18.0%
31.2%
19.8%
25.6%
Millis
3,003
1.2%
8.7%
20.2%
27.5%
22.9%
18.3%
Norfolk
2,913
0.4%
7.7%
22.7%
32.0%
20.6%
16.6%
Walpole
Source: ACS 2006-2010
8,542
1.0%
7.2%
20.4%
25.1%
19.8%
26.5%
Although Medfield’s overall population has declined, the number of households and families
grew moderately between 2000 and 2010, as shown in Table 3.4. 20 In absolute terms, Medfield
gained 115 households and 65 families over ten years, while losing 249 residents. Most of the
surrounding communities also gained households and families, but some lost families. For
example, the number of families in Sherborn decreased by 3.7 percent.
The U.S. Census defines a family as two or more people (one of whom is the householder) related by
birth, marriage, or adoption residing in the same housing unit
20
P a g e | 10
Table 3.4. Households and Families (2000 - 2010)
Geography
Census 2000
Households
Families
Census 2010
Households
Families
Massachusetts
2,443,580
1,576,696
2,547,075
1,603,591
Norfolk County
Percent Change
Household Families
s
4.2%
1.7%
248,827
165,858
257,914
168,903
3.7%
1.8%
MEDFIELD
4,002
3,268
4,117
3,333
2.9%
2.0%
Dover
1,849
1,568
1,869
1,585
1.1%
1.1%
Sherborn
1,423
1,223
1,438
1,178
1.1%
-3.7%
Millis
3,004
2,164
3,030
2,151
0.9%
-0.6%
Norfolk
2,818
2,413
3,049
2,555
8.2%
5.9%
Walpole
8,060
5,972
8,730
6,353
8.3%
6.4%
The vast majority of Medfield’s 4,117 households are married families, 71.3 percent. An
additional 9.7 percent are categorized as “other families,” which include single parents, while
the remaining 19 percent are “nonfamily” households, which includes individuals living alone
and non-related individuals living together. Table 3.5 reports the breakdown of households by
family type. Married families constitute the majority of households in all the surrounding
communities. Again, this finding is expected as suburban communities with high quality
schools tend to attract families.
Table 3.5. Household Type
Geography
Massachusetts
Norfolk County
Total
Households
Married Family
Other Family
Nonfamily
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
2,547,075
1,178,690
46.3%
424,901
16.7%
943,484
37.0%
257,914
134,066
52.0%
34,837
13.5%
89,011
34.5%
1,652,912
765,705
46.3%
265,443
16.1%
621,764
37.6%
MEDFIELD
4,117
2,935
71.3%
398
9.7%
784
19.0%
Dover
1,869
1,439
77.0%
146
7.8%
284
15.2%
Sherborn
1,438
1,044
72.6%
134
9.3%
260
18.1%
Millis
3,030
1,771
58.4%
380
12.5%
879
29.0%
Norfolk
3,049
2,278
74.7%
277
9.1%
494
16.2%
Walpole
8,730
5,303
60.7%
1,050
2,377
27.2%
Boston Metro
12.0%
Source: Census 2010, SF-2
Consistent with other findings, most families in Medfield have children under 18. Table 3.6
shows the breakdown of families by marriage status and presence of children under 18, along
with average family size. Medfield has the highest percentage of families with children, 55.5
percent, of all the comparison communities, reinforcing that Medfield is a community
dominated by families with children. Most of these families are married couples, although 6.6
percent are single parents. Medfield also has the largest average family size of all the
comparison communities, 3.31.
P a g e | 11
Table 3.6. Families by Type and Presence of Children Under 18
Geography
Total
Families
Massachusetts
Norfolk County
Boston Metro
%
Married
% Married
w/own
children < 18
% Single
Parent w/ own
children < 18
Average
Family Size
1,603,591
73.5%
31.3%
13.6%
3.08
168,903
79.4%
36.9%
9.2%
3.15
1,031,148
74.3%
33.3%
12.7%
3.13
MEDFIELD
3,333
88.1%
48.9%
6.6%
3.31
Dover
1,585
90.8%
48.1%
4.7%
3.30
Sherborn
1,178
88.6%
46.1%
6.5%
3.21
Millis
2,151
82.3%
38.7%
9.0%
3.11
Norfolk
2,555
89.2%
45.2%
5.0%
3.24
Walpole
6,353
83.5%
39.3%
7.1%
3.21
More than 21 percent of Medfield’s households contain persons over 65. This is a lower
percentage than nearly all of the comparison communities, but Medfield also has a slightly
lower percentage of seniors in its population. More than 320 of Medfield’s households, 8.2
percent, are one-person households headed by elderly. Table 3.7 presents certain characteristics
of households with seniors. Seniors are an important demographic to consider when analyzing
housing needs. Often living on fixed incomes, many seniors struggle to stay in their homes as
property values and taxes rise. Seniors - and married empty nesters -often want to downsize to
smaller homes or condominiums. If a community does not have a range of housing types, these
households may be forced to leave the community to find their desired housing product.
During an interview for this assessment, Medfield’s Council on Aging Director confirmed that
Medfield seniors are moving out of town because they cannot find smaller homes in Medfield. 21
Table 3.7. Over-65 Population and Characteristics of Households with Over-65 Persons
Geography
% of Total
Total HH Households
% of Total
One-Person
% of Total
Population
with Elderly Households Households/ Households
Member(s)
Headed by
Elderly
Massachusetts
13.8% 2,512,552
Norfolk
14.5%
255,180
County
Boston Metro
13.1% 1,626,564
MEDFIELD
11.4%
3,954
Dover
13.6%
1,773
Sherborn
13.4%
1,468
Millis
11.9%
3,003
Norfolk
8.7%
2,913
Walpole
14.8%
8,542
Source: Census 2010, ACS 2006-2010
623,913
67,204
24.8%
26.3%
265,438
28,187
10.6%
11.0%
386,395
845
490
446
661
608
2,544
23.8%
21.4%
27.6%
30.4%
22.0%
20.9%
29.8%
163,196
326
130
169
224
150
999
10.0%
8.2%
7.3%
11.5%
7.5%
5.1%
11.7%
Roberta Lynch (Director, Medfield Council on Aging), Interview with Community Opportunities
Group, Inc., August 29, 2012.
21
P a g e | 12
HOUSING OCCUPANCY
Medfield is predominantly a community of homeowners. More than 90 percent of the town’s
housing units are owner-occupied, which is on par with the surrounding suburban
communities and typical of suburbs in general. Table 3.8 shows the breakdown of Medfield’s
housing units by homeownership and rentals. Medfield has a very small renter population and
only 375 rental units, or 9.5 percent of the town’s housing stock. Many towns in the region have
similar proportions of rental housing, although two surrounding communities, Millis and
Walpole, have considerably more rental units.
Table 3.8. Owner- and Renter-Occupied Housing Units
Geography
Total
Occupied
Housing Units
Total Owner
Occupied
Housing Units
% Owner
Occupied
Total Renter
Occupied
Housing Units
% Renter
Occupied
Massachusetts
2,512,552
1,608,474
64.0%
904,078
36.0%
Norfolk County
255,180
179,764
70.4%
75,416
29.6%
Boston Metro
1,626,564
1,012,161
62.2%
614,403
37.8%
MEDFIELD
3,954
3,579
90.5%
375
9.5%
Dover
1,773
1,614
91.0%
159
9.0%
Sherborn
1,468
1,294
88.1%
174
11.9%
Millis
3,003
2,408
80.2%
595
19.8%
Norfolk
2,913
2,718
93.3%
195
6.7%
Walpole
8,542
7,093
83.0%
1,449
17.0%
Married-couple families overwhelmingly occupy Medfield’s owner-occupied housing units,
while the renter population is mostly non-families (i.e., singles living alone and non-related
individuals living together). However, 114 families in Medfield live in rental housing and
interviews with stakeholders suggest that there is a need for more affordable rental housing for
families. The Medfield Housing Authority receives 1-2 calls every day from families in the
region looking for rental housing. 22 Tables 2.9 and 2.10 present the breakdown of owner- and
renter-occupied housing units by household type.
John Hurd (Executive Director, Medfield Housing Authority), interview by Community Opportunities
22
P a g e | 13
Table 3.9. Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Household Type
Geography
Massachusetts
Norfolk County
Boston Metro
Total
Married Family
Other Family
Non-Family
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
1,608,474
997,414
62.0%
196,764
12.2%
414,296
25.8%
179,764
116,663
64.9%
19,749
11.0%
43,352
24.1%
1,012,161
635,527
62.8%
121,902
12.0%
254,732
25.2%
MEDFIELD
3,579
2,808
78.5%
256
7.2%
515
14.4%
Dover
1,614
1,331
82.5%
102
6.3%
181
11.2%
Sherborn
1,294
1,013
78.3%
121
9.4%
160
12.4%
Millis
2,408
1,612
66.9%
310
12.9%
486
20.2%
Norfolk
2,718
2,083
76.6%
262
9.6%
373
13.7%
Walpole
7,093
4,886
68.9%
719
10.1%
1,488
21.0%
Table 3.10. Renter-Occupied Housing Units by Household Type
Geography
Total
Married Family
Other Family
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Non-Family
Total
Pct.
Massachusetts
904,078
197,995
21.9%
208,415
23.1%
497,668
55.0%
Norfolk County
75,416
18,541
24.6%
13,280
17.6%
43,595
57.8%
614,403
375
138,371
53
22.5%
14.1%
131,493
61
21.4%
16.3%
344,539
261
56.1%
69.6%
Dover
159
83
52.2%
32
20.1%
44
27.7%
Sherborn
174
69
39.7%
9
5.2%
96
55.2%
Millis
595
110
18.5%
228
38.3%
257
43.2%
195
39
20.0%
54
27.7%
102
52.3%
1,449
251
17.3%
330
22.8%
868
59.9%
Boston Metro
MEDFIELD
Norfolk
Walpole
RACE AND ETHNICITY
Medfield has little racial and ethnic diversity. The vast majority of Medfield’s residents are
white (95 percent) and there are very small populations of other racial groups in town. 23 Asians
are Medfield’s largest minority population, comprising 2.7 percent of the total population.
Medfield’s lack of diversity is not unique in its region, which is less diverse than the state,
county, and metropolitan area. The only comparison community whose population is less than
90 percent white is Norfolk. Norfolk also has the largest minority population; 6.4 percent of the
town is black or African-American.
23
Census 2010, Summary File 1, Table DP-1.
P a g e | 14
LABOR FORCE, EDUCATION, AND EMPLOYMENT
Medfield’s residents are highly educated. Nearly 70 percent of the population has at least a
college degree and over 33 percent has an advanced degree. In the comparison communities,
only Dover and Sherborn have a more educated population. Table 3.11 shows the highest level
of education attained for the comparison geographies. Not surprisingly, income increases with
educational attainment. As shown in Table 3.12, the median income for individuals with a
college degree is more than twice that of a high school graduate in Medfield. Holding a
graduate or professional degree increases income further.
Table 3.11. Highest Level of Education, Population 25 Years and Older
Geography
Less than
High
School
High
School
or GED
Some College or
Associates
Degree
College
Degree
Master's
Degree
Professional
School or
Doctorate
Massachusetts
11.3%
26.7%
23.7%
21.9%
11.4%
4.9%
Norfolk County
6.9%
22.9%
22.7%
26.5%
14.0%
6.9%
10.2%
1.6%
24.9%
13.3%
22.1%
15.8%
24.0%
35.8%
12.9%
24.6%
5.9%
8.8%
Dover
1.0%
6.6%
12.1%
38.4%
27.8%
14.1%
Sherborn
0.0%
6.8%
14.1%
35.3%
27.0%
16.9%
Millis
3.8%
21.3%
30.0%
26.2%
14.1%
3.3%
Norfolk
9.6%
25.1%
22.2%
29.6%
10.1%
2.1%
Walpole
4.0%
24.5%
24.4%
29.0%
13.4%
2.7%
Boston Metro
MEDFIELD
Table 3.12. Median Income by Educational Attainment
Geography
Population
25+ Years
(Total)
Less than
High School
Education
High School
Graduate
College
Graduate
Graduate or
Professional
Degree
Massachusetts
$42,322
$22,348
$32,096
$53,381
$67,553
Norfolk County
$50,457
$25,241
$35,095
$59,761
$77,492
Boston Metro
MEDFIELD
$44,771
$63,081
$22,130
$25,875
$32,501
$32,629
$55,080
$70,912
$70,923
$94,531
Dover
$81,721
$12,000
$56,211
$66,458
$123,702
Sherborn
$75,368
-
$39,348
$101,910
$80,827
Millis
$49,575
$64,205
$36,098
$54,611
$72,500
Norfolk
$60,124
$11,369
$30,690
$78,504
$89,250
Walpole
$53,671
$27,969
$40,238
$65,504
$71,853
According to the Massachusetts Department of Labor and Workforce Development (DLWD), in
2010 Medfield had 368 employers (public and private) that employed 2,779 people (see Table
3.13). The average weekly wage was $802, lower than the metropolitan and state levels. Since
2007, there has been a small gain in the number of employers (7), but an overall decline in jobs
P a g e | 15
and in weekly wages. Although the state and metropolitan area also lost jobs over this time
period, average weekly wages increased.
Table 3.13. Employers, Jobs, and Wages: 2007-2010
Economic Measure
Medfield
Boston Metro Massachusetts
(Statewide)
Annual 2010
Total Establishments
368
136,414
221,849
Average Monthly Employment
2,779
2,222,508
3,150,955
Average Weekly Wage
$802
$1,226
$1,112
Annual 2009
358
131,635
213,962
2,881
2,209,643
3,136,539
Average Weekly Wage
$760
$1,188
$1,082
Annual 2008
358
131,965
213,882
2,843
2,285,004
3,245,755
Average Weekly Wage
$863
$1,201
$1,092
Annual 2007
361
130,688
211,843
2,896
2,271,277
3,236,118
Average Weekly Wage
$838
$1,174
$1,063
Gain-Loss 2007-2010
7
5,726
10,006
-117
-48,769
-85,163
Average Weekly Wage
($36)
$52
$49
Source: MA Department of Labor and Workforce Development, ES-202
Most of Medfield’s employers are in the service industries, primarily professional and business
services, trade, transportation, and utilities. There are 50 construction businesses and 9
manufacturing operations in town, representing approximately 15 percent of all employers.
Wages are higher in the construction and manufacturing industries, around $1,000/week,
compared to service industries overall, which have an average wage of just over $800/week.
However, there is considerable variation among service industries. Wholesale trade, financial,
and insurance positions have the highest average weekly wages, over $1,400, while leisure and
hospitality have lowest, under $300/week. Table 3.14 provides a detailed summary of
Medfield’s local economy. While some residents work in town, the majority commute to Boston
or other employment centers for work.
P a g e | 16
Table 3.14. Composition of Local Economy
Description
No. of
Establishments
Average Monthly
Employment
Average Weekly
Wages
383
2,726
$838
59
304
$1,075
50
9
183
120
$1,072
$1,089
8
324
117
2,423
$1,108
$808
77
40
566
107
$745
$1,457
32
5
413
45
$525
$1,094
6
25
48
137
$352
$1,398
Finance and Insurance
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
17
8
118
19
$1,443
$1,118
Professional and Business Services
Professional and Technical Services
105
66
444
184
$1,001
$1,162
Administrative and Waste Services
Education and Health Services
37
32
256
638
$889
$995
Health Care and Social Assistance
Leisure and Hospitality
27
27
305
367
$835
$298
8
19
92
275
$352
$279
48
48
146
146
$471
$471
Total, All Industries
Goods-Producing Domain
Construction
Manufacturing
DUR - Durable Goods Manufacturing
Service-Providing Domain
Trade, Transportation and Utilities
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transportation and Warehousing
Information
Financial Activities
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Accommodation and Food Services
Other Services
Other Services, Ex. Public Admin
Source: ES202 Wage Report, Medfield 2011, MA Department of Labor
Table 3.15. Work Commuting Patterns
Workplace of Medfield Residents
Boston
Medfield
Newton
Needham
Norwood
Framingham
Waltham
Natick
Cambridge
Wellesley
Other Towns
Total Working Medfield Residents
Source: Census 2000 Journey to Work
Place of Residence of Medfield
Employees
1,199
1,075
233
231
231
182
161
159
156
135
1,932
5,694
Medfield
Franklin
Walpole
Millis
Bellingham
Medway
Boston
Norfolk
Framingham
Westwood
Other Towns
Total Medfield Employees
1,075
254
215
167
161
146
126
108
104
85
1,947
4,388
P a g e | 17
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
The median household income in Medfield is over $126,000, nearly double the statewide level.
Table 3.16 presents the breakdown of median income by type of household. Of the comparison
communities, only Dover and Sherborn have higher median household incomes. Medfield
incomes are higher for families and even higher for families with children. A substantial
percentage of Medfield households, 24 percent, earn over $200,000.
Table 3.16. Household and Family Income
Geography
Median
Household
Income (2010)
$64,509
Median Family
Income (2010)
Massachusetts
% Households
with Income
> $200,000
6.7%
$81,165
Median Family Income
(2010), Families w/
children <18
$82,361
Norfolk County
11.2%
$81,027
$101,870
$110,798
Boston Metro
8.4%
$70,254
$88,475
$91,489
MEDFIELD
24.3%
$126,048
$145,060
$158,750
Dover
41.1%
$164,583
$178,065
$202,000
Sherborn
37.3%
$145,250
$167,273
$207,909
6.1%
$85,472
$95,119
$92,841
Norfolk
17.6%
$113,266
$125,664
$139,946
Walpole
12.2%
$89,697
$111,530
$125,859
Millis
By age of householder, the highest incomes are for householders between 45 and 64 years old.
This population has a median household income of $150,833. Households headed by seniors
have significantly lower incomes, only $48,646. This is the second lowest household income for
seniors in all of the comparison towns and significantly less than neighboring Dover and
Sherborn. Given the high cost of housing and limited affordable options in Medfield it is often
difficult for older residents on limited incomes to remain in the community, and affordable
housing options for seniors is an important housing need in town. This need was corroborated
during interviews with stakeholders and service providers, who also noted that there are few
options in town for empty nesters and seniors looking to downsize. Medfield’s Council on
Aging Director noted that many older Medfield residents have moved to a development in
Norfolk, dubbed “Little Medfield” by residents, that has smaller one-story homes. 24
Roberta Lynch (Director, Medfield Council on Aging), Interview with Community Opportunities
24
P a g e | 18
Table 3.17. Median Household Income of Selected Household Types
Geography
All
Households
Householder
<25 yrs.
Householder
25-44 yrs.
Householder
45-64 yrs.
Householder
>65 yrs.
Massachusetts
$64,509
$30,830
$72,850
$80,150
$34,873
Norfolk County
$81,027
$38,693
$91,708
$100,233
$40,676
Boston Metro
$70,254
$32,139
$78,903
$86,583
$36,847
MEDFIELD
$126,048
-
$148,125
$150,833
$48,646
Dover
$164,583
-
$183,125
$210,208
$78,095
Sherborn
$145,250
-
$175,938
$162,000
$85,750
Millis
Norfolk
Walpole
$85,472
$15,188
$89,479
$98,594
$44,464
$113,266
-
$131,688
$117,256
$64,821
$89,697
$62,188
$110,417
$113,409
$53,045
Married couples with dependent children have the highest median family income of all family
types in Medfield, $170,000, which is consistent with many of the surrounding communities.
Table 3.18 presents median family income for married couples, single males, and single females
with and without dependent children. Of all the family types, single fathers have the lowest
median family income in Medfield, followed by single mothers. There is no consistent trend in
income levels by family type in the surrounding communities.
Table 3.18. Median Family Income by Family Type
Geography
Without Dependent Children
With Dependent Children
Married
Couple
Single
Male
Single
Female
Married
Couple
Single
Male
Single
Female
Massachusetts
$88,343
$63,560
$54,209
$105,477
$45,096
$27,568
Norfolk County
$101,947
$72,793
$66,612
$128,126
$62,424
$39,631
$96,148
$65,915
$57,528
$113,798
$47,151
$30,420
MEDFIELD
$134,750
-*
$74,583
$170,000
$64,779
$68,839
Dover
$159,028
-*
$69,219
$206,250
$65,208
$105,536
Sherborn
$144,556
$98,021
$157,750
$207,933
250,000+
$110,875
Millis
$107,446
$68,988
$98,906
$106,667
$19,514
$53,417
Norfolk
$114,489
$98,958
$87,813
$142,782
$96,375
$50,104
Walpole
$102,482
$87,617
$73,365
$134,444
$125,735
$47,841
Boston Metro
*Not available due to small sample size
INCOME AND POVERTY
Living in poverty is not the same as being a low-income household or family, though people
sometimes use these terms interchangeably. The incomes that define very-low, low and
moderate income are based on ratios of median family income for a given area. As a result, they
serve as a barometer of household wealth on a regional scale, accounting for differences in
wages, the cost of living and indirectly, the cost of housing, in different parts of a state and
different sections of the country. Each year, HUD publishes updated low- and moderate-income
P a g e | 19
limits, adjusted for household size, for economic areas defined by the federal Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). The income limits are used primarily to determine eligibility
for various housing assistance programs. This is important, for “low and moderate income”
reflects assumptions about a threshold below which households have too little income to afford
the cost of housing where they live.
Table 3.19. Income Limits for Medfield, 2013
Geography/Year
Medfield Town
(FY2013)
Median
Income
Income Limit
Category
1
Person
2
Person
3
Person
4
Person
5
Person
6
Person
$19,850
$22,650
$25,500
$28,300
$30,600
$32,850
$94,400
Extremely
Low (30%)
Very Low
(50%)
Low (80%)
$33,050
$37,800
$42,500
$47,200
$51,000
$54,800
$47,150
$53,900
$60,650
$67,350
$72,750
$78,150
Source: HUD, December 11, 2012
In common-sense terms, poverty means having an extremely low household income, but it is
not measured the same way. Poverty thresholds are determined annually by the Census
Bureau, not by HUD. In addition, the thresholds are national, not tied to economic regions, and
they differ not only by household size but also by household composition. For example, when
HUD establishes an income limit for a household of three, the same income limit applies to all
three-person households: a married couple with a dependent child, a single parent with two
dependent children, an older couple with an adult child living at home, or three unrelated
individuals in a household. When the Census Bureau publishes poverty thresholds, however,
the threshold for a three-person household with no dependent children differs from the
threshold for a household with dependent children. The formula for setting poverty thresholds
is based on assumptions about the cost of basic food as a percentage of household income, and
the purposes served by federal poverty thresholds are quite different from the purposes served
by income limits for subsidized housing. Suffice it to say that households and families living at
or below the federal poverty threshold are very poor, and their needs extend far beyond
housing.
Nationally and in Massachusetts, children under 18 comprise a disproportionately large
percentage of the population in poverty, and single-parent families with dependent children are
far more likely to be in poverty than married couples, with or without children. Table 3.20
shows the incidence of poverty for different populations in Medfield. A very small percentage
of children, seniors, and families in Medfield live in poverty. For each of these groups, Medfield
has the lowest or second lowest rate of poverty of all the comparison towns. However, a
sizeable percentage (17.5 percent) of Medfield’s renters live in poverty. This percentage is
higher than many surrounding communities and the county overall. Again, this finding
reinforces the economic divide between renters and homeowners in town.
P a g e | 20
Table 3.20. Incidence of Poverty
Geography
Persons < 18
Persons > 65
Homeowners
Renters
Families
Massachusetts
13.2%
9.3%
2.2%
23.0%
7.5%
Norfolk County
6.3%
6.9%
1.6%
14.9%
4.1%
11.4%
1.3%
9.5%
0.9%
1.9%
0.3%
20.7%
17.5%
6.8%
0.9%
Dover
1.9%
1.5%
1.0%
9.6%
1.6%
Sherborn
3.7%
3.2%
1.9%
15.4%
2.8%
Millis
4.0%
1.6%
0.0%
14.2%
2.1%
Norfolk
5.3%
4.5%
1.2%
41.9%
2.8%
Walpole
6.5%
3.7%
1.6%
19.1%
3.3%
Boston Metro
MEDFIELD
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
AGE AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSING UNITS
Table 3.21 and Chart 3.1 show that single-family, detached homes dominate Medfield’s housing
stock, which is typical for an affluent suburb. Multifamily housing represents 11.4 percent of all
housing units. Medfield has a higher percentage of multifamily housing than Dover, Sherborn,
and Norfolk but less than Walpole and Millis. The multifamily units include several
developments with affordable units that are on the Town’s Subsidized Housing Inventory,
discussed in more detail below. Interviews with social service providers in town suggest a need
for more rental developments for all types of households, including families, single parents, and
individuals living alone.
Table 3.21. Structural Characteristics of Housing Units
Geography
Total Units
Single
Detached
Single
Attached
Two-Family
Multifamily
Other
Massachusetts
2,786,077
52.5%
4.9%
10.6%
31.2%
0.9%
Norfolk County
268,057
58.0%
4.6%
7.8%
29.1%
0.4%
Boston Metro
1,742,581
47.0%
5.5%
11.8%
35.2%
0.6%
MEDFIELD
4,142
83.3%
1.8%
3.4%
11.4%
0.0%
Dover
1,865
94.4%
0.7%
0.4%
4.5%
0.0%
Sherborn
1,498
90.6%
2.9%
0.0%
6.5%
0.0%
Millis
3,087
66.0%
10.5%
5.9%
17.6%
0.0%
Norfolk
3,017
92.8%
2.2%
2.6%
2.4%
0.0%
Walpole
8,879
69.8%
6.3%
3.7%
19.3%
0.8%
P a g e | 21
Chart 3.1 Medfield's Housing Inventory by Unit Type
90.0%
80.0%
Single
Detached,
83.3%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
Single Attached, Two-Family,
3.4%
1.8%
Multifamily,
11.4%
0.0%
Other
0.0%
Source: US Census, 2010
The Metrowest/495 Compact Plan notes very limited housing diversity in the Compact Region.
65 percent of all housing units are single family homes. In the 33 Developing and Maturing
suburb municipalities (which include Medfield), this number increases to more than 75 percent.
Multifamily housing is concentrated in the Regional Urban Centers, such as Framingham,
Marlborough, and Milford, where more than 50% of the housing located is multi-family. The
limited housing choices available in the region contribute to the high housing cost burden. The
Compact Plan encourages municipalities to address the limited diversity in housing stock in the
region through smart growth zoning in support of diverse housing types and increased
development densities. 25
The median age that housing units in Medfield were built is 1969. Overall, Medfield’s housing
stock is similar age to other communities in its region, but newer than the state, county, and
metro area. Medfield’s owner-occupied housing units are very large, with a median size of eight
rooms. Only Dover and Sherborn have larger owner-occupied housing. Rental units in Medfield
are significantly smaller, with a median size of 3.4 rooms, which is the smallest of all
comparison geographies, including the state, county, and metropolitan area. The small size of
Medfield’s rentals suggests that there may be a lack of rental housing in town suitable for
families, while the drastically different sizes of the owner- and renter-occupied units reinforces
the divide between Medfield’s renters and owners.
25
495 Partnership, 495/Metrowest Compact Plan (March, 2013), 11.
P a g e | 22
Table 3.22. Median Age of Housing Units and Median Number of Rooms by Occupancy
Geography
Median Year
Built
Median Rooms:
All Structures
Median Rooms:
Owner Occupied
Median Rooms:
Renter Occupied
Massachusetts
1957
5.6
6.5
4.1
Norfolk County
1959
6.1
6.9
3.9
Boston Metro
1955
5.6
6.7
4.0
MEDFIELD
1969
8.0
8.2
3.4
Dover
1964
9.0+
9.0+
6.5
Sherborn
1969
8.2
8.3
4.3
Millis
1971
6.5
7.0
4.1
Norfolk
1981
7.7
7.8
4.4
Walpole
1971
6.8
7.3
4.1
HOUSING MARKET
Medfield’s strong schools, small town character, conservation lands, and historic resources,
combined with its close proximity to Boston, make it a desirable suburb for families. This
desirability is evident in the town’s high property values. Most households in town are
homeowners, and large, detached-single family homes are the most desirable housing in town.
Little multifamily housing has been built in the past 15 years, and rental housing units are quite
small.
HOUSING SALE PRICES
Medfield and its surrounding communities have some of the highest property values in the
state. Charts 3.2 and 3.3 show the median sale prices for single family homes and
condominiums in Medfield for 2001, 2006, and 2011, capturing the peak of the housing bubble
and the housing market collapse. In 2011, the median price for a single-family home was over
$500,000, which was lower than the median price in Dover and Sherborn but higher than the
median price in Millis, Norfolk, and Walpole. Housing prices in every community except Dover
have decreased since 2006, the height of the housing market. Prices in Medfield have declined
over 14 percent.
P a g e | 23
Thousands
Chart 3.2. Median Sale Price, Single Family Home: 2001-2011
$1,000
$900
$800
MEDFIELD
$700
Dover
$600
Sherborn
$500
Millis
$400
Norfolk
$300
Walpole
$200
$100
$0
2001
Source: The Warren Group, 2012
2006
2011
Condominiums are more affordable, with a median sale price of $199,250 in 2011. The
condominium market in the region over the past ten years has been volatile. In all communities
prices have dropped since 2006, with prices in some communities decreasing by as much as 80
percent. In Medfield, prices decreased 33 percent between 2006 and 2011.
Thousands
Chart 3.3. Median Sale Price, Condo: 2001-2011
$1,000
$900
$800
MEDFIELD
$700
Dover
$600
Sherborn
$500
$400
Millis
$300
Norfolk
$200
Walpole
$100
$0
2001
2006
2011
P a g e | 24
Table 3.23. Residential Property Taxes
2003
Average Single Family
Assessed Value
381,543
Residential Property
Tax Rate
15.96
Average Single
Family Tax Bill
6,089
2004
518,360
12.69
6,578
2005
549,099
12.92
7,094
2006
575,797
12.66
7,290
2007
622,253
12.27
7,635
2008
598,897
12.80
7,666
2009
581,710
13.85
8,057
2010
578,363
14.24
8,236
2011
564,396
15.02
8,477
2012
560,115
15.73
8,811
2013
563,196
15.73
8,859
Source: MA Department of Revenue, Division of Local Services 2013.
Beyond housing which has sold in the past year, assessor’s data provides an indication of the
trends in all home values and housing costs for residents who already own a home in Medfield.
Following sales trends, average assessed valuation has declined moderately since a peak in
2007. Average tax bills have climbed significantly over the past decade.
FORECLOSURES
Medfield has not been immune to the effects of the nationwide housing foreclosure crisis. Since
2007, there have been 15 residential foreclosures in town. Other communities in the region have
been more significantly impacted, however, with 64 foreclosures in Walpole and 44 in Millis
since 2007.
Table 3.24. Residential Foreclosure Deeds, 2007-2011
Community
MEDFIELD
Dover
Sherborn
Millis
Norfolk
2007
Single Condo
Family
0
1
2
0
4
0
6
5
2008
Single Condo
Family
2
4
2
0
2
0
2009
Single
Condo
Family
2
0
0
0
0
0
2010
Single Condo
Family
4
0
3
0
1
0
2011
Single Condo
Family
0
2
4
0
0
0
1
0
9
4
1
0
4
4
1
0
8
5
7
0
4
5
3
0
Walpole
12
1
7
1
10
1
14
5
11
2
P a g e | 25
MARKET RENTS
The median monthly rent in Medfield is approximately $1,000, which is on par with rents in the
state, county, and many communities in region. Rents vary widely, however, and some marketrate developments have rents that would be considered affordable for low- and moderateincome households. There is very little rental housing in Medfield’s region and managers of
local multifamily developments confirm the high demand for rental housing in the area. Chart
3.4 compares median gross rents in Medfield and the comparison geographies, and Table 3.23
provides a sample of market rents in multifamily developments in the region.
Chart 3.4. Median Gross Rent
Walpole,
$1,218
Norfolk, $489
Millis, $1,140
Sherborn,
$1,339
Dover, $2,000
MEDFIELD,
$1,001 Norfolk County,
$1,205
Boston Metro,
Massachusetts,
$1,140
$1,006
$0
$500
Source: ACS, 2006-2010
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
Table 3.25. Survey of Suburban Market Rents in Medfield’s Region
Rents
Community
Development
Low
High
Medfield
Frairy Street Apartments
$850
$1,200
Medfield
Wilkins Glen Apartments
$1,075
$1,651
Medfield
Medfield Gardens (condo rentals)
$900
$1,300
Medfield
J.D. Murphy real estate, various buildings
$995
$1,125
Walpole
J.D. Murphy real estate, various buildings
$950
$1,200
Walpole
Hilltop Preserve
$1,395
$2,195
Millis
Stoney Brook Village
$1,033
$1,621
Holliston
Cutler Heights
$1,191
$1,372
Franklin
Glen Meadow
$1,295
$1,395
Source: Community Opportunities Group, Inc., October 2012 – March 2013
One
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Bedrooms
Two
Three +
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HOUSING PRODUCTION
Overall, housing production in Medfield has declined over the past 15 years from a high of 59
new housing permits in 1996 to a low of just 9 permits in 2008, the height of the recession. Since
2008, construction has accelerated, and 20 building permits were granted in 2011. Chart 3.5
P a g e | 26
graphs residential building permits in town over time. There has been very little multi-family
development in Medfield in the past 15 years, with only a handful of multifamily building
permits in 1999, 2000, and 2001.
Chart 3.5. New Housing Units, Medfield: 1996-2011
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Source: U.S. Census, Building Permits Survey, 2012
Multi-Family
Single Family
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
Most communities have some modestly priced housing: small, older single-family homes that
are less valuable than new homes, multi-family condominiums, or apartments that can be
leased for relatively low monthly rents. This type of affordable housing often stays affordable as
long as the market will allow. Under a Massachusetts law that went into effect in 1969,
however, all communities are supposed to have housing that is affordable to low-income
households and remains affordable to them even when home values appreciate under robust
market conditions. These units remain affordable because their resale prices and rents are
governed by a deed restriction that lasts for many years, if not in perpetuity. Both types of
affordable housing meet a variety of housing needs and both are important. The crucial
difference is that the market determines the price of unrestricted affordable units while a
recorded legal instrument determines the price of deed restricted units. There are other
differences, too. For example, any household - regardless of income - may purchase or rent an
unrestricted affordable unit, but only a low- or moderate-income household is eligible to
purchase or rent a deed restricted unit. Households that can afford more expensive housing but
choose to live in an unrestricted affordable unit creates an “affordability mismatch.”
P a g e | 27
When less than 10 percent of a community’s housing consists of deed restricted affordable units,
M.G.L. c. 40B, Sections 20-23 (“Chapter 40B”) authorizes the Zoning Board of Appeals to grant a
comprehensive permit to qualified affordable housing developers. The 10 percent minimum is
based on the total number of year-round housing units reported in the most recent decennial
census; for Medfield, this currently means 4,220 (Census 2010). A comprehensive permit is a
type of unified permit: a single permit that replaces the approvals otherwise required from
separate city or town permitting authorities. Chapter 40B supersedes zoning and other local
regulations that make it too expensive to build low- and moderate-income housing. By
consolidating the approval powers of multiple town boards, the state legislature hoped to
provide more low-income housing options in suburbs and small towns. Under Chapter 40B, the
Zoning Board of Appeals may approve, conditionally approve, or deny a comprehensive
permit, but in communities that do not meet the ten percent minimum, developers may appeal
to the state Housing Appeals Committee (HAC). Although comprehensive permits may still be
granted after a town achieves the 10 percent minimum, the HAC no longer has authority to
overturn a local board's decision. Despite many years of controversy about Chapter 40B,
Massachusetts voters recently defeated a ballot question to repeal the law.
The Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) maintains a
list of the deed restricted affordable units in each city and town. Known as the Chapter 40B
Subsidized Housing Inventory, the list determines whether a community meets the 10 percent
minimum. It also is used to track expiring use restrictions, i.e., when non-perpetual affordable
housing deed restrictions will lapse. Table 3.26 reports Medfield's Subsidized Housing
Inventory as of August 2012.
MEASURING AFFORDABILITY
The intent of Chapter 40B is to provide a fair-share distribution of low-income housing
throughout the state. However, the number of Chapter 40B units in a city or town does not
measure local housing needs or the degree to which a community is affordable to its residents.
To a housing policy analyst, a home is unaffordable to low- and moderate-income people if
their monthly payments for housing – a mortgage payment, property taxes, and house
insurance for homeowners, or rent and utilities for tenants – exceeds 30 percent of their monthly
gross income. By definition, they are “housing-cost burdened.” According to federal census
data, 61,600 homeowners in Norfolk County and 1,100 in Medfield are housing-cost burdened.
An additional 33,739 renters in the county and 144 renters in Medfield spend more than 30
percent of their gross income on housing. Tables 2.24 and 2.25 show the percentage of cost
burdened homeowners and renters by income.
Not surprisingly, nearly all households with very low incomes are housing cost burdened. All
homeowners and over 70 percent of renters in Medfield who earn less than $20,000 spend more
than 30 percent of their income on housing. Significant percentages of households earning
under $50,000 and even under $75,000 are also housing cost burdened.
P a g e | 28
The ability to find affordable housing is complicated by what housing policy analysts refer to as
the “affordability mismatch.” This term refers to a mismatch between housing cost and income,
for example when people who could afford more expensive housing choose to live in less
expensive housing, effectively making housing that would be affordable to lower income
households unavailable. Households can also be voluntarily housing cost burdened by
choosing to spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing when there are more
affordable options available. It is highly likely that both conditions exist in Medfield, but these
phenomena are difficult to quantify with currently available data.
Table 3.26. Homeowners with Housing Cost Burden by Income
Geography
Income under
$20,000
Income $20,000
to $34,999
Income
$35,000 $49,999
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Massachusetts
99,683
91.3%
92,377
65.6%
83,760
Norfolk County
8,643
94.5%
8,905
68.9%
7,983
Boston Metro
Income $50,000
- $74,999
Income >
$75,000
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
53.2%
135,033
48.0%
162,564
17.8%
54.8%
13,714
52.1%
22,355
19.3%
54,840
94.6%
54,681
71.5%
48,838
56.2%
86,515
53.2%
123,727
19.8%
MEDFIELD
77
100.0%
141
80.1%
172
71.7%
157
59.2%
553
19.7%
Dover
14
56.0%
103
100.0%
48
69.6%
92
61.3%
253
20.0%
Sherborn
39
100.0%
15
62.5%
55
64.7%
20
28.2%
242
22.8%
100
100.0%
101
64.7%
120
58.8%
257
52.4%
307
21.1%
72
100.0%
100
79.4%
85
57.4%
189
61.8%
381
18.4%
335
93.8%
325
90.0%
323
50.2%
566
51.0%
755
16.4%
Millis
Norfolk
Walpole
Table 3.27. Renter Households with Housing Cost Burden by Income
Geography
Income under
$20,000
Income $20,000
to $34,999
Income $35,000
- $49,999
Income $50,000
- $74,999
Income >
$75,000
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Total
Pct.
Massachusetts
210,634
79.5%
118,268
75.8%
62,780
51.5%
32,830
23.0%
7,676
4.5%
Norfolk County
14,095
81.0%
8,716
80.7%
5,831
62.4%
4,059
30.1%
1,038
5.2%
129,340
24
78.8%
70.6%
79,164
91
80.5%
80.5%
49,646
11
60.9%
18.0%
28,556
0
28.0%
0.0%
7,046
18
5.1%
29.0%
11
100.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
21
39.6%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Boston Metro
MEDFIELD
Dover
Sherborn
Millis
Norfolk
Walpole
0
0.0%
14
100.0%
0
0.0%
11
20.0%
34
55.7%
87
63.5%
14
19.7%
0
0.0%
78.2%
7
100.0%
18
75.0%
10
66.7%
0
0.0%
81.2%
137
100.0%
94
64.8%
86
31.5%
41
9.2%
91
75.2%
79
225
P a g e | 29
CHAPTER 40B
Medfield’s Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI) consists of 286 units, which represents 4.6
percent of the town’s housing stock. Table 3.26 provides details on Medfield’s current SHI. The
town’s affordable housing goals under Chapter 40B are calculated based on the town’s total
housing units according to the 2010 Census (4,220). Medfield is currently 228 units short of
reaching its goal of having ten percent of its housing stock deed restricted to be affordable to
low-and moderate-income households. As shown in Table 3.27, Medfield has a higher
percentage of affordable housing than all but one of the comparison communities. No
communities in the region have achieved the ten percent affordable housing goal.
Six properties contribute to Medfield’s SHI. There are 23 affordable ownership units in town,
located in two developments, Allendale and The Village at Medfield (Turtle Brook Way).
Three existing rental properties account for 171 affordable units, while an approved but not yet
constructed 40B adds another 92 units:
Tilden Village is a 60-unit development for
seniors and disabled persons managed by the
Medfield Housing Authority. The complex
consists of six two-story brick buildings with
ten apartments in each. (eight 1-bdrms, one
2-bdrm, and one handicap unit) In addition,
there is a community building with laundry
faculties, a management office and
maintenance garage. There are only 18
applications on waviting list, there is a
Medfield preference, 9-10 turnovers per year.
P a g e | 30
Wilkins Glen is an apartment community
located near downtown Medfield. Beacon
Properties recently acquired and renovated the
102 unit apartment building plus an adjacent
single family home as an affordable housing
preservation project. The financing for this
project was through Mass Housing, using low
income tax credits. Approximately 65 percent
of the units are affordable to households
earning below 60 percent AMI, 10 percent to
households earning below 30 percent, and the
remainder of the units are reserved for
households at or below 80 percent AMI. These
include a mix of one-, two-, three-, and four-bedroom units.
Prior to Beacon Properties’ acquisition, some of the units affordable to households at 80 percent
AMI had previously been unrestricted, so the income eligibility requirements will go into effect
when the units turn over. A majority of the tenants who receive vouchers through Southern
Middlesex Opportunity Council (SMOC) opted for “project based”, rather than mobile
vouchers. The current financing agreement restricts affordability for a period of 30-40 years.
However, as the project was originally developed through a comprehensive permit, a sufficient
number of units will remain under some subsidy program to enable this development to count
permanently on the town’s subsidized housing inventory.
Massachusetts Department of Developmental Services (DDS) Group Homes in town add eight units
to the SHI.
Parc at Medfield The town recently approved a 40B development on West Street which will have
92 units in four structures with a combined total of 24 one-bedroom units, 48 two-bedrooms,
and 20 three-bedroom units. Funded under the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC)
program, all of the units will be affordable to households earning no more than 60 percent of
the area median income. The project is expected to be built over two phases. The approved
units will count on the town’s subsidized housing inventory for 12 months, after which they
will drop from the list until the units are completed. As they have already been approved, the
units will not count toward the town’s annual goal for housing certification, even if they lapse
and are later restored to the SHI.
P a g e | 31
Table 3.29. Medfield Subsidized Housing Inventory
Name
Tilden Village
Allendale
The Village at
Medfield
Wilkins Glen
DDS Group Homes
Parc at Medfield 40B
Address
Type
Total
Units
Affordable
Units
SHI
Units
Affordability
Expires
30 Pound Street
Rental
60
60
60
Perpetuity
Dale Street
Ownership
17
17
17
Perpetuity
Turtle Brook Way
Ownership
6
6
6
Perpetuity
Wilkins Glen
Road
Confidential
Rental
103
103
103
Perpetuity
Rental
8
8
8
n/a
92
92
92
Perpetuity*
286
286
286
6.7%
West Street
Total
Source: DHCD, 2012
*Note: Units may lapse from the SHI if the development is not completed within 12 months. Upon
completion of the project the units will be included again in the SHI but will not count toward annual goal
of affordable housing creation for purposes of Housing Certification.
Table 3.30. Chapter 40B Subsidized Housing in Medfield's Region (2012)
Community
Total Year-Round
Housing Units
Total Development
Units
Total Subsidized
Housing Units
Percent
Subsidized
MEDFIELD
4,220
303
286
6.7%
Dover
Sherborn
1,950
1,479
69
41
17
34
0.9%
2.3%
Millis
3,148
183
120
3.8%
Norfolk
3,112
144
111
3.6%
Walpole
8,984
470
470
5.2%
Source: DHCD, 2012
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND CHALLENGES
Many factors dictate where development can occur and what form that development will take.
Natural features such as wetlands, steep slopes, and poor soils (for areas not served by public
sewer) limit the amount of buildable land in a community. Physical characteristics such as lot
sizes and road capacity also limit development. Public infrastructure, while it can be expanded,
is another limiting factor at least in the short-term. On the regulatory side, local zoning bylaws
control what uses can occur where and, through density and dimensional requirements, shape
the scale and form of development.
P a g e | 32
NATURAL FEATURES
One of Medfield’s most prominent natural features is its abundance of wetlands, which cover
more than 21 percent of the town’s total area. 26 A large swath of wetlands covers the western
side of town, framing the Charles River and its tributaries. Other, smaller wetlands are scattered
across town. Almost 6 square miles of the town, or approximately 40 percent of the total area, is
open space which includes several large parcels of state-owned conservation land near the
Medfield State Hospital and the Medfield Charles River State Reservation. In addition, there are
a number of large tracts protected by land trusts such as the Rocky Woods Reservation, Fork
Factory Brook, and portions of the Medfield Rhododendron Reservation and Henry L. Shattuck
Reservation. In addition, the town has been active in land preservation and has acquired
portions of the Noon Hill Reservation, McCarthy Park, Ralph Wheelock Fields, and portions of
the Medfield Rhododendron Reservation. Topographically, Medfield is relatively flat, and most
of the steep slopes are on preserved lands, including the Noon Hill Reservation, Rocky Woods
Reservation, and Charles River Reservation.
DOWNTOWN
The downtown has a mix of one-, two-, and three-story buildings with a very limited amount of
usable upper floor space. The buildings are primarily used for retail and offices and there is
little vacancy in the downtown area. There has been an unusual amount of retail space that has
turned over in recent time, but new commercial tenants are anticipated to take the place of
stores which have left. Higher density residential development surrounds the downtown, and
nearly one fifth of Medfield residents live within walking distance of downtown.
Downtown Medfield includes a number of historically and culturally significant buildings.
Approximately 18 downtown buildings are included in the Medfield Town Center local historic
district, one of four local historic districts in Medfield. Historic districts do not preclude
redevelopment or new development, but can carry additional restrictions that are intended to
preserve significant historical and architectural characteristics of buildings and ensure that new
development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood.
The Montrose preparatory school acquired a 14 acre site in the downtown in 2007. They have
further plans to expand their campus where they have several refurbished and new buildings,
fields, and courtyards. 27 Recent approval was granted to redevelop an existing building into an
arts and athletic building.
A Downtown Plan completed in 2006, articulated a vision for a walkable downtown with a
sense of historic character, complementary mix of uses, and connection to adjacent
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Executive Office of Administration and Finance, Massachusetts
Geographic Information System (MassGIS), “DEP Wetlands” (January 2009) and “Community
Boundaries” (September 2009), www.mass.gov/mgis/.
27 http://www.montroseschool.org/
26
P a g e | 33
neighborhoods. 28 Senior housing was specifically identified as a priority within the downtown
and surrounding neighborhood, while the plan also recommended expansion of upper floor
space and zoning to allow more multifamily development in the business district. The plan
focuses on, historic renovation, massing and design guidelines for new development, and
improvements to traffic circulation and pedestrian amenities through public/private
partnerships to enhance the vibrancy of downtown Medfield.
Land Use and Zoning
In Massachusetts, land use is regulated primarily through local zoning bylaws, although some
state regulations also affect how development occurs, notably the state Wetlands Protection Act
and Title 5 regulations for septic systems. Local zoning bylaws that govern use, density, and
dimensional requirements impact housing development. Medfield’s local zoning impacts
housing development in the following ways.

Use Restrictions. Medfield’s zoning map divides the town into eight districts, including
four residential districts (Residential Estate (R-E), Residential Town (R-T), Residential
Suburban (R-S), and Residential Urban (R-U). Single-family houses are allowed by-right
in all residential districts and the Agricultural (A) district and by special permit in the
Business (B) district. The regulations are more restrictive with other forms of housing.
Two-family dwellings are only allowed in the R-U district (by right) and the B district
(by special permit), and multifamily dwellings are only allowed in the R-U district by
approval of the Planning Board. Medfield’s zoning also includes provisions for two
alternative forms of housing: family apartments and accessory dwelling units. Allowing
these units can be an effective way to expand the supply of affordable and rental
housing in suburban communities with limited impact on a community’s physical
character.
Section 14.10.8 states that family apartments are intended to:
Provide housing for family members within the home of another member of their
family when situations such as the age, physical condition or financial
circumstances of a member of the family of a person occupying what would
otherwise be a single family dwelling make it necessary or desirable for the
establishment of separate living quarters within that dwelling for said family
member.
28
Community Preservation Associates with Martha Lyon Landscape Architecture LLC, Medfield
Downtown Vision and Action Plan, 2006
P a g e | 34
These units are allowed by right in the R-U district and by special permit in the
remaining residential districts, A district, and B district.
As stated in Section 14.10.7, accessory dwelling units are allowed to “encourage
preservation and maintenance of the larger older houses in Medfield and to increase the
supply of affordable housing without significantly changing the character of existing
residential areas.” These units are allowed by special permit in all residential districts
and district A. To be eligible for the special permit, several conditions must be met, some
of which severely limit the number of properties that could create accessory units. For
example, the house must be built prior to 1938 and must have a minimum existing floor
area of 2,000 sq. ft.

Density and Dimensional Requirements. Medfield’s zoning allows for more dense
residential uses than many other suburban communities. A single-family home requires
as little as 12,000 square foot lot and 80 feet of street frontage in the R-U District. Twofamily homes require 20,000 sq. ft. lots and 100 feet of frontage, and multifamily
developments require 24,000 sq. ft for the first three units, plus 6,000 sq. ft. for each
additional unit, and 200 feet of frontage. Maximum building height is 35 feet all districts
except Business Industrial (B-I). The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is very low in the
residential districts (between 0.20 and 0.35) but increases to 0.75 in the B and B-I
districts. The R-U district is the only district in which multifamily dwellings are allowed.
However, dimensional requirements such as minimum lot size and frontage, in addition
to the 2 ½ story height limit and relatively low FAR (0.35), impede the development of
multifamily housing in much of the district.

Natural Resources Protection. Substantial portions of the town fall within natural resource
protection overlay districts, including the Floodplain District, Watershed Protection
District, and Aquifer Protection District. A special permit is required establishing
minimum elevations for development within the Floodplain and Watershed Protection
Districts. Residential development is permitted within the Aquifer Protection District,
except that where public sewer is not available, the minimum lot size is 80,000 square
feet in the Well Protection (Zone 1), and 40,000 square feet in the Primary Aquifer Zone.
LAND USE
Natural resources account for nearly 64 percent of Medfield’s land area. Another quarter of the
town is used for residential uses. The remaining 11 percent of the town’s land is used for
various other uses, including agriculture, commercial, industrial, recreation, and public uses.
Chart 2.7 shows the complete land use breakdown for Medfield.
P a g e | 35
Chart 3.6. Existing Land Uses
Urban Public/
Institutional, 1.5%
Agriculture, 3.6%
Commercial, 0.9%
Industrial, 0.7%
Water, 1.2%
Recreation, 0.9%
Other, 2.1%
Residential, 25.3%
Wetlands, 21.0%
Forest, 42.9%
Source: MassGIS, 2012
INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY
According to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, there are 71.6 miles of accepted
roadway in Medfield. Two arterials handle the bulk of Medfield’s traffic volume: Route 109,
which runs east-west across town, and Route 27, which runs north-south. The roads intersect in
Medfield’s downtown and connect Medfield to surrounding communities and the regional road
network. Both roads have only two lanes and have significant congestion during commuting
times. Increasing traffic on these roads is likely to be a concern with new, large-scale
developments. The Police Department is undertaking a traffic study in response to concerns
about new commercial uses locating in the downtown. 29
Alternative transportation options are limited in Medfield. Although the MBTA “Ride” is
available in Medfield for qualifying individuals, there is no other public transportation
available in the town. The nearest MBTA bus and commuter rail stations are located in Walpole
29
Sarah Raposa, Town Planner, by phone interview with Community Opportunities Group (April 2, 2013).
P a g e | 36
and Dedham. In addition, the sidewalk network is limited predominantly to the downtown
area in town limiting walkability or safe bicycle transit in surrounding neighborhoods.
In addition, there are limitations to the water and sewer capacity and both systems will be
impacted by future development. There has been a rate increase on a yearly basis for both water
and sewer in Medfield for several years in a row. The rate increases are due to increased use
and costs to the town for the delivery of services. Currently, a 25 percent rate increase is being
debated to help pay to: replace the storage tank at the Medfield State Hospital which was
constructed in 1930 and is currently not operational; drain and paint the interior and exterior of
the Mount Nebo Storage Tank which was constructed in 1983; construct a treatment plant for
Wells 3 and 4 behind the Wheelock School; replace hydrants; and rehabilitation and replace
existing water mains.
In addition to infrastructure, housing production impacts schools districts. Medfield has an
outstanding school district which attracts families to locate in town. According to the 2010 U.S.
Census, 39.2 percent of households in Medfield were comprised of families with children under
the age of 18. The Medfield Public School System consists of three elementary schools
(Wheelock, Dale Street, and Memorial), as well as a middle school and a high school. School
enrollments have been relatively stable over the past decade with slightly less than 3,000
students enrolled in the school system. As chart 3.7 shows, enrollment in recent years have seen
a decrease of elementary aged students while the number of high school students grew during
the latter portion of the past decade. In addition, to the public schools, the Montrose School, an
independent girl’s school, recently located in the downtown. The Montrose School has 204
students, grades 6-12, who come from 49 different communities in the Greater Boston area.
P a g e | 37
Chart 3.7. K-12 Enrollment Trends in Medfield Public Schools
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
K-6
2007
7-8
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
9-12
Source: Mass. Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (2013)
HOUSING RESOURCES
The town of Medfield has a number of local and regional agencies and organizations
available to help support the production of affordable housing or provide housing-related
services.

Medfield Housing Authority. The Medfield Housing Authority is located at 30 Pound
Street in Medfield Massachusetts. The MHA is authorized and operates under the
provisions of Chapter 121B of the Massachusetts General Law and is responsible to the
Department of Housing and Community Development for the management of Chapter
667 Elderly/Handicapped Housing. Until recently the Housing Authority also
administered several housing vouchers at Wilkins Glen, however these vouchers lapsed
and were replaced by federal housing vouchers administered by SMOC.
Housing Authority policies are established by a five member board of which four are
elected by the voters of Medfield and one is appointed by the Governor. 30 The Housing
Authority facilities are managed by part-time Executive Director. The number of hours
provided by the Director is prescribed by State Law, based on the number of units
managed by the Housing Authority. Anticipating increased regionalization of local
30
http://medfieldhousing.org/
P a g e | 38
authorities under state policy, the Housing Authority recently brought the part time
director of Millis’ Housing Authority to fill as Executive Director. 31

Medfield Housing Committee. An Affordable Housing Committee has met intermittently
for many years. The Committee successfully coordinated the Allandale affordable
townhouse development in the early 1990’s, but has been less proactive since. The
Medfield Housing Committee also acts as the Housing Partnership for purposes of
partnering cooperatively with developers through a Chapter 40B development process.
There is cross-membership between the Housing Committee and the State Hospital
Reuse Committee, which includes real estate professionals with experience in affordable
housing development and historic preservation.

Medfield Foundation, Inc. (MFi). A private non-profit which originated in 2001 to raise
private monies for public purposes in the Town of Medfield, such as public facilities
improvements, transportation, cultural programming, and community events. The
Medfield Foundation also oversees the annual Angel Run road race, which raises funds
specifically to provide emergency assistance to residents who need assistance paying
their mortgage, rent, utilities, car repairs, food, and other personal expenses. Proceeds
are distributed through Medfield Youth Outreach. 32

Medfield Youth Outreach. Located under the auspices of the Medfield Board of Health, the
purpose of the office is to serve youth age infant to age eighteen and their families. The
town’s Youth Outreach Worker provides free and confidential individual and family
counseling, assistance with access to financial assistance programs, information and
referral, community programming, and crisis intervention to Medfield residents. The
Youth Outreach office is an intake site for the federal Fuel Assistance Program for
Medfield residents. 33

Medfield Council on Aging. Operating out of The Center, built in 2008, the Council on
Aging provides transportation, advocacy, health support, and social programming for
Medfield’s seniors. The Council on Aging also provides information and referrals to
financial assistance programs for members of the senior community.

Southern Middlesex Opportunity Council (SMOC). Based in Framingham, SMOC’s mission
is to improve the quality of life of low-income and disadvantaged individuals and
families by advocating for their needs and rights; providing services; educating the
community; building a community of support; participating in coalitions with other
advocates and searching for new resources and partnerships. SMOC provides housing
services throughout the region, including shelters and transitional housing, first-time
homebuyer classes, and homelessness prevention programs. SMOC established the
South Middlesex Non-profit Housing Corporation in 1986 which develops and manages
Interview with Roberta Lynch, Chairman Housing Authority Board, March 28, 2013
http://www.medfieldfoundation.org/
33 http://www.town.medfield.net/index.cfm/page/Medfield-Youth-Outreach/pid/21462
31
32
P a g e | 39
affordable housing for families, individuals, and disabled adults. 34 SMOC manages
vouchers for tenants of affordable rental units in Medfield.
IV. AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS
PRIORITY HOUSING NEEDS
The data show that there are significant affordable housing needs among the population that is
already living in Medfield. When the region overall is considered, there are even greater
housing needs. These needs are largely hidden however, and there is a strong sentiment among
some segments of the Medfield community that there is already sufficient affordable housing in
town and that people who cannot afford to live in the community should move. These
sentiments are not unique to Medfield and raise the importance of education about what
affordable housing is and who lives in it, and about the existing housing needs in the
community. Perceptions about affordable housing often change when people realize that
affordable housing serves individuals already living and working in their community and
combats the commonly held belief that these projects will attract undesirable populations from
outside the community. In addition to an overarching need for education about affordable
housing, the following housing priorities emerged out of the needs assessment.
34
•
Medfield’s housing stock is relatively homogenous, and there is a need for more diverse
housing options in town suitable for households of all ages, sizes, and incomes.
Increasing the diversity of housing options in Medfield will enable seniors, younger
adults, and extended family households to establish and maintain long-term residence
in the community.
•
There is a need for affordable rental units suitable for families, including single parents.
Medfield has a large population of families and large family sizes. Even though most
families are homeowners, there is a population of families in town who rent. Medfield’s
existing rental units are very small - the median number of rooms is only 3.4 – which
suggests a need for larger units suitable for families.
•
Medfield’s homes are large, and there are few options for seniors and empty-nesters to
downsize and remain in the community. Smaller single family homes or condominiums
would allow residents an opportunity to stay in Medfield as they age.
•
Single family homes in Medfield are very expensive. There is a need for more affordable
homeownership opportunities for younger adults, people who work in town, care
providers, and lower income households.
•
Demand for the existing rental properties in town is high, suggesting a surplus demand
for rentals in town. Conversations with social service providers in the region suggests
http://www.smoc.org
P a g e | 40
that there is a need for rental housing for all types of households, including young adult
households, single parents, traditional families, seniors, and single individuals.
CHAPTER 40B CERTIFICATION
Certification is available to communities that receive DHCD approval of their affordable
housing plan and meet their annual production targets. The first step involves completing a
housing plan that meets state requirements. When DHCD receives this plan, it has thirty days to
conduct a completeness review and notify the Town if the plan has any deficiencies. Once
DHCD determines that the plan (as submitted or subsequently revised) meets the regulatory
specifications for a Housing Production Plan (760 CMR 56.03(4)), it has ninety days to issue an
approval letter. 35
Low- or moderate-income housing production (units eligible for the Subsidized Housing
Inventory) that occurs during the effective period of this plan will position Medfield to seek
certification if the minimum numerical target of at least twenty-one new low- or moderateincome housing units (or an amount equal to or greater than the 0.50 percent production goal) is
reached within a given calendar year. The units may be entirely within one development or in
separate developments, and while all must be approved in the same calendar year, they do not
have to be approved on the same date. As soon as the minimum target is reached, the Board of
Selectmen should provide DHCD with supporting documentation and request a certification of
compliance.
Requests for certification may be submitted at any time. DHCD will determine whether
Medfield complies within 30 days of receipt of the Town's request. If DHCD finds that Medfield
complies with the Housing Production Plan, the certification will be deemed effective on the
date upon which Medfield achieved its numerical target for the calendar year. The certification
will remain in effect for one year from its effective date. If DHCD finds that Medfield has
increased its number of SHI Eligible Housing units in a calendar year by at least 1 percent of its
total housing units, the certification will remain in effect for two years from its effective date.
Table 4.1. Goals for Low- or Moderate-Income Housing Production in Medfield
Total Year Round Homes (Census 2010)
4,220
Total Subsidized Housing Inventory
286
10% Requirement
422
Gap
228
Required # for 0.5 of 1%
21
Required # for 1.0%
42
Note: Total Existing Subsidized Housing Inventory includes the Parc at Medfield development, as the
Comprehensive Permit was approved in January, 2013. If this development does not go forward, the 92
units will “lapse” from the SHI after 12 months.
Note: a housing plan could be complete but inconsistent with state regulations and policies, in which
case DHCD would issue a denial letter.
35
P a g e | 41
While affordable units in comprehensive permit developments will automatically qualify, units
produced through an affordable housing bylaw, or other local initiatives will need to be
submitted to DHCD for approval. The mechanism for doing so is the Local Initiative Program
(LIP) "Local Action Units" process. An eligible "local action" may include any of the following:
•
•
•
Zoning approval, such as units created under an inclusionary housing bylaw;
Financial assistance from funds raised, appropriated, or administered by the town, such
as a "buydown" unit made affordable with assistance from the Affordable Housing
Trust; or
Town-owned land or buildings conveyed at a substantial discount from fair market
value, i.e., a "public benefit" disposition under M.G.L. c. 30B.
During the period certification is in effect, the Board of Appeals would have the option to
continue approving comprehensive permits, with or without conditions, or to deny them. If the
Board wanted to deny a comprehensive permit or approve one with conditions, it would have
to follow certain procedures specified in DHCD's Chapter 40B regulations:
•
•
Within fifteen days of opening the public hearing on a comprehensive permit
application, the Board would have to notify the applicant in writing, with a copy to
DHCD, that denying the permit or imposing conditions or requirements is consistent
with local needs because the Town has been certified by DHCD. The Board has the
burden of proving consistency with local needs. The Applicant may challenge the
Board's position by submitting a written objection to DHCD, with a copy to the Board,
within fifteen days of receiving the Board's notice.
Thereafter, DHCD has thirty days to review the materials from the Board and the
applicant and make a decision. This review process tolls the requirement for the Board
to complete the public hearing within 180 days. If DHCD does not issue a timely
decision, the Board's position automatically prevails.
Assuming DHCD agrees with the Board, a comprehensive permit approved with conditions or
denied by the Board of Appeals would not be subject to reversal by the Housing Appeals
Committee. Instead, the Board's decision would be deemed consistent with local needs under
760 CMR 56.03(1)(b).
HOUSING PRODUCTION PLAN REQUIREMENTS
The following strategies would address DHCD's current Housing Production Plan
requirements (effective February 22, 2008), relying on a combination of local, state, and private
resources:
•
Zoning Amendments. Identification of zoning districts or geographic areas in which the
municipality proposes to modify current regulations for the purposes of creating affordable
housing developments to meet its housing production goal [760 CMR 56.03(4)(d)(1)];
•
•
•
•
P a g e | 42
Comprehensive Permits. Identification of specific sites for which the municipality will
encourage the filing of comprehensive permit projects [760 CMR 56.03(4)(d)(2)];
Housing Preferences. Characteristics of proposed residential or mixed-use developments
that would be preferred by the municipality [760 CMR 56.03(4)(d)(3)];
Town-Owned Land. Municipally owned parcels for which the municipality commits to
issue requests for proposals to develop affordable housing [760 CMR 56.03(4)(d)(4)];
Regional Collaboration. Participation in regional collaborations to address housing
development [760 CMR 56.03(4)(d)(5)];
V. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
1. Develop local capacity to plan and advocate for, as well as to develop and manage
affordable housing units.

Increase technical capacity. Numerous educational and training resources available to
strengthen the capacity of committee members and municipal staff to address housing
concerns, including conferences and seminars offered by DHCD, Citizens’ Housing and
Planning Association (CHAPA), and the Massachusetts Housing Partnership (MHP).
Direct technical assistance and grants are also provided by MHP and DHCD. In addition
to the Affordable Housing Committee, planning-related committees such as the
Medfield State Hospital Reuse Committee and the Downtown Study Committee should
continue to include members who are knowledgeable about affordable housing needs
and policies.
The Town could also consider hiring a staff person dedicated to affordable housing. The
Town of Sudbury has been able to staff a Community Housing Office with a full time
Community Housing Specialist funded entirely from CPA and Sudbury Housing Trust
Funds. The Town of Northborough, by contrast, provides staff support for its Affordable
Housing Partnership through the Planning Department.

Educate/Communicate with the public. It is important for the public to be well informed
about local housing needs, initiatives and challenges. Not only do housing initiatives –
such as zoning bylaw changes – often require local support, an informed public is more
likely to provide pertinent information, feedback and suggestions. Education can also
dispel myths associated with affordable housing, people who need and occupy
affordable housing, the impact of affordable housing on real estate values, and local
housing needs – and help create an environment whereby the community becomes a
partner in the Town’s housing initiatives. This will be of particular importance in
building consensus around reuse of the Medfield State Hospital, or in implementing
recommended funding or regulatory strategies. Public education requires sustained
effort and many types of outreach: public meetings, neighborhood meetings, articles in
local newspapers, presentations, and “talk show” discussions on local cable television,
and curriculum activities for school students.

P a g e | 43
Establish an Affordable Housing Trust. Medfield can maximize the effectiveness of this
housing plan by establishing an Affordable Housing Trust. In 2004, the General Court
enacted G.L. c. 44, § 53C, the Municipal Affordable Housing Trust Law, in order to
increase the capacity of cities and towns to create affordable housing. Should Medfield
adopt the Community Preservation Act (CPA) or inclusionary zoning provisions which
provide a payment-in-lieu option, the Affordable Housing Trust would provide an
entity to receive these funds and carry out housing activities. Many of the ideas
promoted in this plan could be conducted with or financially assisted by an Affordable
Housing Trust.
Establishing an Affordable Housing Trust is fairly straightforward; activating it is more
challenging. The Board of Selectmen will need to place an article on a future Town
Meeting warrant to adopt G.L. c. 44, § 53C and a basic bylaw establishing the trust and
the board of trustees. 36 A simple majority vote is required. Once the board of trustees has
been appointed and executes a Declaration of Trust for recording with the Registry of
Deeds, it will be able to operate as a legally recognized entity. Its first steps should
include the following:
-
-
Obtain technical assistance;
Network with active Affordable Housing Trusts elsewhere in the region;
Consult with non-profit developers located or working in Medfield's region, such as
South Shore Habitat for Humanity and Neighborhood of Affordable Housing, to
explore ways the trust fund can be used to support housing development for verylow and low-income people;
Consult with competent for-profit developers whose backgrounds include working
with cities and towns on local affordable housing initiatives;
Consult with housing finance programs about possibilities for leveraging non-local
dollars with CPA and other resources;
Establish funding priorities;
Develop a business plan for the trust fund;
Set one-year and five-year goals and an action plan; and
Begin with a relatively low-risk, simple project. Many housing trusts in
Massachusetts are purchasing existing housing units and reselling them as deedrestricted affordable homes, which is a relatively uncomplicated venture.
The Town will need to determine how it wants to provide funding for the trust.
Practices vary from town to town, but many CPA communities have decided to transfer
their annual appropriations for community housing directly to the trust. This helps to
ensure that housing appropriations actually produce some results. An Affordable
Housing Trust may also be used to account for and report other revenues and
expenditures, such as inclusionary housing payments or housing development grants
received from state or federal sources.
36
See Appendix

P a g e | 44
Adopt the Community Preservation Act (CPA). The Community Preservation Act (CPA)
(G.L. c. 44B) provides cities and towns with an option to raise funds through a real estate
tax surcharge for historic preservation, open space and recreation, and “community
housing” – a term that includes low- or moderate-income housing and housing for
median income families. The town can set the amount of the surcharge up to 3 percent,
and establish exemptions. A minimum of ten percent of the revenue collected annually
must be reserved for each of the three statutory purposes. The remaining 70 percent
may be used for any single purpose or combination thereof. In addition, communities
that adopt CPA receive a distribution from the state trust fund (currently about 26
percent) as a supplement to local surcharge revenue. Initiated in 2000, about 155
municipalities in MA have adopted CPA, including several communities in the
surrounding region, as shown in the following table:
Table 5.1. Community Preservation Act Examples
Community
Holliston
Medway
Millis
Norfolk
Surcharge /
2011 CPA
Revenue
1.5% /
$385,037
3% /
$555,155
1% /
$105,932
1% /
$485,935
2% /
$351,402
1% /
$374,429
2% /
$1,566,385
1% /
$888,636
1.5% /
$687,071
3% /
$1,502,906
Avg SF tax
bill*
$7,090
$6,336
$5,540
$7,186
Exemptions
Sample projects
Low income, first
$100,000 residential
Low income, first
Low income
Conversion of Cutler and Andrews
Schools to affordable condos
Purchase and rehabilitation of historic
homes
Open space acquisition and restoration
of historic resources
Affordable housing purchase price
subsidy program, open space acquisition
Benfield Farms: conservation, recreation,
and housing development
Acquisition of Horizons for Youth Camp
Low income, first
Carlisle
$11,960
Low income, first
Sharon
$8,583
Low income, first
Needham
$8,416
Low income, first
Needham Town Hall $15M restoration
Wellesley
$12,198
Low income, first
Restoration of Fuller Brook Park and
Morses Pond
Wayland
$10,529
Low income, first
89 Oxbow: housing development and
conservation
Sudbury
$11,205
Low income, first
Affordable housing buydown program
$100,000 residential,
commercial
* Note: By comparison, Medfield’s average single family tax bill is $8,859.
Source: MA Department of Revenue Division of Local Services Municipal Databank, Community Preservation
Coalition CPA Projects Database
The CPA statute requires that a Community Preservation Committee be appointed to
recommend proposed CPA expenditures to town meeting. When there are no proposed
activities to consider, the 10 percent allocation for housing (or any other purpose) must
be transferred to a special reserve fund for future use. The Housing Trust may be the
recipient of these funds.
Under CPA, housing can serve households earning up to 100 percent of the area median
income (AMI). CPA funds may be used for a range of housing activities, including
P a g e | 45
acquisition, creation, preservation, and support. CPA encourages the reuse of existing
buildings or construction on previously developed sites. When CPA-funded units are
restricted for occupancy by low- or moderate-income households (up to 80 percent of
AMI), they become eligible for listing on the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
Communities may also use CPA revenue to offer homeowner and tenant assistance
programs, such as first/last month rent deposits for low-income tenants, or matching
funds for MHP’s Soft-Second Loan Program. Since these kinds of activities do not
qualify as a housing subsidy under Chapter 40B, units rented or purchased by assisted
families will not be eligible for listing on the Subsidized Housing Inventory. However,
they are important forms of housing assistance and should not be rejected simply
because Chapter 40B does not recognize them.

Explore potential partnerships with nonprofit housing developers. Compared with for-profit
developers, public agencies and private non-profit housing organizations almost always
provide a larger percentage of affordable units in their developments as well as more
deeply affordable units. Access to a variety of housing subsidies is the key to high levels
of affordability. Since the mid-1980s, private nonprofit housing developers and
community development corporations (CDCs) have become the preferred recipients of
most of these subsidies.
Several experienced, successful non-profit developers have begun seeking opportunities
to develop affordable housing in suburban and rural towns. The South Shore Habitat for
Humanity has developed homes in the region with support from Medfield community
members, and is seeking available land to build affordable units in Medfield 37. Another
nonprofit, East Boston-based Neighborhood of Affordable Housing, Inc. (NOAH) has
recently partnered with local governments and small non-profits to create new lowincome housing in Holliston, Webster, and Carlisle. The Community Builders (TCB) has
partnered with small non-profits, too, as in Stow, where the Stow Affordable Housing
Corporation was formed years ago to manage two low-income rental projects sponsored
by TCB. South Middlesex Non-Profit Housing Corporation has developed family and
transitional housing throughout the region, including a recent family housing
development in West Boylston, as well as providing housing support and other services
for low and moderate income households. The Town should meet with some of these
organizations and identify opportunities to collaborate.
2. Identify sites for creation of affordable housing through new development,
redevelopment, or preservation.

Medfield State Hospital. The Town should undertake a further planning effort to develop
a final plan for the disposition and redevelopment of the State Hospital property The
feasibility study prepared by Jones-LaSalle in 2012 confirmed the findings of the Vision
http://medfield.patch.com/articles/south-shore-habitat-for-humanity-offers-beneficial-solution-toaffordable-housing-need
37
P a g e | 46
Study in 2004, which identified housing as having the greatest potential on this site
given its location and other constraints. 38 The Board of Selectmen previously endorsed a
vision for the site that entailed as many as 440 units of housing with a mix of styles and
market/affordability, which represents a density of approximately 5 units per acre for
the 80 acre core campus. Housing for empty nesters and seniors has been consistently
identified as a priority for this site, although a mix of housing types with sufficient
density and a limited proportion of age-restricted units would provide greater flexibility
for a feasible development project which achieves a range of community goals.
Depending on the mix of housing, the site has the potential to fulfill the town’s entire
Chapter 40B gap. However, given the uncertainty of when the site will become available
for development, the town should continue to pursue opportunities to meet its housing
needs in other locations.

Town-owned properties. Adjacent to Tilden Village is a 2 acre vacant property owned by
the Medfield Housing Authority. This has been identified as an ideal location to
accommodate up affordable housing development, most likely for seniors and disabled
as an expansion of Tilden Village. In contrast to the existing 2-story walk-up units at
Tilden Village, a fully handicapped accessible building with elevators would be
preferable for a new senior housing development. Assuming a density comparable to
the Tilden Village development (9 units per acre), the site could accommodate
approximately 20 units.
The town can undertake an inventory of municipal property to identify surplus land
which is not subject to conservation restrictions or is not in active use for municipal or
educational purposes. Tax title foreclosure is a possible method for providing new
opportunities for affordable housing development if tax title properties are available.
After the town has undertaken the time-consuming and complex process of obtaining a
foreclosure decree, the town can have the property deed-restricted so that it is eligible
for the SHI, and then sell it to a qualified low-or moderate-income homebuyer, or
convey the property to an affordable housing development partner such as Habitat for
Humanity.

Privately-owned properties. There are a number of ways that the town can facilitate the
creation of affordable housing on scattered sites throughout the town with funding
through an Affordable Housing Trust. The Town can “buy down” the purchase price of
existing homes to make them affordable to first time homebuyers or extend tax-relief
and/or financial assistance for rehabilitation to financially burdened low- and
moderate-income homeowners in exchange for establishing a permanent deed
restriction to preserve affordability. The subsidy required to make existing market rate
homes eligible for the SHI with a deed restriction to make them affordable to low- and
moderate-income homebuyers could be substantial, however a program to assist
Jones-Lang La Salle, Medfield State Hospital Market Analysis Report Draft (April 20, 2012); Larry Koff
& Associates, Community Development Plan (2004)
38
P a g e | 47
middle income first-time homebuyers (earning up to 100 percent AMI) would also be
beneficial in addressing the Town’s affordability gap.
Finally, the Town can identify opportunities to work with institutional or private
property owners and development partners to create affordable housing units in
conjunction with historic preservation, downtown revitalization, or open space
conservation, or where the town would support the use of Chapter 40B to create
housing that meets local preferences through the Chapter 40B/Local Initiative Program
(LIP). The Town of Wayland, for example, used CPA funds to purchase a 13 acre site of
surplus federal land to create an environmentally sustainable 16-unit townhouse
development of which 11 units are affordable to moderate-income households and 5
units affordable to households earning 100 percent of AMI. Ten acres of the site were
preserved for passive recreation and hiking trails. Leveraging local funds, the town was
able to make the project feasible for a private developer to carry out, and enable the
town to define the outcome with respect to design, construction standards, and
affordability.
The downtown would be a good place to focus efforts to identify individual properties
for housing. The Downtown Plan prepared by community Circle in 2005 noted that
increasing density in the downtown will help to support business vitality, by bringing
customers to the downtown businesses. While many of the buildings in the downtown
are currently single story, there may be some underutilized upper floor space that
could be adapted to accommodate housing. The Town could coordinate with large
property owners in the downtown, in particular the Montrose School, to determine
whether surplus space or land could
accommodate higher density mixed
use development, or infill
development around the perimeters
and nearby neighborhood. The town
could also encourage the conversion
of historic homes on relatively large
lots near the center to accommodate
additional condo or apartment units
while preserving the historic
character of homes from the view of
the street.
3. Update zoning to create opportunities for development of affordable housing, and to
encourage diversity in housing options.
Medfield State Hospital. The town should adopt zoning to facilitate implementation of a
reuse plan for the Medfield State Hospital. A residential village at Medfield State
Hospital might include a combination of rental and ownership housing types including
apartments, townhouses, small detached or semi-attached homes, and/or assisted living
P a g e | 48
units. Zoning should allow for an appropriate density, with flexibility and incentives to
optimize the feasibility of development which provides community benefits, including
historic preservation, affordable housing, open space, and natural resource protection.
The Medfield State Hospital site could provide an opportunity for the Town to adopt
zoning that qualifies under the Compact Neighborhood Policy, a new incentive program
under DHCD. To participate a municipality must identify an “as-of-right” zoning
district (Compact Neighborhood), receive a Letter of Eligibility from DHCD confirming
that the Compact Neighborhood is in an “eligible location” (as defined under Chapter
40R regulations 760 CMR 59.01 et seq.) and that the zoning meets or exceeds the
application requirements for the program, and 3) adopt the Compact Neighborhood
Zoning, submit proof of local adoption and receive a Letter of Certification from DHCD.
The compact neighborhood must:
1) Allow for a minimum number of “Future Zoned Units”, which is generally one
percent of the year round housing units (42 units in Medfield);
2) Allow as-of-right at least 8 units per acre for multifamily residential use (2 family or
more), or at least 4 units per acre for land zoned for single-family residential use.
3) Provide that at least 10 percent of all units constructed within projects of more than
12 units are affordable, and
4) Not impose restrictions on age or any other form of occupancy restrictions on the
Compact Neighborhood as a whole (however specific projects within the district
may be age-restricted or assisted living.)
If DHCD certifies that the municipality has created a “Compact Neighborhood”, this
certification can be used by the municipality as evidence of a “Previous Municipal
Action” that must be considered by a Subsidizing Agency in making the findings that
are necessary under Chapter 40B for a determination of Project Eligibility (760 CMR
56.04(4)(b) and relevant Guidelines). Under the Guidelines, existence of a Compact
Neighborhood may be given weight in this determination. Certification of a Compact
Neighborhood can also enhance a municipality’s competitiveness when applying for
discretionary funding by state agency programs such as MassWorks and Priority
Development Fund. 39
Alternatively, the town could adopt zoning for all, or a portion of the State Hospital site
under Chapter 40R (760 CMR 59.01) with a minimum density of 20 units per acre for
multifamily or 8 units per acre for single-family residential use, and a minimum of 20
percent affordable units. The Town would receive incentive funds of up to $600,000
incentive funds when the zoning is adopted, plus an additional $3,000 for every new
housing unit created, subject to availability of incentive funds.
39
DHCD, Compact Neighborhoods Policy effective November 14, 2012.
P a g e | 49
In addition to these incentive programs, expedited permitting under Chapter 43D has
recently been extended to residential zoning. To be eligible, a municipality must provide
for local permitting decisions on a designated priority development site within 180 days
of a complete application. Expedited permitting will also increase the town’s preference
in discretionary funding.
2. Inclusionary Zoning. An inclusionary zoning bylaw requires developers to include
affordable housing in developments that exceed a certain size threshold, e.g., six or more
lots or dwelling units. Usually, inclusionary bylaws offer developers some options to
comply with affordability requirements: creating new affordable units in a proposed
development, providing equivalent units off-site in another location, donating usable
land to the town, or paying the town a fee in lieu of creating affordable units. When
communities accept fees in lieu of affordable units, they must establish a special revenue
fund to segregate developer revenue from the General Fund. An Affordable Housing
Trust could fulfill this role. By receiving land and/or fees from developers, a community
can assemble the resources it needs to guide affordable housing to preferred locations
and choose the kind of housing that will best meet local needs. Nearby towns which
have implemented inclusionary zoning include Wayland, Wellesley, and Holliston.
3. Incentive Zoning. In addition to, or as an alternative to inclusionary zoning, the town
might consider offering a density bonus and/or relief from dimensional regulations for
development which provides affordable housing. Incentives which allow for more
intensive development may appropriately be focused in areas suited for higher-density
housing, in the downtown, RU-District, and areas served by public sewer. In addition to
affordable housing, incentives could also apply to historic preservation, in order to
facilitate more intensive and diverse housing while discouraging tear-downs. Stronger
site plan requirements and/or design review could help to protect neighborhood
character while facilitating higher density development with affordable units.
As the RU District already provides for fairly flexible and dense housing development,
the Town might consider zoning disincentives for development which does not meet the
town’s preferences for affordable housing and historic preservation. Disincentives might
include the requirement of a special permit, or a density restriction.
4. Accessory Dwelling Units. In order to broaden the availability of economical alternatives
to meet the housing needs of a wider range of residents, the provisions for accessory
dwelling units (Section 14.10.7) could be extended to allow for accessory dwelling units
(not restricted to family members) in owner-occupied homes built after 1938, but which
otherwise meet the conditions under Section14.10.7. This would expand the availability
of rental housing, allow over-housed homeowners to generate additional income from
unneeded space, and provide for housing connected with childcare or service providers.
To a similar end, the town might consider allowing the permanent conversion of homes
constructed prior to 1938 from single family to contain two or more units, consistent
with the dimensional and architectural requirements under the existing Accessory
P a g e | 50
Dwelling Unit bylaw, but eliminating the restriction of the permit to the ownerapplicant/occupant. Encouraging conversion and appropriate expansion of older homes,
rather than tear-down and replacement, could help to increase housing diversity while
preserving community character.
4. Provide support to first-time homebuyers and elderly residents to overcome cost barriers.
1. Tax deferral program. A tax deferral program is currently offered to Medfield seniors with
a $40,000 annual income limit. Significant percentages of households earning under
$50,000 and even under $75,000 are also housing cost burdened. The town of Lincoln’s
income limit for tax deferral was $60,000.
2. First-time homebuyer assistance program. The town should establish a first-time homebuyer
assistance program. With funding through a Housing Trust Fund, down-payment
assistance could be provided to qualifying moderate- and middle- income households.
The town could also provide information to prospective homebuyers about financing
resources available to assist first-time homebuyers such as the Soft Second Loan
Program and MassHousing First-time homebuyer financing.
RATE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREATION
Redevelopment of Medfield State Hospital can potentially fulfill Medfield’s entire gap of 228
units under Chapter 40B. Given the uncertainties about when construction could occur at this
site, the town must undertake more immediate strategies to address housing needs. Expansion
of Tilden Village with at least 21 units could enable the town to obtain Housing Certification for
one year. The town would have to identify additional public or private sites for affordable
housing development in order to maintain certification. An inclusionary zoning bylaw as well
as strategies carried out through a Housing Trust using CPA or other funding sources could
help the town to be a continuing proactive partner in creating and managing affordable housing
units, but they are likely to add a small number of units to the Subsidized Housing Inventory in
any given year.
P a g e | 51
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Affordable Housing. As used in this plan, "affordable housing" is synonymous with low- or moderateincome housing, i.e., housing available to households earning no more than 80 percent of area median
income at a cost that does not exceed 30 percent of their monthly gross income.
Area Median Income (AMI). The median family income, adjusted for household size, within a given
metropolitan or non-metropolitan area, updated annually by HUD and used to determine eligibility for
most housing assistance programs.
Chapter 40A. G.L. c. 40A, the state Zoning Act. The current version of the Zoning Act was adopted in
1975 (1975 Mass. Acts 808).
Chapter 40B. G.L. c. 40B, § 20-23 (1969 Mass. Acts 774), the state law administered locally by the Board of
Appeals in order to create affordable housing. It provides eligible developers with a unified permitting
process that subsumes all permits normally issued by multiple town boards. Chapter 40B establishes a
basic presumption at least 10 percent of the housing in each city and town should be affordable to low- or
moderate-income households. In communities below the 10 percent statutory minimum, affordable
housing developers aggrieved by a decision of the Board of Appeals can appeal to the state Housing
Appeals Committee, which in turn has authority to uphold or reverse the Board's decision.
Chapter 40R. G.L. c. 40R (2004 Mass. Acts 149, s. 92), a state law that provides for overlay districts with
variable densities for residential development and multi-family housing by right (subject to site plan
review). At least 25 percent of the units in a Chapter 40R district have to be affordable to low- or
moderate-income people.
Chapter 44B. G.L. c. 44B (2000 Mass. Acts 267), the Community Preservation Act, allows communities to
establish a Community Preservation Fund for open space, historic preservation, and community housing
by imposing a surcharge of up to 3 percent on local property tax bills. The state provides matching funds
(or a partial match) from the Community Preservation Trust Fund, generated from Registry of Deeds
fees.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). Under the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5300 et seq.), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) makes funds available each year for cities with populations of 50,000 or more ("entitlement
communities") and each of the fifty states (the Small Cities or "non-entitlement" program). CDBG can be
used to support a variety of housing and community development activities provided they meet one of
three "national objectives" established by Congress. Housing activities are almost always designed to
meet the national objective of providing benefits to low- or moderate-income people. Funds may be used
for housing rehabilitation, redevelopment of existing properties for residential purposes (in some cases),
making site improvements to publicly owned land in order to support the construction of new housing,
interest rate and mortgage principal subsidies, and downpayment and closing cost assistance. As a "nonentitlement community," Medfield can access CDBG funds only by applying to DHCD. The state
program is guided by a five-year Consolidated Plan and One-Year Action Plans required by HUD.
Comprehensive Permit. The unified permit authorized by Chapter 40B for affordable housing
development.
P a g e | 52
Consolidated Plan. A five-year plan prepared by CDBG entitlement recipients and Participating
Jurisdictions under the HOME Program. The purpose of the plan is to document and analyze housing
market conditions, affordable housing needs, homelessness and disability housing needs, and nonhousing community development needs in the city or state that receives federal housing and community
development funds and design a strategy to address those needs using federal, state, local, and private
resources. Grant recipients also have to prepare one-year action plans showing how each year's funding
will be used in a manner consistent with the five-year Consolidated Plan.
Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). The state's lead housing agency,
originally known as the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). DHCD oversees state-funded public
housing and administers rental assistance programs, the state allocation of CDBG and HOME funds,
various state-funded affordable housing development programs, and the Community Services Block
Grant (CSBG) Program. DHCD also oversees the administration of Chapter 40B.
Extremely Low Income. See Very Low Income.
Fair Housing Act, Federal. Established under Title VII of the 1968 Civil Rights Act, the federal Fair
Housing Act prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housingrelated transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children
under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing
custody of children under the age of 18), and disability.
Fair Housing Law, Massachusetts. G.L. c. 151B (1946), the state Fair Housing Act prohibits housing
discrimination on the basis of race, color religious creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age,
children, ancestry, marital status, veteran history, public assistance recipiency, or physical or mental
disability.
Fair Market Rent (FMR). A mechanism used by HUD to control costs in the Section 8 rental assistance
program. HUD sets FMRs annually for metropolitan and non-metropolitan housing market areas (a total
of 2,736 FMR areas nationally). The FMR is the 40th percentile of gross rents for typical, non-substandard
rental units occupied by recent movers in a local housing market. (See 24 CFR 888.)
Family. A household of two or more people related by blood, marriage, or adoption.
Gross Rent. Gross rent is the sum of the rent paid to the owner plus any utility costs incurred by the
tenant. Utilities include electricity, gas, water and sewer, and trash removal services but not telephone
service. If the owner pays for all utilities, then gross rent equals the rent paid to the owner.
Group Home. A type of congregate housing for people with disabilities; usually a single-family home.
HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME). A HUD-administered formula grant program that
supports the creation and preservation of housing for low- or moderate-income people. Authorized
under Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, as amended, HOME
provides funding to states, larger cities, and groups of contiguous communities that form a consortium
for the purpose of qualifying as a "Participating Jurisdiction," or "PJ," which is similar to a CDBG
entitlement recipient. HOME funds can be used for home purchase or rehabilitation financing assistance
to eligible homeowners and new homebuyers, construction or rehabilitation of housing for rent or
ownership, or site acquisition or improvement, demolition of dilapidated housing to make way for
HOME-assisted development, and relocation expenses. PJs may also use HOME funds for tenant-based
rental assistance contracts of up to two years if doing so is consistent with their Consolidated Plan and
P a g e | 53
justified under local market conditions. Up to 10 percent of the PJ's annual allocation may be used for
program planning and administration.
Household. One or more people forming a single housekeeping unit and occupying the same housing
unit.
Housing Appeals Committee (HAC). A five-member body that adjudicates disputes under Chapter 40B.
Three members are appointed by the Director of DHCD, one of whom must be a DHCD employee. The
governor appoints the other two members, one of whom must be a city councilor and the other, a
selectman.
Housing Authority. Authorized under G.L. 121B, a public agency that develops and operates rental
housing for very-low and low-income households.
Housing Cost, Monthly. For homeowners, monthly housing cost is the sum of principal and interest
payments, property taxes, and insurance, and where applicable, homeowners association or
condominium fees. For renters, monthly housing cost includes rent and basic utilities (oil/gas, electricity).
HUD. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Inclusionary Zoning. A zoning ordinance or bylaw that encourages or requires developers to build
affordable housing in their developments or provide a comparable public benefit, such as providing
affordable units in other locations ("off-site units") or paying fees in lieu of units to an affordable housing
trust fund.
Infill Development. Construction on vacant lots or underutilized land in established neighborhoods and
commercial centers.
Jobs-to-Housing Ratio. An indicator of the adequacy of employment and housing in a given community
or area.
Local Initiative Program (LIP). A program administered by DHCD that encourages communities to
create Chapter 40B-eligible housing without a comprehensive permit, e.g., through inclusionary zoning,
purchase price buydowns, a Chapter 40R overlay district, and so forth. LIP grew out of recommendations
from the Special Commission Relative to the Implementation of Low or Moderate Income Housing
Provisions in 1989. The Commission prepared a comprehensive assessment of Chapter 40B and
recommended new, more flexible ways to create affordable housing without dependence on financial
subsidies.
Low Income. As used in this plan, low income means a household income at or below 50 percent of AMI.
It includes the household income subset known as very low income.
MassHousing. The quasi-public state agency that provides financing for affordable housing.
Mixed-Income Development. A residential development that includes market-rate and affordable
housing.
Mixed-Use Development. A development with more than one use on a single lot. The uses may be
contained within a single building ("vertical mixed use") or divided among two or more buildings
("horizontal mixed use").
P a g e | 54
Moderate Income. As used in this plan, moderate income means a household income between 51 and 80
percent of AMI.
Open Space-Residential Development. An approach to residential development that seeks to preserve
as much land as possible for open space and resource protection by allowing housing to be concentrated
on less sensitive areas of a site.
Overlay District. A zoning district that covers all or portions of basic use districts and imposes additional
(more restrictive) requirements or offers additional (less restrictive) opportunities for the use of land.
Regulatory Agreement. An affordable housing restriction, recorded with the Registry of Deeds or the
Land Court, outlining the developer's responsibilities and rights
Section 8. A HUD-administered rental assistance program that subsidizes "mobile" certificates and
vouchers to help very-low and low-income households pay for private housing. Tenants pay 30 percent
(sometimes as high as 40 percent) of their income for rent and basic utilities, and the Section 8 subsidy
pays the balance of the rent. Holders of Section 8 certificates have to choose rental units with a monthly
gross rent that does not exceed the Fair Market Rent (FMR), and the subsidy they receive makes up the
difference between 30 percent of their monthly gross income and the actual gross rent for the unit. By
contrast, the subsidy for a Section 8 voucher holder is the difference between the FMR and 30 percent of
their monthly gross income. Thus, while Section 8 voucher holders may choose units with gross rents that
exceed the FMR, they have to make up the difference between the FMR and the monthly gross rent.
Section 8 also can be used as a subsidy for eligible rental developments, known as Section 8 Project-Based
Vouchers (PBV), which are not "mobile" because they are attached to specific units.
Shared Equity Homeownership. Owner-occupied affordable housing units that remain affordable over
time due to a deed restriction that controls resale prices, thereby retaining the benefits of the initial
subsidy for future moderate-income homebuyers.
Single Room Occupancy (SRO). A building that includes single rooms for occupancy by individuals and
usually includes common cooking and bathroom facilities shared by the occupants.
Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI). A list of housing units that "count" toward a community's 10
percent statutory minimum under Chapter 40B.
Subsidy. Financial or other assistance to make housing affordable to low- or moderate-income people.
Transit-Adjacent Development (TAD). Development that is in close proximity to transit, but with a
design that has not been significantly influenced by it. It is distinguished from TOD, where transit is the
central design feature.
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD). Residential and commercial developments designed to maximize
access by transit and non-motorized transportation. A TOD typically has a rail or bus station at its center,
surrounded by relatively high-density development, with progressively lower-density within one-quarter
to one-half mile of the center.
Typical, Non-substandard Rental Units. A term that defines the types of rental units that HUD includes
and excludes in establishing the FMR for each housing market area. The term excludes: public housing
units, rental units built in the last two years, rental units with housing quality problems, seasonal rentals,
and rental units on ten or more acres.
P a g e | 55
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The lead federal agency for financing
affordable housing development and administering the Fair Housing Act.
Very Low Income. As used in this plan, very low income is a household income at or below 30 percent of
AMI. In some housing programs, a household with income at or below 30 percent of AMI is called
extremely low income.
P a g e | 56
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST
An Affordable Housing Trust is essentially an accounting mechanism for segregating revenues from the
General Fund and dedicating them for the purpose of creating affordable housing. A board of trustees
appointed by the Board of Selectmen oversees the fund and has authority to invest monies in the trust for
any of sixteen purposes listed in the statute. They include:
(1) to accept and receive real property, personal property or money, by gift, grant, contribution, devise or
transfer from any person, firm, corporation or other public or private entity, including but not limited to
money, grants of funds or other property tendered to the trust in connection with any ordinance or bylaw or any general or special law or any other source, including money from chapter 44B [Community
Preservation Act];
(2) to purchase and retain real or personal property, including without restriction investments that yield a
high rate of income or no income;
(3) to sell, lease, exchange, transfer or convey any personal, mixed, or real property at public auction or
by private contract for such consideration and on such terms as to credit or otherwise, and to make such
contracts and enter into such undertaking relative to trust property as the board deems advisable
notwithstanding the length of any such lease or contract;
(4) to execute, acknowledge and deliver deeds, assignments, transfers, pledges, leases, covenants,
contracts, promissory notes, releases and other instruments sealed or unsealed, necessary, proper or
incident to any transaction in which the board engages for the accomplishment of the purposes of the
trust;
(5) to employ advisors and agents, such as accountants, appraisers and lawyers as the board deems
necessary;
(6) to pay reasonable compensation and expenses to all advisors and agents and to apportion such
compensation between income and principal as the board deems advisable;
(7) to apportion receipts and charges between incomes and principal as the board deems advisable, to
amortize premiums and establish sinking funds for such purpose, and to create reserves for depreciation
depletion or otherwise;
(8) to participate in any reorganization, recapitalization, merger or similar transactions; and to give
proxies or powers of attorney with or without power of substitution to vote any securities or certificates
of interest; and to consent to any contract, lease, mortgage, purchase or sale of property, by or between
any corporation and any other corporation or person;
(9) to deposit any security with any protective reorganization committee, and to delegate to such
committee such powers and authority with relation thereto as the board may deem proper and to pay,
out of trust property, such portion of expenses and compensation of such committee as the board may
deem necessary and appropriate;
(10) to carry property for accounting purposes other than acquisition date values;
(11) to borrow money on such terms and conditions and from such sources as the board deems advisable,
to mortgage and pledge trust assets as collateral;
P a g e | 57
(12) to make distributions or divisions of principal in kind;
(13) to comprise, attribute, defend, enforce, release, settle or otherwise adjust claims in favor or against
the trust, including claims for taxes, and to accept any property, either in total or partial satisfaction of
any indebtedness or other obligation, and subject to the provisions of this act, to continue to hold the
same for such period of time as the board may deem appropriate;
(14) to manage or improve real property; and to abandon any property which the board determined not
to be worth retaining;
(15) to hold all or part of the trust property uninvested for such purposes and for such time as the board
may deem appropriate; and
(16) to extend the time for payment of any obligation to the trust.
In effect, the trustees may function as a developer, investor, lender, property manager, or housing
services provider. They can acquire, improve, and sell or lease real property as long as they use the trust
for the purposes for which it is intended: the creation and preservation of affordable housing. An
important advantage of an affordable housing trust is that the trustees can receive and expend monies
without a specific authorization vote from Town Meeting, which means they will be able to act quickly as
opportunities arise. The statute does not set a cap on the number of trustees, so the Town may decide
how large the board should be (the law requires at least five members), the town boards and
commissions that should be represented on it, and the particular skills and interests that would create a
balanced board of trustees. The Board of Selectmen must have representation on the board of trustees,
but other town boards are optional at the community's discretion.