Hendries property granted eligibility to pursue 40B

by Frank Schroth

And now there are three .  .  . projects that have been green lighted to file for comprehensive permits. The Massachusetts Housing Partnership sent a letter of eligibility to Steve Connelly, a principal at Carrick Realty, informing him that his request for determination of preliminary project eligibility for an apartment building consisting of 57 units (49 two bedroom and 8 three bedroom) has been approved.

They found that the location and plan were “eligible” and “appropriate.” The letter notes the following:

eligibility letter hendries clip

 

You can find the full text of the letter on the town web site here.

The two other projects to receive letters of eligibility are Milton Mews off Brush Hill Road and a project on Randolph Avenue. You can find all town documents regarding these projects here.

  8 comments for “Hendries property granted eligibility to pursue 40B

  1. Thom Brown
    June 9, 2014 at 7:02 pm

    Welcome news for the town. Sadly, the town of Milton has never built a house through “Habitat For Humanity.” Only 2% of it’s current affordable housing (12 units) is for families. Milton is a diverse community of race and religion and now has an opportunity through these 3 projects to welcome economic diversity. The time for projects such as these is now, I applaud Milton.

  2. Dick Burke
    June 10, 2014 at 7:23 am

    The 2% affordable housing figure for families is a little misleading.
    There are a number of economically disadvantaged families taking full advantage of the Section 8 program to live in Milton . The issue becomes , who are we making affordable housing available for, current Milton residents or for families that want to move to Milton ?

  3. Joe Grogan
    June 15, 2014 at 6:27 am

    The fact we are at this point now with this property is not surprising given the personal witch hunt against the Connollys that has gone on for many years. Like them or hate them, the fact that they had to endure the personal attacks from so many is embarrassing while watching two other buildings go up within eyeshot of this one. As I see it, the trade was 35-38 owner occupied condos for the 57 40b units because a few very vocal people made it personal. People (probably the same that would oppose anything the Connollys would attempt to do) I am sure those same people will comment on this saying the Connollys did this, the Connollys cut down the tree, The Connollys did not want to do this etc. This would only further prove my point. At the end of the day, it is their property and it is their right to explore what options they have and what they would like to pursue that hopefully through fair discussions with the town they could produce based on their economic assumptions, not others. I can honestly say that I am not in favor of such dense housing on that spot of land but I can also appreciate the Connollys position, they were left with no choice to go this route. it really is the perfect example of smart growth given the location and the various attributes that is used to consider proper placement of a 40b project. After all, this is a law on the books that people passed in the state of Massachusetts and usually benefits the developer more so than the town, classic example here.

  4. Michael Chinman
    June 16, 2014 at 3:18 pm

    Mr. Grogan: who are the “few very vocal people” you are trying to disparage with this posting? I honestly can’t imagine. The civic leaders I know who have been most involved trying to achieve a good result at that property, that benefits all, and is in accord with local laws, have worked many hours, zero compensation or glory, bringing credit to the neighborhood, the town.

  5. Joe Grogan
    June 17, 2014 at 10:58 pm

    Mr. Chinman, not looking to disparage anyone, as you once said “facts are stubborn things” Fact here is, we now have a 57 unit 40B instead of a 36 or 37 unit owner occupied building and this is after many years of the “civic leaders” you referenced looking for a good result at that property that benefits all. Higher tax revenue, owner occupied units and more commercial space would have benefitted all instead we have denser housing, lower tax revenue and potential rental units where people would typically not have the same pride of ownership and will instead cost the town money. Another fact, this was a bad trade.

  6. Michael Chinman
    June 18, 2014 at 8:13 am

    Odd that you don’t feel that “witch hunt” and “personal attacks” are disparaging comments about the architects, the lawyers, the elected officials, who spent long hours, on their own time, meeting with and ultimately being rebuffed by Mr. Connelly. The assertion that he had “no choice” but the current course is completely false.

  7. Peter Jackson
    June 18, 2014 at 11:40 am

    Thank you Michael. Many people worked very hard to try to achieve a quality development on this site that enhances the Central Ave Business District and the town. It is unfortunate that it was unable to be concluded but the discussions are not over. It’s possible there can be a quality 40B development on the site or perhaps a continued negotiation on a mixed use development.

    There is still much work to do to complete the red3evelopment and everyone hopes it is a project that can be completed cooperatively and be a credit to the town and the developer.

  8. Steve Morash
    June 18, 2014 at 10:13 pm

    So now Mr. Connolly has received “preliminary project eligibility for an apartment building consisting of 57 units (49 two bedroom and 8 three bedroom) has been approved.”

    Call me cynical. I don’t believe he wants to do anything with 40B. I would not be surprised if he sees this as a card to be played with/against the town to get his way.

    This town and a number of people have spent a long time with Mr. Connolly trying to “negotiate” a solution for this parcel.

    Good luck to the Commonwealth in their dealings with Carick Realty. Who knows, Kissinger is still alive and Camp David is available as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *