Share This Article
Questions have been raised about why the Sudbury Housing Authority has not taken advantage of the $500,000 approved under Article 39 at Town Meeting last May for the maintenance of four of the properties owned by the Housing Authority in the Pine Lakes and Pine Rest neighborhoods.
The proponents of Article 39 would like the four properties, three of which are now vacant, to remain single family homes and urge the speedy use of the funds so families may once again reside in them. From the Housing Authority’s perspective, the use of the Town Meeting allocation does not resolve either of the two main reasons the SHA has embarked on the path of redevelopment of the single family homes into two family homes – to create additional, smaller homes that meet the current and future needs of the families who will live in them, and to create a subsidy program that will adequately fund the ongoing maintenance of the properties with their own income stream. The SHA explained in its opposition to Article 39 at Town Meeting that by redeveloping the four properties, it is maximizing its assets and planning for the current and long-term needs of both the tenants and the ongoing maintenance of the properties.
This will not be the first time the SHA has redeveloped outdated and unsuitable properties. In 2012, the Housing Authority successfully redeveloped four properties into new duplexes and built a fifth duplex that are attractive, fit architecturally into the community, suit the needs of current and future tenants, and are financially sound investments for the long term.
The second issue facing the Housing Authority is that the SHA cannot act as nimbly or independently as a private landlord. The SHA is heavily regulated by the State’s Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities. Any capital improvements or even routine turnover upgrades with an estimated cost in excess of $10,000 would have to be approved and managed by the State. The SHA would have to hire architects and engineers to create a scope of the work so estimates could be obtained, and a budget, timeline, and work specifications created. All work would have to comply with prevailing wage laws, and the EOHLC would oversee the project every step of the way. Because the SHA is proceeding with the proposed redevelopment, it has not invested the time and resources necessary to evaluate the current needs of the three homes. Even in the best of circumstances, any improvements to these homes would take a much longer period of time than expected by the proponents and, most likely, the cost would exceed the $500,000 that was appropriated.
Finally, Article 39 was proposed and passed at Town Meeting without accurate and current information about the properties or the process and cost involved in updating them. The petitioners of Article 39 did not consult with the SHA about the condition of the properties, request an estimate of the costs involved, or ask whether the SHA would be able to use the funds. In short, the $500,000 figure was not based on any factual assessment of the needs of any of the properties or the realities of the situation.
The SHA and the neighbors of the vacant homes are all frustrated with the slow progress being made on the redevelopment. However, the SHA has been proceeding methodically towards what it hopes will be a successful conclusion. We expect to begin the design phase of the process sometime this winter. We welcome the input of the community in this and future phases.