Sold In Belmont: A Tiny House, a Place to the Manor Born and Mad Prices at McLean

December 31, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker Leave a Comment

Photo: A “tiny house” on Westlund.

9 Westlund Rd., Ranch (1950). Sold: $615,000.

73 Dartmouth St. Multifamily (1900). Sold: $730,000.

69-71 Carleton Rd., Multifamily (1927). Sold: $899,000.

137 Claflin St. Center-entry Colonial (1934). Sold: $805,000.

93-95 Bartlett Ave. Multifamily (1928). Sold: $708,000.

204-206 Waverley St. #3, Condominium (1906). Sold: $399,900.

52 Summit Rd. #7, Townhouse condominium (2005). Sold: $1,300,000.

22 Wellesley Rd. Brick Manor House with a turret (1929). Sold: $3,092,500.

20 South Cottage Rd. #102, A unit within a renovated Georgian Colonial brick building (2015/1893). Sold: $1,495,000.

20 South Cottage Rd. #101, A unit within a renovated Georgian Colonial brick building (2015/1893). Sold: $1,450,000.

A weekly recap of residential properties sold in the past seven-plus days in the “Town of Homes”:

• 9 Westlund Rd., Ranch (1950). Sold: $615,000. Listed at $629,000. Living area: 864 sq.-ft. 4 rooms, 2 bedrooms, 1 baths. On the market: 91 days.

• 73 Dartmouth St. Multifamily (1900). Sold: $730,000. Listed at $725,000. Living area: 2,016 sq.-ft. 10 rooms, 4 bedrooms, 2 baths. On the market: 71 days.

• 69-71 Carleton Rd., Multifamily (1927). Sold: $899,000. Listed at $915,000. Living area: 2,640 sq.-ft. 12 rooms, 4 bedrooms, 3 baths. On the market: 107 days.

• 137 Claflin St. Center-entry Colonial (1934). Sold: $805,000. Listed at $778,000. Living area: 1,686 sq.-ft. 7 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 1.5 baths. On the market: 57 days.

• 93-95 Bartlett Ave. Multifamily (1928). Sold: $708,000. Listed at $719,000. Living area: 2,200 sq.-ft. 11 rooms, 5 bedrooms, 2 baths. On the market: 127 days

• 204-206 Waverley St. #3, Condominium (1906). Sold: $399,900. Listed at $399,900. Living area: 1,044 sq.-ft. 5 rooms, 2 bedrooms, 1 baths. On the market: 79 days.

• 52 Summit Rd. #7, Townhouse condominium (2005). Sold: $1,300,000. Listed at $1,450,000. Living area: 3,240 sq.-ft. 7 rooms, 1 bedrooms, 3.5 baths. On the market: 113 days.

• 22 Wellesley Rd. Brick Manor House with turret (1929). Sold: $3,092,500. Listed at $3,200,000. Living area: 4,905 sq.-ft. 11 rooms, 5 bedrooms, r.5 baths. On the market: 57 days.

• 20 South Cottage Rd. #102, A unit within a renovated Georgian Colonial brick building (2015/1893). Sold: $1,495,000. Listed at $1,495,000. Living area: 2,825 sq.-ft. 7 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths. On the market: 481 days.

• 20 South Cottage Rd. #101, A unit within a renovated Georgian Colonial brick building (2015/1893). Sold: $1,450,000. Listed at $1,450,000. Living area: 2,680 sq.-ft. 7 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths. On the market: 525 days.

It was once known as Upham Memorial Hall, the building at McLean Hospital that served for 80 years as the upscale home for a select number of wealthy residents who were stark, raving mad. And a half century ago, Upham was the involuntary home of the great blues and pop performer Ray Charles, who beat a heroin possession charge by agreeing to a judge’s order to spend some time in the care of the hospital for “observation and tests.”

As for this week, the building enters its second life as the upscale home for a select number of wealthy residents who are willing to pay stark, raving mad prices to live next to other rich folks. (It’s so exclusive, developer Northland Development won’t distribute photos of the interior. “If you have to ask …”) Maybe it’s just me, but when I spend $1.5 million, I want something more private than a 2,600 sq.-ft. “apartment” that shares a floor with other “tenants.” How annoying it must be being interrupted while watching “Keeping up with the Kardashians” by some burdensome neighbor knocking on the door asking if they can borrow some Grey Poupon for their Poulet aigu de Tarragon. Oh, dear!

(I like this English version of the Grey Poupon commercial with the great English actors Paul Eddington and Ian Richardson.)

Top billing in terms of “wow” factor goes to the brick manor house on Wellesley Road, which was the long-time home of the Palandjian family, bought in 1969 by the father Petros and now owned by a trust for the kids. Although the exterior and elegant European/English landscape is more impressive than the relatively standard interior (What? No cathedral ceiling? Hrumph!)

Here’s a bit of trivia: Peter Palandjian is the last Belmont resident to play on the ATP Tour, ranking 280th in singles in 1989, reaching the quarterfinals in Johannesburg and Telford.

As for the house hidden on a back road on the Hill, its value has taken off. Appraised by the town at $651,000 just 20 years ago, it was assessed at $1.9 million in 2015. That’s a nice little $1 million bubble “profit” for the family homestead. Well, it does have a sauna in the basement, and the master bath has a fireplace, just like those in medieval castles.

My favorite house is the itsy-bitsy ranch on Westlund, a stone throw away from the Winn Brook. At less than 900 square feet, it’s smaller than most condominiums on the market. It almost qualifies for a “Tiny House,” which run from 100 to 400 square feet. While the exterior needs work, the interior is rather nice. The wood floors and walls are in great shape, the kitchen is a good size, and you get a living room/dining room that supplies all you need.

The only issue facing this great starter house is who bought it. Hopefully, it is a growing family who can gain some equity from the purchase. But the marketing pitch had an ominous final sentence: “Ideal for first-time buyers who can move right in and expand the house later or developers.”

With the town’s Planning Board still months away from formulating new bylaws on bulk and height limits for new construction, this little gem could be lost to an oversized faux Colonial with no style or soul.

Cushing Village Developer Misses Deadline for [Put Number Here] Time

December 23, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker 1 Comment

Photo: The municipal parking lot at Cushing Village is .. still there.

Belmont just received another lump of coal from the developer who promised 30 months ago that he would build a project that “will revitalize Cushing Square and will become a source of pride for all of Belmont.”

On Dec. 3, after repeatedly missing deadlines for five months to purchase the municipal parking lot in Cushing Square, a “contrite” Chris Starr came before the Planning Board to apologize to town officials for two-and-a-half years of delays and false starts in building the 164,000 sq.-ft. the multi-use development known as Cushing Village.

Starr told the board – which oversees the troubled project for the town – that he pledged to meet “three agreed to ‘milestones’ with the town” to begin the initial construction phase of the $63 million project consisting of 115 residential units, 38,300 sq.-ft. of retail and 225 parking space with 50 reserved for town use.

“So we are really committed to making a change in Cushing Square and getting Cushing Village done,” said Starr.

The first milestone was to purchase the deed for the lot at Trapelo and Williston roads adjacent to the Cushing Square Starbucks at a cost of $850,000 by Friday, Dec. 11.

Um, how about moving that first deadline by a week, to Dec. 18, advised Starr’s attorney Mark Donahue.

“We have frankly lost time as we … were communicating with the lenders,” said Donahue, speaking of lead banker Wells Fargo. Despite a lot of misgivings, the board and Board of Selectmen Chair Sami Baghdady felt that Starr and his team had a plan that could be met.

Present at the meeting was Tony Papantonis, president and founder of Needham-based Nauset Construction, who said the lot would be “secured” and fenced in during Christmas week with heavy machinery marshaled on the space. In fact, prep work would begin that week, said Papantonis.

But for residents who live in the nearby neighborhood, the scene is anything but busy. Twenty days after Starr made his “solid” promise to the Planning Board, the lot remains open for parking, there is no fencing at the site, and the only activity is people leaving Starbucks with a hot mocha in a red cup.

Once again, Chris Starr failed to make a “milestone” for the troubled project.

“The bottom line here is that the deadline was missed,” confirmed David Kale, town administrator on Wednesday, Dec. 23.

One neighbor, who has been following the Cushing Village saga for many years, said he has been reviewing land registry activity in Belmont and has not seen any evidence that Starr or Wells Fargo has begun the process of securing the deed for the lot.

What next? Kale said the Planning Board can request an agenda item concerning Cushing Village is included at its next meeting, “but that would be up to the board to do so.”

An email was sent to Elizabeth Allison, the current chair of the Planning Board, concerning such a request.

But it appears that a solution may come to pass before the Planning Board’s next meeting. It seems the missed deadline has less to do with a major failure on the developer’s part but rather what has cursed the project from the time Starr first initiated plans in 2008; simple incompetence.

According to sources within government circles, the lack of a signature on an important set of papers at a time when officers of the bank and development company are decamping for an extended holiday recess was the culprit.

The result is an inexcusable delay of several weeks, up until the first week in January, before the team can come together to sign off of the payment to Belmont for the municipal lot.

Three more lost weeks is but a drop in the bucket when the developer said in July 2013 the first building (on the parking lot) would welcome residents and retailers by the late fall/early winter … of 2014.

Sold In Belmont: A Million Dollar Flip That Fizzled on Highland

December 20, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker Leave a Comment

Photo: 6 Highland Rd. sold for nearly a quarter of million dollars profit in 2014, not so in 2015.

6 Highland Rd., Classic Colonial (1941). Sold: $1,300,000.

8 Oakley Rd. #2, Condominium townhouse (2011). Sold: $860,000.

60 Newcastle Rd. Side-entry Colonial, (1947). Sold: $800,000.

A weekly recap of residential properties sold in the past seven-plus days in the “Town of Homes”:

• 6 Highland Rd., Classic Colonial (1941). Sold: $1,300,000. Listed at $1,250,000. Living area: 2,237 sq.-ft. 6 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths. On the market: 65 days.

• 8 Oakley Rd. #2, Condominium townhouse (2011). Sold: $860,000. Listed at $899,000. Living area: 3,175 sq.-ft. 6 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 2 baths. On the market: 58 days.

• 60 Newcastle Rd. Side-entry Colonial (1947). Sold: $800,000. Listed at $775,000. Living area: 1,593 sq.-ft. 8 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 1.5 baths. On the market: 51 days.

Selling a house for nearly half-a-million dollars greater than the appraised value for a fairly standard Colonial, you’d be, as Donald Trump/Charlie Sheen would put it, “a winner.”

Dante Muzzioli was a Hall of Fame hockey coach for five decades with Belmont High School. And he proves to be a solid real estate developer. Back in November 2013, Muzzioli purchased the rundown prewar house on Highland Road for $890,000, a nice premium over the assessed value of $718,000.

Within days, Muzzioli got to work putting in $97,000 of renovations and improvements – strip and reroof, install a three-ton AC system in the attic to service both floors, and $60,000 in bath and kitchen renovations – then place it on the market. By August of 2014, the once-threadbare house sold for $1,250,000 (he had originally listed the house at $1,395,000! but that price was just crazy), a more than quarter of a million dollar profit. Try getting that margin playing with equities.

But the most recent sale did not turn out as lucrative for the new owners. A mere 14 months after purchasing the house, the new owner placed the Colonial on the market for the original sales price. If this was purposely low-balling a house to spark a bidding war, it wasn’t that successful. Not to say $50,000 isn’t hay feed, it doesn’t come close to the last jump in sales price.

In the end, the neighborhood has a new comparable sale ($1.3 million) that is way out of whack from the 2015 market value the town has placed on the value of the land and building of $872,000. What better definition of a bubble is there?

Spike in Average Property Tax Bill Anticipated As Override Comes Dues

December 14, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker Leave a Comment

Photo: Board of Assessors’ (from left) Robert Reardon, Martin Millane, Jr. and Charles Laverty III

Belmont property owners can expect the equivalent of a lump of coal in their next two quarterly tax bill arriving in February 2016 as residents prepare to pay for the Prop 2 1/2 override voters passed in April.

The average household can expect to see its next two tax bills jump by $350, according to Robert Reardon, chair of the Belmont Board of Assessors which presented its recommendations for next fiscal year’s property tax rate to the Belmont Board of Selectmen at its Monday, Dec. 14 meeting.

While the assessors are recommending a significant drop in the tax rate – $12.56 per $1,000 in fiscal 2016, down from $12.90 in fiscal ’15 – any possible dip in taxes was offset by a dramatic increase of 11 percent in assessed values of all property town-wide, from $5.928 billion in 2015 to 2016’s $6.598 billion.

Approximately $4.5 million of the $6.9 million spike in assessed values comes from the Proposition 2 1/2 override that passed comfortably by voters at this year’s Town Election to stabilize school finances.

In comparison, assessed values rose in fiscal year 2015 by $2.3 million and by $1.9 million in fiscal ’14.

The value of an “average,” or median priced Belmont house has rocketed to $928,003 from $847,900 in fiscal 2015

For the “average” Belmont home, taxes next fiscal year will be $11,655, an increase of $717.45 from the $10,938.

In comparison, property taxes increased $373 between fiscal 2014 and fiscal 2015.

Reardon said after the new fiscal year begins on July 1, 2016, the increase will be spread over four quarters, and the average customer’s bill will be about $180 higher.

Suspecting many Belmont residents would “notice” the large change in their tax bill, Reardon said the Assessors’ Office would include in the next two bills a two-page “explanation to the taxpayers on why the levy was increased and the approximate increase can is the result of the change.”

“Just so they have a better understanding and cut down the number of questions they may have,“ said Reardon, who was accompanied to the meeting by his colleagues, Martin Millane, Jr. and Charles Laverty III

The Massachusetts Department of Revenue has a handy primer on calculating the tax levy.

As with past years, the assessors recommended, and the selectmen agreed to a single tax classification for all properties and no real estate exemptions.

Reardon said Belmont does not have anywhere near the amount of commercial and industrial space – at a minimum 20 percent – to creating separate tax rates for residential and commercial properties.

“We are not raising more money by having a commercial rate, we are only shifting it” onto businesses while the savings for residential ratepayers would be “negotiable,” said Reardon.

“One of the dilemmas is because our residential property values are so high, I think it artificially drives up a lot of our commercial properties,” said Baghdady.

“Commercial rents to justify the value is tough to absorb by a business,” said Baghdady.

Sold in Belmont: All I Want for Christmas is a Million-Dollar House

December 13, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker Leave a Comment

Photo: 14 Watson Rd. sold for nearly a quarter of million dollars over its assessed value.

A weekly recap of residential properties sold in the past seven-plus days in the “Town of Homes:

206 School St., Single family (1925). Sold: $1,098,000.

140 Watson Rd., Brick Colonial (1940). Sold: $1,020,000.

31 Amherst Rd., Two-level ranch (1954). Sold: $1,025,000.

200 Rutledge Rd., Garrison Colonial (1940). Sold: $1,580,000.

4 Waterhouse Rd., Center-entrance Colonial (1938). Sold: $685,750.

29 Cowdin St., Colonial (1940). Sold: $724,000.

18 Lodge Rd., English Tudor Colonial (1935). Sold: $710,000.

• 140 Watson Rd., Brick Colonial (1940). Sold: $1,020,000. Listed at $1,050,000,. Living area: 2,277 sq.-ft. 8 rooms, 4 bedrooms, 2.5 baths. On the market: 57 days.

• 31 Amherst Rd., Two-level ranch (1954). Sold: $1,025,000. Listed at $1,125,000. Living area: 2,347 sq.-ft. 6 rooms, 4 bedrooms, 3 baths. On the market: 117 days.

• 18 Lodge Rd., English Tudor Colonial (1935). Sold: $710,000. Listed at $755,000. Living area: 1,783 sq.-ft. 7 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 1.5 baths. On the market: 93 days.

• 4 Waterhouse Rd., Center-entrance Colonial (1938). Sold: $685,750. Listed at $850,000. Living area: 1,742 sq.-ft. 7 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 1.5 baths. On the market: 79 days.

• 29 Cowdin St., Colonial (1940). Sold: $724,000. Listed at $749,000. Living area: 1,708 sq.-ft. 6 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 1.5 baths. On the market: 93 days.

• 206 School St., Single family (1925). Sold: $1,098,000. Listed at $1,098,000. Living area: 2,805 sq.-ft. 9 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths. On the market: 86 days.

• 200 Rutledge Rd., Garrison Colonial (1940). Sold: $1,580,000. Listed at $1,795,000,. Living area: 3,608 sq.-ft. 13 rooms, 5 bedrooms, 3.5 baths. On the market: 93 days.

A million dollar house on Rutledge? Of course! How about in the shadow of the Temple on Amherst Road? You bet. Even along School Street, where the production of “This Old House” came to visit, makes sense to see a price tag for a cool million.

But Watson Road? The road off of Washington below the Presidential neighborhood is typical of many Belmont side-streets, one of homes built in the same style as their neighbors; sturdy but far from fancy.

And 140 Watson is just that: the town rates it as a B grade house – heated by oil with an unfinished attic – with its last significant renovation was the installation of replacement windows a decade ago.

The town’s assessors did bump up its assessed value in the past year, to a whopping $784,000.

Somehow, this “average” house oversold its assessed value by nearly a quarter of a million dollars! Maybe the buyers misheard an important fact: it’s heating is oil not that there is oil in the basement, a la “The Beverly Hillbillies.”

The fact that an average house could sell for a fat premium should give people pause, during which time they can recall the last few housing financial “bubbles” and their impact on the community and town finances.

Pleasant Selling: Long-time Gas Station on Market for $3.8 Million

December 10, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker 2 Comments

Photo: The Star K Gas station at Pleasant Street and Scott Road.

As the residents of Belmont Hill and the Winn Brook neighborhood focus their attention on a proposed Dunkin’ Donuts shop that would occupy a new strip mall at the corner of Brighton and Pleasant streets, they may also want to keep their eyes on the business across Pleasant Street at the corner of Scott Road.

According to the Multiple Listing Service, the Star K Gas station at 368 Pleasant St. is up for sale with an asking price of $3,800,000.

According to a description of the site, the location is “[p]erfect for the entrepreneur or developer, this property/business is ready for your vision. Steps from Route 2 and minutes to Fresh Pond/Cambridge/Boston.”

The business owned by Belmont resident Irakalis Kotzobaldiris consists of a two-story building and the gas station, built in 1975, and is located on a sizable half-acre of prime real estate at the base of Belmont Hill.

After buying the property in 1985, Kotzobaldiris renovated the two-bay service station building in 1998, adding a 700 sq. ft. retail convenience store, a customer waiting area, the second floor office/storage area and other improvements for $320,000.

The property is listed by Century 21 Commonwealth.

ZBA Grounds Airbnb, Punts Internet Lodging to Planning Board

December 8, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker 2 Comments

Photo: The room that Joanne Sintiris rents for $85 a night as an Airbnb host.

Joanne Sintiris found herself uncomfortably close to the edge of a financial cliff.

A divorce left the Betts Road resident wrestling to make ends meet and seeking some way to make a little extra money.

“I needed some way to supplement my income. It was hard to see how I was going to do that,” she said.

Then Sintiris discovered the wildly popular online service Airbnb where homeowners can rent out one or more rooms in their house, condo or apartment for a nightly, weekly or monthly fee.

“It turned out to be a real savoir,” said Sintiris, who rents a spare room out for $85 a night, below the $135 average for the Boston area.

The “room” includes a private entrance, one bedroom, living room, private bathroom, use of a washer/dryer, a shared garden and patio with a grill.

“It was crazy. I was turning people away, many people who I didn’t want,” said the Cambridge native.

And her guests raved about the experience.

“Joanne was a wonderful host, she was easy to communicate with, friendly, and we felt very welcome in the apartment. The location was quiet, relaxing, yet still easy to get to the best parts of Boston,” wrote a lodger who stayed in October.

Sintiris will now see her windfall slashed dramatically after the Belmont Zoning Board of Appeals Monday night, Dec. 7, rejected her request by a single vote for a special permit to would allow her to continue renting the room for less than seven days.

In a debate that once veered off to include the threat of sex offenders and all guests requiring CORI background checks, the board Monday essentially punted the issue off to the Planning Board, which will be asked to create, or at least, modernize the town’s antiquated lodging and boarder bylaws for the 250 residents who host Airbnb visitors in Belmont.

“If it is correct that there will be 250 people with rooms to rent, then in that case it must be thought out in a comprehensive way which is the role of the Planning Board,” said ZBA Chairman Eric Smith.

Sintiris’ case is the first of what could be several hundred the Office of Community Development anticipates to bring before the ZBA. The town contends that under existing town bylaws, anyone renting for less than seven days must obtain a special permit under the town’s bylaws. Sintiris just happened to be the first Airbnb provider plucked from the website to be required to rent the room for seven plus days.

Since a majority of lodgers stay less than four days, Sintiris sought the special permit since those potential customers are decamping across the town line in Cambridge (with a 1,000 Airbnb listings), Boston (2,000), and other neighboring communities that have no or very limited restrictions.

“I need to have the flexibility to provide a room for a weekend or a week,” she said.

Airbnb is now one of the biggest success stories coming from the new internet service industry, reporting Monday a net worth exceeding $25 billion.

While there is the occasional sensational negative event, Airbnb have become the “go to” lodging experience for a rapidly growing number of travels around the world. In the seven years since Airbnb was founded, more than 60 million people have used the service, listing almost two million homes in 34,000 cities (Paris alone has 60,000 hosts) in approximately 190 countries worldwide.

Municipalities have scratched the surface of regulating these new fangled rentals; Somerville proposed a six percent tax (but had no way of implementing it) and Boston is pondering restrictions.

For the handful of residents who opposed the special permit, the issues created by this “disrubting ” range from noise to fear of those coming into the community.

Opponents such as Patrice Shea of Talyor Street, who lives close by another Airbnb location, said her street has vehicles coming in “from all over the country” in addition to “Uber cars” – the online, on-demand car service – as people arriving at “very unusual hours,” while many strangers are seen walking with suitcases on the sidewalk. She also wondered if the town wasn’t loss of town revenued in taxes and fees.

“It’s just plain creepy,” Shea said after her testimony.

“I get the fiscal benefit to the host … and the renter, they pay less money. [But] what does it do to me?” said JP Looney who lives eight houses up Betts from Sintiris, wondering if “a boarding house” in the vacinity will likely reduce his property values.

Looney also pondered safety issues with unfamiliar people coming into the area.

“Is Airbnb doing a criminal background check? That’s not what I understand from the website,” Looney ask. “We are opening up a can of worms by allowing this.”

Picking up on the critic’s line of questioning, board member Nicholas Iannuzzi said without CORI and sexual offendors background checks, “you should in fear of our own safety with anyone in your house for $85 a night.”

Sintiris countered that she has had a “great experience with everyone,” including university educators and professionals who are coming to town for work or to visit children at school.

In the end, the board voted 3-2 (Iannuzzi and Jim Zarkadas voting no) in favor of Sintiris’ special permit; while a purality, it was one vote shy of the necessary threshold for the issuance of the license.

While Iannuzzi’s negative response was towards the distrubtor aspect of the technology, Zarkadas’ ran towards finding a more precise definition of the town’s lodging bylaws.

“It really is up to the Planning Board to make updated laws because there has been a lot of changes and I’m pretty sure they were written back in … the 1800s. While I’m open to business, but when it starts to cross the line of running and operating a business in a neighborhood, there is a lot of unknowns that need to answered,” he said.

Sami Baghdady, the current chair of the Board of Selectmen and former chair of the Planning Board, said it is incumbent for the bylaw writing entity to fill in the gaps in taxes, zoning and licenses that new technology brings to the town.

“The Planning Board needs to address this quite quickly, just because there is more than 200 units now doing business,” he said.

For Sintiris, the change to seven days minimum stay that began this fall “has already hurt me,” saying the current regulations has cut her income by $1,000 a month.

“I’m not asking for much. Just enough,” she said.

A Contrite Developer Promises Action on Long-Delayed Cushing Village

December 5, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker 1 Comment

Photo: Developer Chris Starr (photo 2012)

Apologetic and contrite, Chris Starr stood before the Belmont Planning Board and said he was sorry.

“I can’t begin to tell you how much each of these delays really impacts me,” said Starr.

“I’ve seen the frustration of people in Cushing Square, and I’ve seen the residents and the business owners … and I certainly empathize with what they are going through right now. And I share that frustration,” said Starr.

Starr, who in 2010 sued each member of the Belmont Board of Selectmen and threatened in 2012 to develop a 40B housing development if the Planning Board would not move on the development, was penitent at the Dec. 3 meeting as he sought for the third time in the past four months either an extension or modifications to the proposed project that was approved nearly 30 months before.

“I want first to start off by apologizing for having to come back for yet another request. We are deeply sorry to do this … the simple fact is that there were some lender requirements that needed to address.

The Planning Board approved Thursday night the three “modifications” to a one-year extension to the special permit granted in July 2013 passing Starr’s Smith Legacy Partners to obtain the town permits to construct the residential/commercial/parking complex running from Belmont and Common streets onto Trapelo to Winston roads.

The two-and-a-half year delay in construction was due in large part in the difficulty in securing a primary lender who would assume the risk in a project led by an inexperienced developer.

Starr also announced Thursday that he is now to meet three agreed to “milestones” with the town to begin the initial construction phase of the project.

“So we are really committed to making a change in Cushing Square and getting Cushing Village done,” said Starr.

The three strict milestones with deadlines as part of the agreement:

The developers must close on the deed for the municipal parking lot at a cost of $850,000 by Friday, Dec. 11,
Begin initial demolition on Friday, Jan. 15, 2016, and
Seek a building foundation permit from the town by Monday, Feb. 1, 2016.

One of the modifications deals directly with the very first milestone, delaying the Dec. 11 closing of the sale of the municipal parking lot adjacent Trapelo Road by a week.

Starr said he and his family is “committed to closing on the 18th” ending by thanking the Planning Board for “your understanding, your patience and I’m sure it won’t go unrewarded.”

Mark Donahue, the Smith Legacy attorney, outlined the modifications that he noted was being required by Wells Fargo, the developer’s lead lender who will commit $15 million at the start of the project.

The first is a “force majeure” provision that allows the three milestones will be extended in the event of an extraordinary incident; relating to acts of God and not mere neglect or if the developer seeks a better deal.

The second is what Donahue called “the lender saving provision” where the milestone dates are set aside if the lender exercises its rights of taking control of the property if it is determined the developer fails to meet his obligation to the bank. The lender, Wells Fargo, will then have the ability to negotiate a sale or a new deal with the town within the one-year extension, preventing the project from falling into “a black hole.”

The benefit of the second alteration is it “reassures the town” the project will be ultimately completed, with or without Starr at the helm, said Donahue.

“This is not to suggest in any fashion that the developer is walking away from these milestones,” said Donahue.

The third is the delay by a week of the first milestone.

“We have frankly lost time as we … were communicating with the lenders,” said Donahue.

The new additions, said Belmont Selectman Chair Sami Baghdady, will be beneficial to Belmont as it will allow the development to move forward whoever is in control of the project.

Saying that “we’re all frustrated to be here again” Baghdady said when looking at the development “in the bigger picture, we have to say to ourselves, ‘OK, what’s best for Belmont?'”

None of the proposed language affects the one-year extension “and it’s still ticking,” said Baghdady. If the developer misses any of the milestone conditions, “we don’t want the special permit to terminate. We do want the lender to have the opportunity to come in, secure the project, take it over, finish the construction, cure, remedy and proceed.”

“We don’t want a hole in the ground … and if this developer can’t make it continue, it is good for Belmont to have some else move in and move this project forward,” he said.

Cushing Village, at 164,000 sq.-ft. encompassing three buildings and two town blocks, would be the largest development in Belmont in recent memory. When completed in 18 months, the $63 million project will include 115 residential units, 38,000 sq.-ft. of retail spaces and underground parking that includes 50 municipal spaces.

After the closing, the public will see heavy equipment come to the municipal parking lot, the first building site, a few days later as the lot will be closed for the final time on Christmas week, according to Tony Papantonis, president and founder of Needham-based Nauset Construction.

Demolition of the S.S. Pierce building (at the corner of Common and Trapelo) and the former CVS building at Common and Belmont would then begin as well as prep work on the municipal lot within two weeks, in the first weeks of January 2016.

Back Again: Cushing Village to Seek More Changes to Development Permit

December 2, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker Leave a Comment

Photo: The proposed Cushing Village development (left) and what is currently at the location (right).

Only three weeks after receiving an extension allowing it an additional year to construct its long-stalled project, the developers of the troubled Cushing Village residential/commercial/parking complex at Common Street and Trapelo Road will be back once again before the town’s Planning Board on Thursday, Dec. 3, as the project’s money backers are expected to demand modifications to the agreement to provide them even more legal and financial cover in the event the deal falls apart.

While neither the developer, Smith Legacy’s Chris Starr, nor the town’s point person on the project, the Office of Community Development’s Jeffrey Wheeler, would indicate what section of the extension requires altering, the one-year deadline of the special permit itself would not be affected, according to Sami Baghdady, chair of the Board of Selectmen.

Baghdady led the Planning Board when it awarded the special permit to Starr in July 2013 to build a 164,000 sq.-ft. three-building development with 115 units of housing, shops and underground parking in the heart of Cushing Square.

This time, it’s the developer’s financial backers who are demanding the changes.

“It is my understanding that the proposed modifications to the one-year extension of the special permit are at the request of the developers’ lenders,” said Baghdady, who said the thrust of the revisions is to allow the lenders the opportunity to protect their interests in the event that the developer does not meet the time deadlines of the conditions.

But even Baghdady said the public will know the exact implications of the changes when the agenda item is taken up by the Planning Board.

“It is difficult to comment any further without the benefit of the developer’s presentation at the hearing,” said Baghdady.

Thursday marks the third time since August that the development team requested and received extensions and modifications to the special permit issued nearly 30 months ago.

The latest extension, for 12 months, issued on Nov. 17, also stipulated the developers meet three strict deadlines as part of the agreement:

The developers must close on the deed for the municipal parking lot at a cost of $850,000 by Friday, Dec. 11,
Begin initial demolition on Friday, Jan. 15, 2016, and
Seek a building foundation permit from the town by Monday, Feb. 1, 2016.

The meeting’s timing is also somewhat interesting, as it will occur at the same time thousands of Belmont residents will be attending the annual “Turn on the Town” Holiday Tree Lighting Ceremony taking place in Belmont Center, a block from Town Hall.

Belmont Police has issued traffic bulletins advising residents of road closures in the Center including Leonard Street being closed at 5:30 p.m., making travel to Town Hall difficult.

Traditionally, the Planning Board holds meetings on Tuesday evenings.

Sold in Belmont: The Roof on the Exploding Colonial, No-So-High French Country

November 30, 2015 By Franklin B. Tucker Leave a Comment

Photo: 25 Greensbrook Way.

A weekly recap of residential properties sold in the past seven-plus days in the “Town of Homes:

15 Temple St., Colonial (1928). Sold: $1,060,000.

47 Homer Rd., Colonial (1940). Sold: $917,500.

10 Marlboro St., Unit 1., Condominium (2006). Sold: $420,000.

93 Country Club Lane, French Country-style (1938). Sold: $894,000.

138 Dean St., Brick Ranch (1957). Sold: $765,00.

25 Greensbrook Way, Great exploding Colonial (2008). Sold: $2,010,000.

• 15 Temple St., Colonial (1928). Sold: $1,060,000. Listed at $1,150,000,. Living area: 2,426 sq.-ft. 10 rooms, 5 bedrooms, 2 full, 2 half baths. On the market: 68 days.

• 10 Marlboro St., Unit 1., Condominium (2006). Sold: $420,000. Listed at $449,000. Living area: 1,140 sq.-ft. 5 rooms, 2 bedrooms, 1 bath. On the market: 74 days.

• 47 Homer Rd., Colonial (1940). Sold: $917,500. Listed at $885,000. Living area: 2,094 sq.-ft. 8 rooms, 4 bedrooms, 2.5 baths. On the market: 130 days.

• 93 Country Club Lane, French Country-style (1938). Sold: $894,000. Listed at $1,149,000 Living area: 2,225 sq.-ft. 5 rooms, 4 bedrooms, 3 baths. On the market: 65 days.

• 138 Dean St., Brick Ranch (1957). Sold: $765,00. Listed at $789,000. Living area: 1,353 sq.-ft. 7 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 2 baths. On the market: 61 days.

• 25 Greensbrook Way, Great exploding Colonial (2008). Sold: $2,010,000. Listed at $2,245,000. Living area: 5,663 sq.-ft. 10 rooms, 5 bedrooms, 4.5 baths. On the market: 92 days.

The town calls the design of the pretty house on Country Club Lane a “French Country style” house, which, while popular in some part of the country, never really caught on here.

On closer inspection, the Belmont structure has few of the typical design elements associated with the French countryside; stonework and stone floors, wood beams, a large fireplace, small, panelled windows with heavy shutters and a mishmash of styles.

It was also overpriced, even by Belmont Hill standards. Nearing 80 years old without any significant improvements, a nearly $1.15 million price tag – or more than $500 per square foot (that’s new construction value) sent most people out the door. It’s little wonder the owners took a steep $200,000 reduction in the initial offer.

• • •

The builders of the structure on nearby Greensbrook Way decided they needed to build the equivalent of a second house on the sode of their massive exploding Colonial. Because who doesn’t have use for nearly 5,700 square feet of livable space! You literally need roller skates to effectively get around the place. The “main” section is all about space with a massive 19-foot ceiling height (If you need to ask how do you heat this barn, you can’t afford it!) and blown out walls to give almost freakish amount of openiness. And what wouldn’t a house be without a 1,000 sq. ft. master suite. The secondary section has bedrooms, au-pair suites, a media room and three vehicle garage.

Built and first sold in 2008, there is one thing somewhat particular about the house: it appears to have a hard ceiling on the final sales price. Both in 2008 and this year, the house sold for a deep discount of its list price, coming in at $2,010,000 (giving back $685,000 and $235,000 respectively) each time. You can understand the first sale being impacted by the financial crisis on 2008-9 but what kept the buyers holding onto their wallets is a question mark. Is the popularity of the “small(er)” house movement creeping upward impacting the supply of high-end buyers?

«Previous Page
1
…
8
9
10
11
12
…
21
Next Page»

The Belmontonian

Belmont's Independent Media Outlet Covering the 'Town of Homes'