The City Council today unanimously approved a $110-million fund to help finance new housing in the city through low-cost loans for new housing that meets certain city criteria for affordable units, the use of minority- and women-owned subcontractors and climate resiliency.
The measure now goes to Mayor Wu for her signature, which it will likely get since she proposed a version of the measure last year.
Under the proposal, as loans, with rates between 4% and 6%, are repaid, new loans would go out for additional projects.
Projects would have to have already been approved by the BPDA and zoning board and set aside at least 20% of their units as affordable - compared to the 17% normally required for new developments, according to Councilor Brian Worrell (Dorchester), who also proposed a version of the fund.
Developers would also get priority if their construction workforce matches the city's overall resident diversity, if they have a track record of hiring Boston residents, if their projects are particularly climate resilient, have community support and include ground-floor space for particular types of community ventures, such as day-care facilities, pharmacies and grocery stores.
The first project to benefit could be a currently stalled mixed-income building as part of the massive re-build of the Bunker Hill housing development in Charlestown.
Councilors approved the measure unanimously, but only after a contentious debate on a proposal by Councilor Julia Mejia (at large) to put off a vote for a week so she could hold a hearing to get more details on the proposal.
Mejia cautioned her fellow councilors should not try to make her out as an opponent, when she fully supports more housing, she just wants to get answers on questions such as how to ensure developers really do hire Boston residents. Referring specifically to Bunker Hill, she declared: "Charlestown knows I go hard for them. I don't want to be gaslit."
But Worrell said his committee had already held five public hearings on the proposal. And Councilor Gabriela Coletta Zapata (Charlestown, East Boston, North End) said Bunker Hill residents have waited more than long enough for progress on their project.
The current Bunker Hill buildings, the units in which will be replaced as new housing is built, "have outlived their purpose," residents have been engaged in efforts to get new housing for ten years even as they continue to live with cockroaches and broken stoves and it's time to get moving. "They deserve dignified housing and what they are living in right now is not dignified."
In the end, the council voted 7-2-1 against delaying a vote to allow another hearing. Councilors Erin Murphy (at large) and Ed Flynn (South Boston, South End, Chinatown, Downtown) voted for a delay - Flynn in part over outrage the city doesn't want to use the new fund to buy new elevators at the Ruth Barkley apartments in the South End. Mejia voted "present."
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Just build more housing
By John
Wed, 01/15/2025 - 4:21pm
The issue isn't the money as much as it is the red tape like the above making it more expensive. In order to qualify for these grants, developers would have to subject themselves to even more regulations in addition to all the standard opposition to development that they're going to see.
I'm sure it could help someone, but simply not over-regulating is free and would help many more people. For every resident that gets a reserved construction job, there are a hundred that are enduring increased housing costs from delayed development.
Just by squinting at it, I
By dvg
Wed, 01/15/2025 - 8:21pm
Just by squinting at it, I can already see enough "if's" in this proposal to practically increase the cost of any projects by 20-30% and more than negate the benefits of the low-interest loan.
Just one example: You want to build something in Charlestown and hire a bunch of trade people from the next-door cities of Everett, Somerville or Chelsea because that’s where a lot of blue-collar people live, and it’s a competitive market. This may disqualify your project from the loan because these folks don’t technically live in the city of Boston and you won't meet the quota. Instead, you must hire from a smaller pool of contractors who live over one (rush) hour away in Dorchester or Mattapan. Few of them will care to travel that far (timewise) if they don’t have to. You can't get competitive bids. Then you also need to hire someone to keep track of where the workers live, the chromosomes they were born with, where they worship, skin complexion, and respond to audits on the requirement. And that was just one of the "if's".
This is the typical type of government overreach that makes it extra expensive to build in Boston. Plenty of people love to write rules with the best intentions without thinking of the unintended consequences.
And build the new subway cars in Springfield!
By BostonDog
Wed, 01/15/2025 - 8:32pm
Yeah, housing is partly so expensive because builders needs to meet all sorts of requirements that have nothing to do with safety.
Somerville is currently building new low-income housing with off-site fabricated blocks. A crane stacks the modules into position much the way a shipping container is loaded. It will take them a fraction of the time to have the whole building finished.
It's almost shocking to see that sort of construction approved because it's so rare in this area. Cities don't want it used because much of the labor happens elsewhere and the design is boxy.
Here is a short video about the project: [url]https://www.instagram.com/dellbrookjks/reel/DB1rA3...
Worcester housing authority is also doing prefab
By hydeparkish
Wed, 01/15/2025 - 9:27pm
You also get great quality since the boxes are built in a factory instead of in the field.
It still only saves 20% I think.
It's largely the acquisition cost of land being so high that is a big challenge no one can find a solution for that keeps housing costs so high.
That and zoning set up to favor single families ....just see the huge fights from the folks in Milton and Needham to try and keep multifamily units from being built in those towns!
This is awesome
By blues_lead
Thu, 01/16/2025 - 9:23am
Pre-fab is often better for many of the workers, too. They can be inside, in a climate-controlled and ventilated building. They don't have to wear all their tools. Their work can be at an appropriate height, rather than needing to hunch over or strain up. And they get to go to the same place every day, so can account for that when looking for a place to live, and not have to deal with the vagaries of a constantly changing commute.
So no construction workers
By cinnamngrl
Thu, 01/16/2025 - 7:11am
So no construction workers live in Charlestown?
Spend Spend Spend
By StillFromDorchester
Thu, 01/16/2025 - 5:02am
Everything will be fine, just pay your taxes on time.
Ezra Klein is right
By W.C. Plains
Thu, 01/16/2025 - 10:31am
Developers would also get priority if their construction workforce matches the city's overall resident diversity, if they have a track record of hiring Boston residents, if their projects are particularly climate resilient, have community support and include ground-floor space for particular types of community ventures, such as day-care facilities, pharmacies and grocery stores.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/02/opinion/democra...
"Liberalism is much better at seeing where the government could spend more than at determining how it could make that spending go farther and faster.
Amen to that. So true, thanks
By dvg
Fri, 01/17/2025 - 6:09am
So true, thanks for sharing this brilliant article and quote; I am afraid I'm going to plaster it all over the place from now on!
Add comment