Senior housing builder considers taking Worcester to Land Court over rejection
Photo | Grant Welker
The entrance to the Bramble Hill site on Salisbury Street
One week after the Worcester Planning Board rejected plans for an age-restricted housing at the former Bramble Hill mansion, the developer is considering its options.
“My client is bitterly disappointed,” said Mark Donahue, the Worcester attorney from Fletcher Tilton representing Hills Properties of Cincinnati, Ohio. “We are evaluating our next move.”
Last week, the developer failed to get four votes, the requirement for a special permit from the five-member panel.
Hills is seeking approval to demolish the 118-year-old home on the 17-acre property near the Holden town line vacant for more than a decade.
In its place, 123 apartments would be built in three-story buildings adjacent to Salisbury Hills, a senior community where another developer is seeking to add 114 single-family homes.
Premiere Properties of North Andover bought the vacant Georgian Revival-style home last year for $820,000. The nine-bedroom home is assessed by the City of Worcester at $1.2 million.
Hills has the property under agreement for an undisclosed price Donahue said.
In September, the Worcester Regional Chamber of Commerce issued a report saying the city is in the midst of a housing crisis. If it goes unaddressed, rents will continue to rise and the city’s economic growth could stall, the chamber found.
“When you read that report, and hear the city manager say we must grow our housing stock, the Planning Board decision baffles my client,” Donahue said. “We spent a lot of time with the neighborhood where it was well-received.”
Among the options under consideration, he said is an appeal to Massachusetts Land Court; Hills could walk away from the deal and leave it to the property’s owner to consider the next step; or the developer could ask the panel to reconsider the request for a special permit.
“There are lots of people over 55 who are sick and tired of taking care of their Colonial or paying someone to do it,” he said. “Senior housing is a cash cow for a city because the residents do not require any services.”
John Vigliotti, chairman of the Planning Board who was one of the no votes, declined a request for an interview. In an email he wrote: "Based upon the threat of litigation by the developer, I will have no comment on the matter at this time."
Opponents insisted the plan failed to meet the city’s requirements for continuing care retirement communities.
They argued at the planning board meeting just building apartments for seniors does not include a way for residents to age in place, one of the city’s provisions.
In addition, they said, the project lacks nursing and medical care, needed services as elders age in place.
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments