HomeMy Public PortalAbout2009 Housing Production PlanBrewster Housing Production Plan i
BREWSTER, MASSACHUSETTS
HOUSING PRODUCTION PLAN
Prepared by
Karen Sunnarborg, Housing and Planning Consultant
Funding support from the Town of Brewster’s Community Preservation Fund
June 2009
Brewster Housing Production Plan ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Brewster Community Preservation Committee wishes to acknowledge the help of particular
individuals who provided important input into this project including Jillian Douglas, Assistant
Town Administrator, David Tately, Deputy Town Assessor, Todd French of Kinlin Grover
GMAC Real Estate, Jean Sears from the Council on Aging, Jackalyn Courchesne of the Brewster
Housing Authority, Doreen Contrastano from the Board of Selectmen’s Office, and members of
the Brewster Housing Partnership. Finally, thanks to those members of Brewster boards,
commissions and staff as well as the many residents, who attended the public forum held during
the planning process.
Brewster Housing Production Plan iii
TOWN OF BREWSTER
HOUSING PRODUCTION PLAN
Table of Contents
Page
I. Executive Summary 1
A. Introduction 1
B. Housing Goals 4
C. Summary of Development Challenges 4
D. Summary of Housing Needs Assessment 5
E. Summary of Production Goals 8
F. Summary of Housing Strategies 9
II. Introduction 13
A. Definition of Affordable Housing 15
B. The Planning Process 17
C. Housing Goals 18
III. Housing Needs Assessment 20
A. Demographic Profile 20
1. Population, Race and Household Type 20
2. Age Distribution 21
3. Income 22
4. Poverty 25
5. Employment 25
6. Education 26
7. Disability Status 26
8. Residency in 1995 26
B. Housing Profile 26
1. Housing Characteristics 26
2. Housing Market Conditions 30
C. Cost Analysis of Existing Market Conditions 38
D. Subsidized Housing Inventory 41
1. Current Inventory 43
2. Proposed Projects 46
E. Gaps Between Existing Needs and Current Supply 47
1. Rental Housing Needs 47
2. Homeownership Needs 48
3. Special Population Needs 49
4. Existing Housing Conditions Needs 50
5. Summary of Priority Housing Needs 50
F. Local and Regional Organizations 50
IV. Obstacles to Development/Mitigation Measures 54
A. Infrastructure 54
B. Zoning 54
C. Local Capacity 57
D. School Enrollment 58
Brewster Housing Production Plan iv
Page
E. Transportation 58
F. Environmental Concerns 59
G. Availability of Subsidy Funds 60
H. Community Perceptions 60
V. Property Inventory 61
A. Publicly Owned Properties 61
B. Privately Owned Properties 62
VI. Production Goals 63
VII. Housing Strategies 66
A. Housing Production Strategies 68
B. Zoning and Planning Strategies 75
C. Housing Preservation Strategies 81
D. Capacity Building Strategies 84
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 Summary of Public Forum 93
APPENDIX 2 Summary of Housing Strategies 94
APPENDIX 3 Summary of Housing Regulations 96
and Resources
APPENDIX 4 Glossary of Terms 120
Brewster Housing Production Plan 1
TOWN OF BREWSTER
HOUSING PRODUCTION PLAN
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Introduction
Brewster is located at the inside bend of the elbow of Cape Cod. With approximately 10,000 residents,
Brewster is bordered by Cape Cod Bay on the north, Orleans on the east, Harwich on the south, and
Dennis on the west. Brewster’s small town character, miles of pristine beaches, rich historical connection
to the sea, and rural nature have continued to lure visitors over the years – some who arrive for extended
periods in the summer, others who have decided to purchase second homes, and those searching for a
place to retire. But living in Brewster has become expensive and despite the relatively recent softening of
the housing market, homes remain out of reach for most year-round residents.
A summary of some of the demographic and housing characteristics of Brewster versus Barnstable
County and the state is included in Table I-1. This information also shows how unique Brewster is, with
sizable differences from other communities in the County and the state, some of which can be explained
based on the following factors:
Preserved Open Space
More than one-third of Brewster’s land area has been reserved for conservation, watershed
protection, open space, and recreational purposes. This significant reserve of open space as well
as other environmental constraints places significant burdens on new development.
Housing Growth and Density
The Cape has experienced substantial housing growth in the recent past, fifth highest among the
state’s 14 counties. In regard to resulting increases in density, the Cape is the third highest
among the 14 counties. Brewster is experiencing somewhat greater housing growth than the
County and state, but density levels still remain lower.
Seasonal Housing Pressures
More than 40% of the town’s housing stock is occupied by seasonal or occasional residents as
compared to 32% in Barnstable County as a whole, where one would expect a high level of such
residents, and a state average of only 3.6%. Consequently, in the summer months, Brewster’s
resident population increases exponentially, putting substantial pressure on Town services and the
long-term, permanent population. Town estimates indicate that the total number of visitors
actually comes close to 30,000. This temporary population, however, has bolstered the local
economy and employment has increasingly focused on servicing these temporary residents.
Seasonal workers have also encountered significant challenges locating decent and affordable
housing in Brewster and throughout the Cape.
Older Population
In comparison to the Cape and state in general, Brewster’s population is older, with a median age
of 46.9 years as opposed to 44.6 and 36.5 years for the County and state, respectively.
Additionally, the town had a higher proportion of residents 65 years of age or older, 26.2% versus
23% (34% using 2005 census projections) for the County and only 13.5% for the state. Brewster
also had a substantially higher percentage of those 45 to 54 years of age who are entering the
prime of their earning potential and better able to afford the higher cost of housing, 17% versus
14.8% for the County and 13.8% for the state.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 2
On the other hand, the town had a comparable number of school-age children under 18 years of
age as the County, at a bit more than 20%, but fewer than the level for the state at 23.6%. The
relatively smaller numbers of children relates directly to the increasing numbers of non-family
households and dwindling numbers of those aged 20 to 34 who are forming new families and
entering the labor market, 9.6% of all households in Brewster but 13.2% for the Cape in general
and 21.0% for the state. The high cost of living in Brewster, the lack of affordable housing in
particular, as well as limited employment opportunities are creating barriers for this age group
and making it increasingly more likely that those who were raised in Brewster will not be able to
raise their own families locally.
Table I-1
Summary of Demographic and Housing Characteristics for
Brewster, Barnstable County and the State 20001
Characteristics Brewster Barnstable County Massachusetts
Household Characteristics
% less than 18 years 20.9% 20.4% 23.6%
% 20 to 34 years 9.6% 13.2% 21.0%
% 45 to 54 years 17.0% 14.8% (20.8%) 13.8%
% 65 years or more 26.2% 23.1% (34.4%) 13.5%
Median age 46.9 years 44.6 years 36.5 years
% non-family
households
30.8%
36%
36%
Average household
size
2.34 persons
2.28 persons
2.51 persons
Median income
2000/2009 projections
$49,276/$77,363
$45,933/$72,115
$50,502
Individuals in poverty 3.7% 7% 9%
% earning less than
$25,000
22.6%
24.6%
24.6%
% earning more than
$100,000
12.6%
12.4%
17.7%
Housing Characteristics
% owner-occupied 84.4% 77.8% (79.6%) 61.7%
% renter-occupied 15.6% 22.2% (20.4% 38.3%
% occupied housing 56.2% 64.5% 93.2%
% seasonal or
occasional use
40.3%
32.0%
3.6%
% in single-family,
detached structures
74.9%
82.9%
52.4%
Housing growth
2000 to 2005
5.9%
4.6%
2.5%
Housing density
2000 to 2005
288.0 to 303.4 units per
square mile
371.6 to 388.9 units per
square mile
334.5 to 342.9 units per
square mile
Median sales price/end
of 2008
$198,500/$370,000 $178,800 $185,700
1 Updated data is provided where available, but for many demographic and housing characteristics, the
2000 census is the only source available.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 3
Source: Data for the above table is derived primarily from the 2000 census, however, some updated estimates have been
incorporated. For example, the numbers in parentheses indicate updated census projections based on the 2005 American
Community Survey for the County and demonstrate trends towards a continuing aging population and increased levels of owner-
occupancy.
Higher Incomes
The 2000 median income in Brewster was higher than that for the County, $49,276 and $45,933,
respectively, and comparable to the state median at $50,500. Updated 2009 projections for
Brewster and the Cape are $77,363 and $72,115 respectively. Additionally, the percentage of
those earning less than $25,000 annually was lower in Brewster, 22.6%, while it was 24.6% for
the County and state. On the other hand, there were fewer year-round residents in Brewster and
the County earning more than $100,000, 12% as opposed to 17.7% for the state.
Escalating Housing Market Conditions
The 2000 median house price provides a comparison of Brewster’s housing market to that of
Barnstable County and the state, with significantly higher market values -- $198,500 for
Brewster, $178,800 for the County and $185,700 for the state. Since that time housing prices
have doubled. Brewster’s median house value for a single-family home was $410,000 as of July
2007. To afford this price, a purchaser would have to earn approximately $112,000 based on
conventional lending practices, well beyond the means of most local residents. Since that time the
housing market has slowed down and prices have decreased somewhat, down to $370,000 as of
the end of 2008. Nevertheless, high housing prices are reflected in increased property taxes,
which in combination with rising energy bills and insurance costs, cause a serious financial strain
on long-term residents, particularly those with fixed incomes. Applying the updated median
income estimate of $77,363, based on the 57% change in the HUD median income levels for
Barnstable County between 2000 and 2009, would result in an affordability gap of $65,000, the
difference between what the median income household could afford ($305,000) and the median
priced house ($370,000). This information points to a critical local concern, the divergence
between the high costs of housing and residents’ ability to pay for it, but it should also be noted
that the combination of decreased market prices and interest rates has narrowed the affordability
gap significantly in recent months.
Scarce Supply of Affordable Housing
The supply of housing for working families is dwindling as homes that were priced reasonably in
the past have more than doubled in value given market pressures brought on by a buoyant
regional economy and the demand from the seasonal, second home and retirement market. There
are currently only five single-family homes on the market for less than $300,000 and only another
15 priced below $400,000. Based on the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community
Development’s most recent data on the Chapter 40B Subsidized Housing Inventory, Brewster had
4,379 year-round housing units, of which 253 can be counted as affordable, representing 5.78%
of the year-round housing stock. To meet the state’s 10% affordable housing goal under Chapter
40B of the Massachusetts General Laws, at least 438 of the existing units would have to be
“affordable”.2 This means that right now Brewster is short of the 10% standard by 185 affordable
2 Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969 established the Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Law
(Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B) to facilitate the development of affordable housing for low-
and moderate-income households (defined as any housing subsidized by the federal or state government
under any program to assist in the construction of low- or moderate-income housing for those earning less
than 80% of median income) by permitting the state to override local zoning and other restrictions in
communities where less than 10% of the year-round housing is subsidized for low- and moderate-income
households.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 4
housing units. Assuming future housing growth, this 10% figure is a moving target and
ultimately the required minimum number of affordable units will increase over time.
B. Housing Goals
The Town of Brewster has adopted the following housing goals to help guide the development of specific
strategies for promoting affordable housing:
1. Strive to meet 10% state affordable housing goal. Brewster will promote decent, safe,
affordable housing for rental or purchase to meet the needs of present and future Brewster
residents. In accordance with state law, Brewster will seek to raise its affordable housing
stock to 10% of all year-round units at the rate of 0.50% per year.
2. Serve a variety of housing needs. Brewster will encourage and support affordable
housing that can serve a variety of needs including elderly residents, families with
children, couples, singles, those with disabilities, Town employees and those “at risk” of
losing their housing. In addition, Brewster will strive to promote and support workforce
housing (and especially first-time ownership opportunities) that is affordable to those
with moderate incomes, i.e. between 80% and 120% of area median income.
3. Promote affordable housing that is consistent with smart growth whenever possible.
Encourage the development and the maintenance of affordable housing that is compatible
with the existing semi-rural residential character of the Town, and to the extent feasible,
direct development to those locations that, within a smart growth context, can better support
new development. Smart growth development is a response to the problems associated
with unplanned, unlimited suburban development – or sprawl – and calls for more
efficient land use, a mix of uses, compact development patterns, less dependence on the
automobile, a range of diverse housing opportunities and choices, equitable allocation of
the costs and benefits of development, and an improved jobs/housing balance.
4. Preserve existing affordable housing. Brewster will establish programs and provide
resources to preserve the affordability of its existing affordable housing units.
5. Make zoning and regulatory reforms. Brewster will make the necessary zoning and
regulatory changes to encourage the development of affordable rental units and homes.
This includes measures to promote smart growth development.
6. Encourage partnerships. Brewster will work with other towns and with state and regional
agencies to support affordable housing at the regional level. Brewster will encourage the
private, public and semi-public sectors to cooperate in utilizing existing housing stock and
creating new units to meet affordable housing needs.
C. Summary of Development Challenges
Undertaking a more proactive housing agenda to promote affordable housing will be a significant
challenge in Brewster. First, the town’s resources for absorbing growth are limited given significant
physical constraints. In addition to the considerable extent of the town’s preserved open and recreational
space, Brewster has no sewer services and some areas are still without municipal water, making denser
development more costly and difficult. This raises concerns among residents about water supply and
water quality impacts of any new development
Second, local zoning provides substantial obstacles to affordable housing development, and current
regulations would have to be reformed or in many cases overridden through “friendly” comprehensive
permits to overcome these barriers. Zoning for accelerated growth raises local questions concerning
capacity and changing the very nature of the community with its small town distinctions.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 5
Third, the Town needs to establish the means of building its capacity to promote more affordable
development by aggressively reaching out for necessary technical and financial resources and building the
political support needed to get the job done. It must also strive to effectively manage the Town’s limited
assets as a whole, and direct growth most effectively for the overall environmental and social health of the
community. Besides Community Preservation Funds, Brewster has limited resources to support
affordable housing. Because the Town has little commercial and industrial uses, it relies predominantly
on property taxes raised through its residential base. While tax revenues have increased based on rising
property values, Brewster, like other nearby communities, has a relatively low tax rate of $5.96 per
thousand as opposed to more than $15.00 per thousand in quite a few other communities in the Boston
region.
This Housing Production Plan suggests a range of options for meeting pressing local housing needs and
bringing Brewster closer to the state’s 10% affordable housing goal, presenting a proactive housing
agenda of Town-sponsored initiatives based on documented local needs. Due to the high costs of
homeownership, including escalating costs associated with taxes, insurance3 and utilities, some residents
are finding it increasingly difficult to afford to remain in Brewster. Children who grew up in the town are
now facing the possibility that they may not be able to return to raise their own families locally. Long-
term residents, especially the elderly, are finding themselves less able to maintain their homes and keep
up with increased expenses, but are unable to find alternative housing that better meets their current life
styles. Families are finding it more difficult to “buy up,” purchasing larger homes as their families grow.
Town employees and employees of local businesses are increasingly hard pressed to find housing that is
affordable in Brewster and are confronted with longer commutes as the increasing affluence of the area
squeezes them out of the housing market. Clearly more housing options are required to meet local needs
and produce Brewster’s fair share of regional needs.
D. Summary of Housing Needs Assessment
The Housing Needs Assessment examines the issue of housing in Brewster, particularly housing
affordability, to present a documented snapshot of current conditions and trends. It also looks at the gaps
between what housing is available to serve local residents and what is required to meet local needs,
including a review of local, regional and state resources. Based on the Housing Needs Assessment, there
are a number of key indicators that suggest there are significant local needs for affordable housing that go
beyond what is required to meet the 10% state goal including:
1. Households with Limited Incomes
Despite increasing household wealth, there are substantial numbers of households with incomes
below $25,000, 932 households or almost 23% of all households, based on 2000 census data.
There are substantially more of these households than subsidized units available (254 units), and
they are challenged to compete in Brewster’s very tight housing market.
There were 1,423 households with incomes at or below 80% of the 2000 area median income.
Therefore, based on income alone, about 35% of Brewster’s households might qualify for
housing assistance.4
The numbers of residents living in poverty have declined over the past couple of decades,
however, there still remains a population within the town of Brewster, including 360 individuals
and 45 families in 2000, who were living below poverty level.
3 Following Hurricane Katrina, more insurance companies are deciding to no longer offer insurance in
“high risk” areas, including Brewster, and as a result insurance costs ar e doubling. Many residents are now
being referred to the state’s Fair Plan, which is not designed to serve areas like Brewster.
4 While these households’ incomes might be at or below 80% of area median income, many households are
likely to have assets, particularly if they are homeowners, that are more than the allowable state or federal
standards that would disqualify them from housing assistance.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 6
There were 254 households earning at or below 30% of area median income, referred to by HUD
as extremely low-income households, and of these 193 were owners and 61 were renters. Of
these households, 71.5% of the owners and 55.7% of the renters, or 172 total households, were
spending more than 50% of their income on housing-related expenses.
Of the 439 households earning between 30% and 50% of area median income, referred to as very
low-income households, more than half were spending over 30% of their income on housing and
another 30% were spending more than 50% on housing.
There were 730 households earning between 50% and 80% of median income and more than one-
quarter were spending over 30% of their income on housing with about 5% spending more than
50% on housing.
The significant resort economy in Brewster causes fluctuations in the job force that increases in
the summer months to serve seasonal needs. At this point there are few housing options in
Brewster to house these lower paid seasonal workers.
Priority Need #1: Given the high costs of housing, more subsidized rental housing is necessary
to make living in Brewster more affordable, particularly for those described above with very
limited financial means.
2. Affordability Gaps
In 2000 there were almost 1,000 households, or about one-quarter of all Brewster households,
who were living in housing that by common definition was beyond their means and unaffordable
as they were paying more than 30% of their income on housing-related expenses.
Real estate listings as of August 21, 2007, did not include any single-family homes on the market
in Brewster for less than $200,000, only five for less than $300,000, and just another 15 priced
below $400,000. Consequently, almost all listings were priced out of the range of the average
household much less low- and moderate-income households.
Applying the updated median income estimate of $77,363 based on the 57% change in the HUD
median income levels for Barnstable County between 2000 and 2009, would result in an
affordability gap of $65,000 as of the end of 2008, the difference between what the median
income household could afford and the median priced house. The affordability gap has in fact
widened from $23,500 in 2000 to $155,000 in mid-2007 and then based on the combination of
lower real estate prices and interest rates decreased to $130,000 as of June 2008 to half that
amount, $65,000, as of the end of 2008.
For those earning at 80% of area median income, the affordability gap was $229,500 in 2007, the
difference between the maximum they could afford of $180,500 and $410,000, the median priced
house at that time. This gap decreased to $204,500 in mid-2008 due to further softening of the
housing market and lower interest rates and decreased further to $150,000 as of the end of 2008.
In regard to rentals, the gross median rent of $770, according to the 2000 census, required an
income of about $30,800 (assuming utilities are included in the rent), which was within the means
of two-person households earning at about 80% of area median income in 2000. Nevertheless,
approximately 1,130 or 27% of Brewster’s households would still have been unable to afford to
rent at that level. Rental levels have increased substantially as average winters rentals are
currently about $1,000 and year-round rents about $1,500.
Demographic trends also suggest that those entering the labor market and forming new families in
Brewster are dwindling in numbers, reducing the pool of entry-level workers and service
employees. For example, in 1980 this group comprised about 23% of Brewster’s residents, but
by 2000 the number of those in this age category had dropped from almost 2,000 residents to less
than 1,000, comprising less than 10% of the town’s population.
Priority Need #2: Wider range of affordable housing options including first-time homeownership
opportunities, particularly for younger households entering the job market and forming their own
families, as well as for empty nesters.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 7
3. Special Needs Households
More than 2,000 residents that claimed some kind of disability in 2000. Of the population age 5
to 20 years old, 210 or 10.6% had some disability. Of those aged 21 to 64, 1,291 residents, or
more than one-quarter of the persons in the age range, claimed a disability, and 168 were
unemployed, likely due to their disability. Also, 552 seniors or about one-quarter of those in this
age group claimed some type of disability. These levels of disability, particularly that of seniors,
represent significant special needs within the Brewster community.
There were 89 extremely low-income elderly owners (earning at or below 30% of area income)
spending more than 50% of their incomes on housing.
There were 23 seniors who rented and were spending more than 50% of their income on housing.
As a result of two (2) projects that underwent Cape Cod Commission review, the Town has six
(6) affordable assisted living units and another six (6) under construction. However, given the
high number of seniors in Brewster, including those with disabilities, more of this type of housing
is needed.
Priority Need #3: Some amount of new housing should be built handicapped-adaptable or accessible to
the disabled, including seniors, and more supportive housing services should also be integrated into new
development – goal of 10% of all new units created.
4. Existing Housing Conditions
About 25% of Brewster’s housing stock was built prior to 1970, and houses in this age category
are more likely to have traces of lead-based paint, posing safety hazards to children, as well as
problems concerning aging system and structural conditions.
Brewster does not have municipal sewer services and consequently it is likely that some septic
systems require repairs.
Priority Need #4: Programs to support necessary home improvements, including deleading and septic
repairs for units occupied by low- and moderate-income households, particularly the elderly living on
fixed incomes, and including investor-owned properties tenanted by qualifying households.
This Housing Needs Assessment suggests that over the next five (5) years the Town of Brewster
establish the following targeted affordable housing production goals and priority housing needs.
Table I-2
Summary of Priority Housing Needs and Targeted Production Goals
Type of Housing Seniors/One
Bedroom Units
Small Families/
2 Bedrooms
Large Families/
3+ Bedrooms
Total
Rental 40 30 12 82
Ownership 6 6 26 38
Special Needs* (4) (4) (4) (12)
Total 46 36 38 120
Source: 2000 HUD SOCDS CHAS and Census data, Karen Sunnarborg Consulting
* These numbers reflect about 10% of new units created.
Also worth noting is that, provided the community can demonstrate the associated need and the absence
of any discriminatory impacts, up to 70% of units in an affordable housing development can be set-aside
as “local or community preference units.” Within the parameters of fair housing laws and Chapter 40B
guidelines, the criteria for these units can be defined by the Town as Brewster residents, employees of the
Town of Brewster (including the School District) or employees of businesses located in Brewster.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 8
E. Summary of Production Goals
The state administers the Housing Production Program that enables cities and towns to adopt an
affordable housing plan that demonstrates production of .50% over one year or 1.0% over two-
years of its year-round housing stock eligible for inclusion in the Subsidized Housing Inventory.5
Brewster would have to produce at least 22 affordable units annually to meet these production
goals through 2010. When the 2010 census figures become available in 2011, this number will be
higher, most likely closer to 25 units.
If a community has achieved certification6 within 15 days of the opening of the local hearing for a
comprehensive permit, the ZBA shall provide written notice to the applicant, with a copy to
DHCD, that it considers that denial of the permit or the imposition of conditions or requirements
would be Consistent with Local Needs, the grounds that it believes have been met, and the factual
basis for that position, including any necessary supportive documentation.
If the Applicant wishes to challenge the ZBA’s assertion, it must do so by providing written
notice to DHCD, with a copy to the ZBA, within 15 days of its receipt of the ZBA’s notice,
including any documentation to support its position. DHCD shall review the materials provided
by both parties and issue a decision within 30 days of its receipt of all materials. The ZBA shall
have the burden of proving satisfaction of the grounds for asserting that denial or approval with
conditions would be consistent with local needs, provided, however, that any failure of the
DHCD to issue a timely decision shall be deemed a determination in favor of the municipality.
This procedure shall toll the requirement to terminate the hearing within 180 days.
Using the strategies summarized in Section VII, the Town of Brewster has developed a Housing
Production Program to project affordable housing production over a five -year period, however,
there is likely to be a great deal of fluidity in these estimates from year to year. The goals are
based largely on the following criteria:
At a minimum, at least 50% of the units that are developed on publicly owned parcels
should be affordable to households earning at or below 80% of area median income and
at least another 10% affordable to those earning up to 120% of area median income,
depending on project feasibility. The rental projects will also target some households
earning at or below 50% or 60% of area median income depending upon subsidy program
requirements.
Projections are typically based on a minimum of four units per acre. However, given
specific site conditions and financial feasibility it may be appropriate to increase or
decrease density as long as projects are in compliance with state Title V and wetlands
regulations.
Because housing strategies include some development on privately owned parcels,
production will involve projects sponsored by private developers through the standard
regulatory process or “friendly” comprehensive permit process. The Town plans to
promote increased affordability in these projects when possible.
The projections involve a mix of rental and ownership opportunities. The Town will
work with developers to promote a diversity of housing types directed to different
5 The state has only recently adopted changes to Chapter 40B, including modifications to production
requirements, what had previously been referred to as Planned Production. For example, the annual
production goals are now based on one-half of one percent of total housing units as opposed to three-
quarters of one percent in the past.
6 Certification means that the community has met its production goal.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 9
populations with housing needs including families, seniors and other individuals with
special needs to offer a wider range of housing options for residents.
Production goals over the next five (5) years include the creation of 133 affordable units (for
those earning at or below 80% of area median income), 12 units (for those earning between 80%
and 120% of area median), and 74 market units with a total projected number of housing units
created of 219 units.
F. Summary of Housing Strategies
The strategies outlined below are based on previous plans, reports, studies, the Housing Needs
Assessment, housing goals (see Section I.B above) and the experience of other comparable
localities in the region and throughout the Commonwealth. The strategies are grouped according
to the type of action proposed – Housing Production, Zoning and Regulatory Reforms, Housing
Preservation and Building Local Capacity – and prioritized. Highest priority actions are those
that will be implemented within the next two years, most of which will involve some immediate
actions, and lower priority strategies are those that will involve focused attention after the next
couple of years, working towards implementation after Year 2 but before Year 5. A summary of
these actions is included in Appendix 2.
Within the context of Chapter 40B compliance issues, local needs, existing resources, affordability
requirements and the goals listed in Section II of this Plan, the following housing strategies are offered for
consideration. It is important to note that these strategies are presented as a package for the Town to
consider, prioritize, and process, each through the appropriate regulatory channels. Moreover, all of
the proposed actions present opportunities to judiciously invest limited Community Preservation funding
to build local capacity, modify or create new local zoning provisions and development policies, subsidize
actual unit production (predevelopment funding and/or subsidies to fill the gap between total development
costs and the affordable rent or purchase prices) and leverage additional resources, and help preserve the
existing affordable housing stock.
1. Housing Production Strategies
To accomplish the actions included in this Housing Production Plan and meet production goals, it
will be essential for the Town of Brewster to reach out to the development community and
sources of public and private financing to secure the necessary technical and financial resources
to create actual affordable units. While some of the units produced may rely on the participation
of existing homeowners, most of the production will require joint ventures with developers – for
profit and non-profit – to create affordable housing.
Make publicly-owned land available for affordable housing
Conduct necessary feasibility studies for publicly owned properties and convey suitable Town-
owned properties for some amount of affordable housing. The Town should formalize its process
of determining the future use of surplus municipal properties, convening all stakeholders
including the Brewster Housing Partnership.
Support private development in line with local guidelines
Reach out to local developers who have been active in producing affordable housing to discuss the
Town’s interest in promoting these units, possible areas and opportunities for new development, local
guidelines and priorities for new development and the prospects for working together in the future. This
will be particularly useful after the Town has produced Affordable Housing Guidelines and has passed
key zoning changes. Also, establish a process for reviewing local development proposals in their early
conceptual stages to provide useful feedback to developers on preliminary plans.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 10
Convert existing housing to long-term affordability
Explore various program models for converting existing housing to units that have long-term affordability
restrictions and prepare an implementation plan that outlines program procedures and the respective roles
and responsibilities of various municipal staff persons and boards and committees. Community
Preservation Funds and potentially HOME funding from the Barnstable County HOME Consortium could
be allocated to the program to provide the necessary subsidies.
Promote accessory apartments
Provide information to residents to promote the use of the recently revised accessory apartment
bylaw and monitor its effectiveness. If it is not being used, explore efforts in other communities
to promote affordable accessory apartments, such as Wellfleet’s, and determine how best to move
forward locally including the possible addition of a CPA-funded rehabilitation loan program.
2. Zoning and Planning Strategies
The Town of Brewster should consider the following planning and zoning-related strategies to
provide appropriate incentives and guidance to promote the creation of additional affordable
units:
Encourage more flexible cluster zoning
Amend Brewster’s Zoning Bylaw to incorporate density bonuses as incentives for producing affordable
units in new developments and promote cluster zoning as a “smarter” way for developing new sites to
better protect the environment and the rural character of Brewster while offering a broader range of
housing options that can promote affordability.
Adopt inclusionary zoning
Adopt inclusionary zoning to ensure that any new residential development in Brewster
provides a percentage of affordable units or cash in lieu of units.
Allow starter housing on noncomplying lots
Explore zoning options for promoting starter homes on lots that do not meet minimum
area or dimensional requirements but might still be suitable for the development of
smaller homes, and prepare and adopt a zoning bylaw to enable these lots to be developed
under specific criteria including the incorporation of affordability and sensitivity to
groundwater protection areas.
Promote mixed-use development
Promote mixed residential and commercial development through changes in the Zoning Bylaw,
directing such development to places in town that already allow commercial uses and are better
suited to higher density development.
Adopt Affordable Housing Guidelines
Prepare and approve Affordable Housing Guidelines to provide guidance to developers
on the types of housing proposals that will be acceptable to the community.
Review the effectiveness of the accessory apartment bylaw and modify if necessary
Monitor the use of the recently revised accessory apartments to determine its effectiveness and if
necessary, explore efforts in other communities to promote affordable accessory apartments, such
as Wellfleet’s, and determine how best to move forward locally.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 11
3. Housing Preservation Strategies
Housing production is critical, but the Town also needs to be concerned that all eligible
affordable units are counted as affordable in the Subsidized Housing Inventory and it does not
lose existing affordable units to the greatest extent possible. Efforts should also be made to refer
eligible homeowners to existing programs that can address the deferred home maintenance needs
of lower income residents, including seniors.
Reconcile Subsidized Housing Inventory
Continue to provide necessary information to DHCD to have eligible units qualify as
affordable in the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
Insure long-term affordability
Insure that all affordable units, current and future, remain a part of the Town’s Subsidized
Housing Inventory to the greatest extent possible.
Help qualifying homeowners access housing assistance
Disseminate information and make referrals to local, regional and state programs that
provide technical and financial assistance to help qualifying property owners make
necessary home improvements including building code violations, septic repairs,
handicapped accessibility improvements and lead paint removal.
4. Capacity Building Strategies
In order to be able to carry out the strategies included in this Housing Plan and meet production
goals, it will be important for the Town of Brewster to build its capacity to promote affordable
housing activities. This capacity includes gaining access to greater resources – financial and
technical – as well as building local political support, continuing to develop partnerships with
public and private developers and lenders, and creating and augmenting local organizations and
systems that will support new housing production.
Hire a Housing Coordinator
Hire the necessary professional support to provide ongoing staff-support to effectively
coordinate the implementation of various components of the Housing Production Plan,
most likely, at least initially, on a part-time basis.
Investigate the feasibility of creating a Municipal Affordable Housing Trust Fund
While the Town has established a housing fund under the control of the Board of
Selectmen, some further consideration should be made to creating a Municipal
Affordable Housing Trust Fund provided for under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter
44, Section 55C as a permanent municipal entity for overseeing the implementation of the
Housing Production Plan.
Establish partnerships
Reach out to private, public and nonprofit entities to secure additional housing resources
– technical and financial – in support of efforts to produce affordable housing, using
Community Preservation funding as important leverage.
Conduct ongoing educational campaign
Continue to engage the community in discussions on affordable housing to present
information on the issue needed to dispel myths and negative stereotypes and to help
galvanize local support, political and financial, for new production.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 12
Establish Annual Housing Summits
Establish at least annual meetings of relevant Town boards and committees to focus on
affordable housing issues, promoting more effective communication and coordination on
housing initiatives.
Encourage training for board and committee members
Promote opportunities for Town board and committee members to take advantage of
ongoing training and educational programs related to affordable housing.
Continue to apply for Commonwealth Capital Scoring
Continue to submit the application for Commonwealth Capital scoring that is used by the state to
allocate a wide range of discretionary funding related to the environment, transportation,
infrastructure, economic development, and housing. Municipalities are scored in large part
related to the progress they have made towards promoting smart growth development.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 13
II. INTRODUCTION
Brewster is primarily a rural, residential community located on the bay side of Cape Cod, approximately
16 miles east of Hyannis and 85 miles from both Boston and Providence. More than one-third of
Brewster’s land area has been reserved for conservation, watershed protection, open space, and
recreational purposes. Among Brewster’s greatest physical assets are approximately 325 acres of beaches
and marshlands as well as 24 ponds larger than ten acres in size. This significant reserve of open space as
well as undevelopable natural resources, six (6) miles of coast, a rich history, and quaint New England
seaside charm, serve to draw summer visitors, second home owners and retirees to Brewster, but also
place substantial pressure on existing developable land. Additionally, significant population growth,
particularly in the summer season, while stimulating the local economy, also presents the town with a
host of other challenges. A compelling question is whether Brewster will be able to sustain the diversity
of ages, occupations, and incomes residents so treasure in light of high land and home values?
Brewster town, Barnstable County, Massachusetts
20 miles across
Population growth has put significant pressures on the town, local services and the housing market in
particular, as the population almost quadrupled in size between 1970 and 1990, from 2,220 residents to
8,415. During the 1980s and 1990s, the population nearly doubled in size, and during this timeframe
experienced substantial demographic shifts as almost 4,000 new housing units were created. During this
same time period seasonal housing units increased from 10% to 40% of the housing stock, median
incomes grew from $15,687 to almost $50,000, and housing values soared to more than $400,000.
Population growth since 1960 is summarized in Table II-1.
Table II-1
Brewster Housing Production Plan 14
Population Change
1960-January 2007
Increase From Previous Period
Year
Population
Increase in
# Residents
Percentage
Change
1960 1,237 -- --
1970 2,220 983 79.5%
1980 5,226 3,006 135%
1990 8,415 3,189 61.0%
2000 10,094 1,679 20.0%
January 2007 10,332 238 2.4%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau and Town of Brewster.
This population growth is graphically presented in the following chart.
Figure II-1
Population Growth 1960 to January 2007
1,237
2,220
5,226
8,415
10,094 10,332
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Jan-07
YearNumber of Residents As mentioned above, a substantial portion of the housing growth has been attributable to seasonal
residents, the second home market or retirement households. This seasonal or occasional housing
stock increased from 372 units in 1980 to 2,751 units in 1990 and up to 2,960 units in 2000, a
700% increase during this time period involving growth of about 2,600 seasonal units. In 2000,
this component of the housing stock represented about 40% of all Brewster units. The seasonal
and second home market has placed enormous pressures on Brewster, causing dramatic increases
in housing prices and taxing local infrastructure and services, particularly in the summer months
when estimates indicate that there are up to 30,000 visitors.
High housing prices, which often characterize resort-housing markets, have depleted the affordable
housing stock with the exception of tiny condominium units. As of August 21, 2007, there were no
single-family homes listed on the market for less than $200,000 and only five active listings for less than
$300,000. Only 20 houses were for sale at less than $400,000. Consequently those with incomes of less
than $110,000 and without substantial financial assets are virtually shutout of the private housing market
Brewster Housing Production Plan 15
based on conventional lending requirements. The median single-family house price as of the end of July
2007 was $410,000, affordable to households earning at least $112,000, substantially greater than the
median income of about $43,000 in the last census and adjusted current median income of $77,363.
In regard to the future, the Buildout Analysis that was performed by the state’s Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs in 20007, projected that the town of Brewster could support an additional 1,464
households or housing units based on current zoning. The analysis also projected approximately 3,652
additional residents and 593 more school children. Infrastructure requirements to support this added
growth included about 271,180 gallons of water per day and 1,854 tons of municipal solid waste per year,
of which a projected 535 tons would be non-recyclable. This analysis further indicated that in order to
meet the 10% state standard, the projected population growth would require at least an additional 146
units of affordable housing over and above the 185 units required based on the 2000 year-round housing
unit count. Therefore, approximately 330 units of affordable housing would be required for build-out
(once again this is premised on current zoning), though it is worth noting that the analysis does not project
how long it will take to achieve actual buildout. This goal would be remarkable without a considerable
investment of public and private resources and strong political will.
This Housing Production Plan provides documentation on local needs and suggests a range of options to
meet these needs and to bring Brewster closer to the state’s 10% affordable housing goal, presenting a
proactive housing agenda of Town-sponsored initiatives. Due to the rising costs of homeownership,
including escalating costs associated with taxes, insurance and utilities, some residents are finding it
increasingly difficult to afford to remain in Brewster. Children who grew up in the town are now facing
the possibility that they may not be able to return to raise their own families locally. Long-term residents,
especially the elderly, are finding themselves less able to maintain their homes and keep up with
increased real estate taxes and energy costs but unable to find alternative housing that better meets their
current life styles. Families are finding it more difficult to “buy up,” purchasing larger homes as their
families grow. Town employees and employees of local businesses are increasingly hard pressed to find
housing that is affordable in Brewster. Another trend is for residents to rent out their homes in the
summer months and camp or move in with relatives during this period in order to afford to live in
Brewster, and the occupants of the Housing Authority’s family housing development have all been at risk
of homelessness if not actually homeless. Clearly more housing options are required to meet local needs
and produce Brewster’s fair share of regional needs.
A. Definition of Affordable Housing
There are a number of definitions of affordable housing as federal and state programs offer various
criteria. For example, HUD generally identifies units as affordable if gross rent (including costs of
utilities borne by the tenant) is no more than 30% of a household’s net adjusted income (with a small
deduction for each dependent, for child care, for extraordinary medical expenses, etc.) or if the carrying
costs of purchasing a home (mortgage, homeowners association fees, property taxes and insurance) is not
more than typically 30% of net adjusted income. If households are paying more than these amounts, they
are described as experiencing housing affordability problems; and if they are paying 50% or more for
housing, they have severe housing affordability problems and heavy cost burdens.
Affordable housing can also defined according to percentages of median income for the area. Housing
subsidy programs can be targeted to particular income ranges depending upon programmatic goals.
Extremely low-income housing is directed to households with incomes at or below 30% of area median
income as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ($20,950 for a family of
three for the Barnstable area) and very low-income is defined as households with incomes less than 50%
of area median income ($34,900 for a family of three). Low- and moderate-income generally refers to the
7 The agency is now called the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 16
range between 51% and 80% of area median income ($55,900 for a family of three at the 80% level).
These income levels are summarized in the table below.
Table II-2
2009 TARGETED INCOME LEVELS FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE BARNSTABLE AREA
# Persons in
Household
30% of Median
Income
50% of Median
Income
80% of Median
Income
1 $16,300 $27,150 $43,450
2 18,650 31,050 49,700
3 20,950 34,900 55,900
4 23,300 38,800 62,100
5 25,150 41,900 67,050
6 27,050 45,000 72,050
7 28,900 48,100 77,000
8+ 30,750 51,200 81,950
2009 Median Household Income for the Barnstable Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) = $75,400
The state established legislation for promoting affordable housing under Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969,
creating the Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Law (Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B).8
This legislation allows developers to override local zoning if the project meets certain requirements and
the municipality has less than 10% of its year-round housing stock defined as affordable under the 40B
Subsidized Housing Inventory. In calculating a community’s progress toward the 10% Chapter 40B goal,
the state counts a housing unit as affordable if it is created by state or federal programs that support low-
and moderate-income households earning at or below 80% of area median income.
FOR THE PURPOSES OF CHAPTER 40B,
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS GENERALLY DEFINED
AS HOUSING UNITS THAT ARE:
1. Subsidized by an eligible state or federal program.
2. Subject to a long-term deed restriction limiting
occupancy to income eligible households for a specified
period of time (at least 30 years or longer for newly
created affordable units, and at least 15 years for
rehabilitated units).
3. Subject to an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing
Plan.
Based on the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development’s most recent data on
Brewster’s supply of affordable housing included in the state’s Subsidized Housing Inventory, Brewster
had 4,379 year-round housing units, of which 253 can be counted as affordable, representing 5.78% of the
8 Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969 established the Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Law
(Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B) to facilitate the development of affordable housing for low-
and moderate-income households (defined as any housing subsidized by the federal or state government
under any program to assist in the construction of low- or moderate-income housing for those earning less
than 80% of median income) by permitting the state to override local zoning and other restrictions in
communities where less than 10% of the year -round housing is subsidized for low- and moderate-income
households.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 17
year-round housing stock. To meet the 10% standard, at least 438 of the existing units would have to be
“affordable” based on the state’s definition. This means that right now Brewster is short of the 10%
standard by 185 housing units. Assuming future housing growth, this 10% figure is a moving target and
ultimately the required minimum number of affordable units will increase over time.
Additionally, most state-supported housing assistance programs are targeted to households earning at this
same level, at or below 80% of area median income, however, others, particularly rental programs, are
directed to those earning at lower income thresholds. For example, the Low Income Housing Tax Credit
Program that subsidizes rental units are targeted to households earning within 60% of median income.
First-time homebuyer programs typically apply income limits of up to 80% of area median income.
It is worth noting that according to the 2000 census, approximately 1,423 households or almost 35% of
Brewster’s total households would be income-eligible for affordable housing using the 80% of area
median income criterion without regard to assets.
The Community Preservation Act allows Community Preservation funding to be directed to those within
a somewhat higher income range – 100% of area median income – now commonly referred to as
“community housing”. Additionally, some housing developments incorporate several income tiers. For
example, one project could combine units for those earning at or below 80% of area median income,
moderate-income “workforce” units for those earning between 80% and 120% of median income, and
even some market rate units to help cross-subsidize the more affordable ones. A rental project might
include a couple of tiers below the 80% level in addition to workforce and/or market rate units.
B. The Planning Process
This planning process builds on the work that began in 2004 towards drafting an Affordable Housing
Plan. The Brewster Community Preservation Committee determined that it was necessary to update and
complete this Plan, undertaking a more comprehensive analysis of housing needs and strategies that will
direct Brewster’s future housing agenda. The Committee issued a Request for Proposals on May 9, 2007
to solicit interest from consultants to do this work, and the following August the Committee entered into a
contract with Karen Sunnarborg Consulting.
This Housing Production Plan is divided into two phases. The first phase focuses on the Housing Needs
Assessment – the review and assessment of documentation and research already compiled as well as the
collection and analysis of new information to identify local housing needs, to determine what resources
are available to meet these needs and to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the remaining gaps in
housing services and programs. A public forum was conducted on October 30, 2007 to obtain input from
local leaders and community residents on housing needs, concerns and priorities that bolstered this
analysis and helped focus the planning effort on the second phase, the housing strategies. A summary of
local input from this forum is included as Appendix 1.
The second phase provides specifics on how to preserve and create new affordable and workforce housing
opportunities in Brewster. Guided by the context established in phase one, prioritized actions are
presented, each including the rationale for the strategy, next steps, the timetable for implementation, the
resources required, and the projected number of affordable units produced. These strategies will provide
a blueprint to enable the Community Preservation Committee, Town Board of Selectmen, Housing
Partnership, Housing Authority, Planning Board, and other key committees to chart a course for the future
towards making progress on local housing needs as well as meeting the 10% state affordable housing
threshold and production goals.
This Housing Production Plan is being produced under the state’s new Chapter 40B requirements that enable
cities and towns to prepare and adopt a Housing Production Plan that demonstrates production of an increase of
Brewster Housing Production Plan 18
.50% over one year or 1.0% over two-years of its year-round housing stock eligible for inclusion in the
Subsidized Housing Inventory.9 Brewster will have to produce approximately 22 affordable units annually to
meet these goals through 2010. When the 2010 census figures become available in 2011, this number will be
somewhat higher. If DHCD certifies that the locality has complied with its annual goals, the Town may, through
its Zoning Board of Appeals, deny comprehensive permit applications without opportunity for appeal by
developers.
C. Housing Goals
The Town of Brewster has adopted the following housing goals to help guide the development of specific
strategies for promoting affordable housing:
1. Strive to meet 10% state affordable housing goal. Brewster will promote decent, safe,
affordable housing for rental or purchase to meet the needs of present and future Brewster
residents. In accordance with state law, Brewster will seek to raise its affordable housing
stock to 10% of all year-round units at the rate of 0.50% per year.
2. Serve a variety of housing needs. Brewster will encourage and support affordable
housing that can serve a variety of needs, including elderly residents, families with
children, couples, singles, those with disabilities, Town employees and those “at risk” of
losing their housing. In addition, Brewster will strive to promote and support workforce
housing (and especially ownership opportunities) that is affordable to those with
moderate incomes, i.e. between 80% and 120% of area median income.
3. Promote affordable housing that is consistent with smart growth whenever possible.
Encourage the development and the maintenance of affordable housing that is compatible
with the existing semi-rural residential character of the Town, and to the extent feasible,
direct development to those locations that, within a smart growth context, can better support
new development. Smart growth development is a response to the problems associated
with unplanned, unlimited suburban development – or sprawl – and calls for more
efficient land use, a mix of uses, compact development patterns, less dependence on the
automobile, a range of diverse housing opportunities and choices, equitable allocation of
the costs and benefits of development, and an improved jobs/housing balance.
4. Preserve existing affordable housing. Brewster will establish programs and provide
resources to preserve the affordability of its existing affordable housing units.
5. Make zoning and regulatory reforms. Brewster will make the necessary zoning and
regulatory changes to encourage the development of affordable rental units and homes.
This includes measures to promote smart growth development.
6. Encourage partnerships. Brewster will work with other towns and with state and regional
agencies to support affordable housing at the regional level. Brewster will encourage the
private, public and semi-public sectors to cooperate in utilizing existing housing stock and
creating new units to meet affordable housing needs.
The primary local agencies supporting affordable housing in Brewster include the Brewster Housing
Authority, a state-funded agency, and the Brewster Housing Partnership, a five-member volunteer
committee appointed by the Board of Selectmen and supported by staff in the Town Administrator's
Office. The Community Preservation Committee has also become active in supporting affordable
9 Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B, 760 CMR 56.03 (4).
Brewster Housing Production Plan 19
housing, providing important new funding for affordable housing initiatives and supporting the
preparation of this Housing Plan. Additionally, the Planning Board plays a critical role in amending
zoning to better promote housing affordability and smart growth development as does the Zoning
Board of Appeals in its responsibilities for oversight of comprehensive permit projects.
III. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Brewster Housing Production Plan 20
This Housing Needs Assessment presents an overview of the current housing situation in the town of
Brewster, providing the context within which a responsive set of strategies can be developed to address
housing needs and meet production goals.
A. Demographic Profile10
1. Population, Race and Household Type
For a small town, Brewster has experienced considerable growth in recent years in both its year-round
and seasonal populations. The population in fact almost doubled between 1980 and 2000, from 5,226
residents to 10,094, a 93.2% increase. Town records indicate that Brewster had 10,332 residents in
January 2007, pointing to an increase in population since 2000 of 238 residents.
The population has remained predominately White but minority residents are steadily increasing in
number from 37 residents in 1980 to 279 in 2000. Approximately one-third of the 2000 minority
population identified themselves as Black or African American, another third as Asian, another 17% as
Native American, and the remaining claimed Hispanic origin.
Table III-1
Demographic Characteristics
1980-2000
1980 1990 2000
# % # % # %
Total Population 5,226 100.0 8,440 100.0 10,094 100.0
Minority
Population*
37
0.7
93
1.1
279
2.8
Total # Households 1,950 100.0 3,383 100.0 4,124 100.0
Family Households 1,471 75.4 2,427 71.7 2,854 69.2
Female Heads of
Households with
Children **11
60
3.1
288 (with
& without
children)
8.5
212
5.1
Non-family
Households **
479
24.6
956
28.3
1,270
30.8
Average Household
Size
Not Available
2.42 persons
2.34 persons
Source of above table: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980, 1990 and 2000
*All non-White classifications
** Percent of all households
Smaller, non-family households are becoming a more significant part of Brewster, increasing by 314
households between 1990 and 2000 and by 477 between 1980 and 2000, growing as a percentage of all
households from about 25% in 1980 to almost 31% in 2000. While the number of families almost
doubled from 1980 to 2000, from 1,471 to 2,854 households, they decreased as a proportion of all
households from about 75% to 69%. Correspondingly, the average household size decreased from 2.42
persons in 1990 to 2.34 persons in 2000, reflective of the growth in smaller, non-family households and a
significant number of retirees. This trend towards smaller households is part of a demographic shift that
10 The bulk of the data that is available on social and economic information is through the U.S. Bureau of
the Census and while old, dating back to 2000, is the primary source available. Projections and updated
sample data will be added where available.
11 A family householder is a householder living with one or more people related to him or her by birth,
marriage, or adoption. The householder and all people in the household related to him are family members.
A nonfamily householder is a householder living alone or with nonrelatives only.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 21
is occurring throughout the state and country. For example, the percentage of non-family households
grew from 33% to 36% between 1990 and 2000 in both Barnstable County and the state as a whole.
2. Age Distribution
As Table III-2 demonstrates, demographic changes are occurring remarkably fast in Brewster. For
example, while the population almost doubled between 1980 and 2000, those under the age of five stayed
at the same level, 359 and 353, respectively. Also, proportionately the school-age population between
five and 17 years is declining somewhat, from 18% in 1980 to 17.4% in 2000. Those under 18 years of
age comprised almost one-quarter of the 1980 population, or 1,300 young persons, then decreased on a
percentage basis to about 21% of residents or 2,106 persons in 2000.
Table III-2
Age Distribution
1980-2000
Age Range
1980 1990 2000
# % # % # %
Under 5 Years 359 6.9 569 6.7 353 3.5
5 – 17 Years 941 18.0 1,334 15.8 1,753 17.4
18 – 20 Years 125 2.4 216 2.6 231 2.3
21 – 24 Years 219 4.2 278 3.3 207 2.1
25 – 34 Years 942 18.0 1,175 13.9 707 7.0
35 – 44 Years 453 8.7 1,458 17.3 1,467 14.5
45 – 54 Years 356 6.8 672 8.0 1,715 17.0
55 – 59 Years 332 6.4 340 4.0 523 5.2
60 – 64 Years 376 7.2 523 6.2 491 4.9
65 – 74 Years 722 13.8 1,083 12.8 1,260 12.5
75 – 84 Years 308 5.9 586 6.9 936 9.3
85 Years and
Over
93 1.8 206 2.4 451 4.5
Total 5,226 100.0 8,440 100.0 10,094 100.0
Under 18 1,300 24.9 1,903 22.6 2,106 20.9
Age 20 to 34 1,195 22.9 1,520 18.0 969 9.6
Age 45 to 59 688 13.2 1,012 12.0 2,238 22.2
Age 65+ 1,123 21.5 1,875 22.2 2,647 26.2
Median Age -- -- 46.9 years
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980, 1990 and 2000
Most significantly is the drop in those between the ages of 20 and 34 who are entering the labor market
and beginning to form their own families, reducing the pool of entry-level workers and service
employees. In 1980 this group comprised about 23% of Brewster’s residents, but by 2000 the number of
those in this age category dropped from almost 2,000 residents to less than 1,000, comprising less than
10% of the town’s population. This trend is happening throughout most communities of the Cape, where
the combination of fewer job opportunities, particularly those outside of the retail and service sectors that
pay well, and escalating living expenses are increasingly forcing this group to relocate further and further
away. This trend suggests the need for not only workforce development efforts, but also more first-time
homebuyer opportunities as starter homes in the private housing market have virtually been eliminated.
Another significant population shift is reflected in those between the ages of 45 and 59, who made up
13.2% of Brewster residents in 1980 but 22.2% in 2000, largely correlated to the costs of living, where
Brewster Housing Production Plan 22
those older residents in the height of their earning potential are better able to afford to live in town. This
trend also reflects the overall aging of the population.
The aging trend is particularly evident in the older age categories. Those 65 years of age or older were
21.5% of the population in 1980, but increased to 26.2% by 2000. Even those frail elderly over 85 years
increased as a percentage of the population from 1.8% in 1980 to 4.5% in 2000, from 93 to 451 residents,
a growth of almost five times the size of this group over two decades. This trend also suggests that the
Town should address the housing needs of this burgeoning population, offering more housing options for
seniors, including those with handicapped accessibility and support services.
Table III-3 provides comparative information for Barnstable County and the state, which highlights the
trends described above. Brewster and Barnstable County had a significantly lower percentage of children
than the state, about 20% as opposed to almost 24%. It is probable the town’s school-age population will
not likely increase substantially over the next few years.
Notably, Brewster’s young adult population of those 20 to 34 years of age is substantially smaller than
that of the Cape as a whole, 9.6% versus 13.2%, and proportionately less than half that of the state at 21%
in 2000. While this younger age group is significantly smaller, those baby boomers (born 1946 to 1964
and age 43 to 61 in 2007) comprise a far greater proportion of town residents, at 22.2%, than the Cape at
14.8% or the state at 13.8%, once again a reflection of Brewster’s aging population and costly living
conditions.
Brewster’s had a more significant population of seniors, at 26.2% as opposed to 23.1% for the County
and only 13.5% for the state. The considerable aging of Brewster’s population is also reflected in its
median age, 46.9 years versus 44.6 and 36.5 years for the County and state, respectively.
Table III-3
Comparative Demographic Data
2000
Age Range
Brewster Barnstable County Massachusetts
# % # % # %
Under 18 2,106 20.9 45,440 20.4 1,500,064 23.6
Age 20 to 34 969 9.6 29,330 13.2 1,331,067 21.0
Age 45 to 54 2,238 22.2 32,802 14.8 (20.8) 873,353 13.8
Age 65 + 2,647 26.2 51,265 23.1 (34.4) 860,162 13.5
Median Age 46.9 years 44.6 years 36.5 years
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000; Numbers in parentheses indicate updated census projections for Barnstable
County based on the 2005 American Community Survey. This projected data includes substantial trends towards an
aging population including a revised figure of 10.1% for residents under the age of 35.
If these demographic trends continue, Brewster will be confronted with increasing numbers of older
residents and fewer numbers of younger households entering the job market and forming their own
families who cannot afford to live in town. Consequently, the Town should target its affordable housing
efforts to the development of first-time homebuyer opportunities as well as more affordable rental options
for younger households and the increasing numbers of older, long-term residents with fixed incomes.
3. Income
Brewster has gained increasingly more affluent residents over the past several decades as have many
other communities on Cape Cod and in the Boston region, with median income levels rising from $15,687
in 1979, more than doubling to $34,935 in 1989 and to $49,276 by 1999, during a time of significant
Brewster Housing Production Plan 23
population growth when the number of households more than doubled. This 2000 median household
income level is also higher than those of neighboring communities as presented below.
Brewster -- $49,276
Chatham -- $45,519
Dennis -- $41,598
Eastham -- $42,618
Harwich -- $41,552
Orleans -- $42,594
Those earning more than $75,000 increased from only 19 households in 1979 to almost 300 in 1989 to
1,020 in 1999. In 1979 only 1.5% of households were earning between $50,000 and $74,999, but in 1999
this level was about one-quarter of all households, more than what one would expect under normal
inflation. While it is to be expected that the incomes of longer-term residents would increase over time, it
was largely the influx of new residents with higher income levels that boosted median income levels.
Despite this increasing household wealth, there are substantial numbers of households with incomes
below $25,000, 932 households or almost 23% of all households, based on 2000 census data. There are
substantially more of these households than subsidized units available (254 units), and they are
challenged to compete in Brewster’s very tight housing market. It is likely that many of the households in
the lower income ranges may in fact be long-term residents who own their homes, which are now worth a
considerable amount of money. As such they are cash poor but equity rich. Nevertheless, continued
increases in taxes, insurance and energy bills as well as health-related issues, may drive these households
out of the community given the limited number of affordable and/or service supported housing
alternatives in Brewster.
The income distribution for those households that include children – families – is somewhat higher with a
median family income in 1999 of $57,174, with 16% of all families earning more than $100,000 and
2.8% earning more than $200,000. A comparison of 1979, 1989 and 1999 income figures is presented in
Table III-4 below.
Table III-4
Income Distribution by Household
1979-1999
1979 1989 1999
# % # % # %
Under $10,000 566 29.0 270 8.1 190 4.6
10,000-24,999 1,001 51.3 891 26.6 742 18.0
25,000-34,999 257 13.2 515 15.4 513 12.4
35,000-49,999 77 4.0 728 21.7 635 15.4
50,000-74,999 30 1.5 648 19.4 1,027 24.9
75,000-99,999 19 1.0 157 4.7 498 12.1
100,000-149,999 104 3.1 349 8.5
150,000 or more 32 1.0 173 4.2
Total 1,950 100.0 3,345 100.0 4,127 100.0
Median income $15,687 $34,935 $49,276
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980, 1990 and 2000
The chart below shows the substantial shift in income levels from 1979 to 1999.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 24
Figure III-1
Income Distribution by Census
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
<10,00010,000-24,99925,000-34,99935,000-49,99950,000-74,999$75,000-$99,999$100,000-$149,999>$150,000IncomeNumber of HouseholdsYear 1979
Year 1989
Year 1999
Incomes for Brewster residents are higher than the Cape as a whole with 2000 median household income
levels of $49,276 and $45,933, respectively. The County proportionately had higher levels of households
in all income categories below $50,000, while Brewster had fairly comparable levels in those categories
above $50,000 as documented in Table III-5.
Table III-5
Income Distribution by Household: Barnstable County and Brewster
1999
Barnstable County Brewster
# % # %
Under $10,000 6,478 6.8 190 4.6
10,000-24,999 16,843 17.8 742 18.0
25,000-34,999 12,148 12.8 513 12.4
35,000-49,999 15,935 16.8 635 15.4
50,000-74,999 20,425 21.5 1,027 24.9
75,000-99,999 11,243 11.9 498 12.1
100,000-149,999 7,605 8.0 349 8.5
150,000 or more 4,168 4.4 173 4.2
Total 94,845 100.0 4,127 100.0
Median income $45,933 $49,276
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000
Brewster’s median income level was fairly comparable to that of the state at $50,502.
Projections of median income, based on the percentage increase of HUD area median income
levels for Barnstable County of 57%, would put the 2009 median for Brewster at $77,363.
4. Poverty
Brewster Housing Production Plan 25
The following table presents poverty levels in Brewster over the past couple of decades.
Table III-6
Poverty Status
1979-1999
1979 1989 1999
# % # % # %
Individuals
Below Poverty *
621
13.9
437
5.4
360
3.7
Families ** 176 13.6 112 4.7 45 1.6
Related Children
Under 18 Years
***
181
27.8
171
9.4
28
1.4
Individuals
65 and Over
****
135
15.3
30
1.8
70
3.1
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980, 1990 and 2000
*Percentage of total population for whom poverty status was determined
**Percentage of all families
***Percentage of all related children under 18 years
****Percentage of all individuals age 65+
The 2000 census indicates that the absolute numbers of those with incomes below the poverty level
($10,400 for an individual and $17,600 for a family of three in 2008) decreased substantially from 1979
to 1999, although despite a considerable drop in the poverty level for seniors between 1979 and 1989,
from 15.3% to 1.8%, there was a slight increase to 3.1% in 1999. Clearly poverty levels have dropped
dramatically in absolute numbers and as a percentage of the total population, which is correlated to the
increasing affluence of Brewster, particularly the escalating costs of living including housing costs, which
are now prohibitive for those earning below the poverty level without subsidies. These reductions in
poverty levels are also likely reflective of individuals and families being forced to leave Brewster in
search of more affordable living conditions. However, there still was a population within the town of
Brewster, including 360 individuals and 45 families, who had substantial income limitations and may
require public assistance to meet their housing needs.
5. Employment
Brewster is located well into the Cape and a fair distance from the major population and job centers of
Boston and Providence, approximately 85 miles away, but about 16 miles from Hyannis. The 2000
census indicated that more than one-third of Brewster’s workers, 37.2%, were involved in management or
professional occupations and more than half, 55.7%, were employed in the lesser paying retail and service
oriented jobs that supported the local economy including construction (10.4%), sales and office
occupations (27.7%), and service occupations (17.6%). While 69% were salaried workers, another 14.8%
were government workers and 15.9% were self-employed.
Additional information on employment patterns indicated that of those Brewster residents who were
employed over the age of 16, 1,345, or about 30%, worked in the community which was lower than that
for the County at 42%, suggesting fewer employment opportunities in town. It should also be noted that
the significant resort economy in Brewster causes fluctuations in the job force that increases in the
summer months to serve seasonal needs. At this point there are few housing options in Brewster to house
these lower paid seasonal workers.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 26
6. Education
The educational attainment of Brewster residents has improved. In 2000, 94% of those 25 years and older
had a high school diploma or higher and about 40% had a Bachelor’s degree or higher, up from the 1990
figure of 35% with a college degree and higher than the 2000 figure of 33.6% for the County. Those
enrolled in school (nursery through graduate school) totaled 2,254 residents or almost 22% of the
population, and those enrolled in nursery school through high school totaled 1,923 students, 85% of those
who were enrolled in school and 19% of the total population.
7. Disability Status
Of the 2000 population age 5 to 20 years old, 210 or 10.6% had some disability. Of those aged 21 to 64,
1,291 residents, or more than one-quarter of the persons in the age range, claimed a disability. More than
87% of this group was employed, leaving another 13% unemployed, likely due to their disability. In
regard to the population 65 years of age or older, 552 seniors or about one-quarter of those in the age
group claimed some type of disability. These levels of disability, particularly that of seniors, represent
significant special needs within the Brewster community.
8. Residency in 1995
Approximately 36% of the persons in Brewster over the age of five who were living in Brewster in 2000,
or 3,518 residents, moved to a new residence in Brewster from 1995 to 2000. Of these, 18.6% came from
Barnstable County, 17.6% came from a different county, with 6.4% coming from the same state and
12.1% coming from a different state or elsewhere, representing significant mobility of the town’s year -
round population.
It is important to note that housing turnover drives up housing prices in an escalating real estate market,
and typically the buyers are more affluent than sellers, fueling demographic changes in the community
over time. This suggests that it is useful to find ways to reduce housing turnover, to maintain the
affordability in the existing housing stock to the greatest extent possible, and to help those who want to
remain in town afford to do so.
B. Housing Profile
Housing in Brewster involves two distinct markets, the year-round housing stock and the seasonal or
second home market now comprising more than 40% of all dwelling units. This seasonal usage, the
burgeoning interest in second homes by affluent baby boomers, and the attractiveness of the Cape for
retirement, in addition to regional market pressures, have resulted in high housing prices that are no
longer affordable to most long-term, year-round residents. Some more recent softening of the market still
has not made single-family homes much more accessible. The creation and preservation of affordable
housing is particularly important in enabling the year-round population to remain in the community.
1. Housing Characteristics
The 2000 census counted 7,339 total housing units in the town of Brewster, up 15% from 6,367 units in
1990 and as much as 110% from 3,489 units in 1980. Substantial housing growth occurred between 1980
and 1990 when the town gained 2,878 units, including 1,026 owner-occupied homes and 348 rental units.
During this same time, the census counted 2,379 new seasonal units, so in addition to the new
construction of approximately 1,500 seasonal units, more than another 800 existing units were converted
to seasonal use. Housing growth between 1990 and 2000 slowed down with only about 1,000 new units,
863 in owner-occupied housing and a gain of another 200 or so seasonal units. During this time,
however, the rental housing supply was reduced by 122 units, most likely converted to ownership or to
seasonal usage.
Out of the total housing units in 2000, Brewster had 4,124 occupied units, of which 3,480 or 84.4% were
owner-occupied while the remaining 644 units, or 15.6%, were rental units. These figures represent a
Brewster Housing Production Plan 27
higher level of owner-occupancy in 2000 than that of Barnstable County where 78% of the units were
owner-occupied. Table III-7 includes a summary of these housing characteristics.
Table III-7
Housing Characteristics, 1980-2000
1980 1990 2000
# % # % # %
Total # Housing
Units
3,489 100.0 6,367 100.0 7,339 100.0
Occupied
Units *
2,009 57.6 3,383 53.1 4,124 56.2
Occupied
Owner Units **
1,591 79.2 2,617 77.4 3,480 84.4
Occupied
Rental Units **
418 20.8 766 22.6 644 15.6
Total Vacant Units/
Seasonal,
Recreational or
Occasional Use*
372
10.7
2,751
43.2
2,960
40.3
Average House-
Hold Size of
Owner-Occupied
Unit
Not Available
2.46 persons
2.37 persons
Average House-
Hold Size of
Renter-Occupied
Unit
Not Available
2.27 persons
2.16 persons
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980, 1990 and 2000
* Percentage of total housing units ** Percentage of occupied housing units
The 2000 homeowner vacancy rate was 1.5%, down only marginally from 2.6% in 1990. The change in
the homeowner rate is relatively insignificant as any level below 5% is considered to represent tight
market conditions and the rate remains well below that of the state and nation as a whole. The rental
vacancy rate, on the other hand, more than doubled from 6.1% to 12.3% between 1990 and 2000, and is
higher than what would be expected and more than the 7.4% rental vacancy rate for Barnstable County.
This may be related somewhat to the seasonal nature of a considerable portion of the employment base
that drives a great many residents out of town for parts of the year.
Table III-8
Vacancy Rates, 1990 and 2000
Vacancy Rates by Tenure
1990 2000 MA 2000 Nation
Rental 6.1 12.3 3.5% 5%
Homeowner 2.6 1.5 0.7% 3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000
Brewster Housing Production Plan 28
The 2000 census indicated that a great majority of the existing housing units were in single-family,
detached structures totaling 5,495 units or 74.9% of Brewster’s housing units, lower than the 83% level
for the County. There was a gain of 855 of these units between 1990 and 2000 but a decrease of 270
single unit attached structures during this same time period. Additionally, Brewster saw a gain of multi-
family housing units, about 200 in small multi-family structures of two to four units and 238 units in
larger five to nine unit structures, that are likely are part of condominium development, particularly
Ocean Edge. However, another 55 units were lost in structures of ten or more units. Additionally, six
seasonal mobile homes were lost when the Town purchased the Jolly Whaler Village for open space.
There are two existing mobile home parks/campgrounds in town, Sweet Water Forest on Harwich Road
and Shady Knoll Campground on Route 6A.
Table III-9
Units in Structure
1990 – 2000
Type of
Structure
1990 2000
# % # %
1 Unit Detached 4,640 72.9 5,495 74.9
1 Unit Attached 1,087 17.1 817 11.1
2 to 4 Units 244 3.8 445 6.1
5 to 9 Units 135 2.1 383 5.2
10 or More Units 223 3.5 168 2.2
Other 38 0.6 32 0.4
Total 6,367 100.0 7,339 100.0
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000
Table III-10 charts housing growth, identifying that more than one-third of Brewster’s housing units were
created between 1980 and 1989, and almost 60% built between 1970 and 1990, directed largely to the
higher priced market based on the growing demand for second homes and places to retire on or near the
seashore. No more than one-quarter of Brewster’s housing stock, 1,859 units, was built prior to 1970.
Table III-10
Year Structure Built
2000
# %
1999 to March 2000 91 1.2
1995 to 1998 494 6.7
1990 to 1994 628 8.6
1980 to 1989 2,684 36.6
1970 to 1979 1,583 21.6
1960 to 1969 588 8.0
1940 to 1959 617 8.4
1939 or earlier 654 8.9
Total 7,339 100.0
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000
Table III-11 compares Brewster’s housing growth from 1970 through 2000 to that of its neighbors.
Almost three-quarters of Brewster’s housing stock was built during this timeframe, a dramatically higher
level than neighboring towns where new unit production was substantial but typically between 50% and
60% with the exception of Eastham at about 65%. This demonstrates considerably more recent
Brewster Housing Production Plan 29
development than the state as a whole where only about one-third of new housing construction took place
between 1970 and 2000.
Table III-11
Recent Housing Development, 1970 to 2000
Brewster and Neighboring Communities, Barnstable County and Massachusetts
Community # Units Built 1970-2000 % Units Built 1970-2000
Brewster 5,480 74.7
Chatham 3,405 50.7
Dennis 7,162 50.8
Eastham 3,576 64.6
Harwich 5,416 57.3
Orleans 3,002 58.9
Barnstable County 85,148 57.9
Massachusetts 847,922 32.3
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000
The median number of rooms per housing unit was 5.5, indicating that the average home was moderately
sized with three bedrooms at most. The number of rooms per dwelling ranged from three rooms or less in
484 units (6.6%) to nine rooms or more in 431 dwellings (5.9%), representing a relatively small number
of very large residential units. This data, however, is based on 2000 information, and it is likely that
given the economics of new development, new home construction since then has focused on the larger,
luxury home market, particularly second homes and summer residences.
The building permit data summarized below indicates that building activity has slowed down in
recent years and the average number of permits for new residential units decreased from 98
permits per year from 1993 through 2006, to an average of 62 permits from 2000 to 2006.
This data also indicates that since the 2000 census, at least another 450 units have been added to
Brewster’s total housing stock through July 2007.
Table III-12
Building Permit Data, 1993 to 7/2007
Year # Building Permits for New Units
1993 64
1994 129 (includes 15 condos)
1995 104
1996 135
1997 140 (includes 25 rental units)
1998 91
1999 285 (includes 88 condos represents 18 months)
2000 95
2001 74
2002 57
2003 75
2004 51
2005 40
2006 39
As of 7/2007 19
Total (1993-7/2007) 1,398
Average Per Year (1993-2006) 98
Average Per Year (2000-2006) 62
Source: Brewster Building Department
Brewster Housing Production Plan 30
Census projections for Barnstable County through the 2005 Housing Estimates reinforce these
high growth rates including:
Housing growth in Barnstable County between 2000 and 2005 was estimated to be 6,715
units, from 147,083 to 153,798 units, up 4.6%. During this same time period, building
permit activity in Brewster indicates a 5.9% increase in new housing units, higher than
the growth rate of the County and more than double that of the state at 2.5%
Housing growth for 2005 alone was 0.8% for the County, 0.5% for Brewster and 0.6%
for the state.
Barnstable County’s housing growth ranked fifth among all 14 Massachusetts counties.
Housing density increased from 371.6 units per square mile in 2000 to an estimated 388.9
in 2005 for Barnstable County. Statewide housing density was lower, increasing from
334.5 to 342.9 units per square mile during this same time period, and in fact the Cape’s
housing density has exceeded the state’s since 1990 as it was up 9% as opposed to 6% for
the state.
The Cape’s addition of 17 units per square mile between 2000 and 2005 was third highest
of the 14 Massachusetts counties, following only Suffolk and Nantucket Counties, and
ahead of its growth during the 1990s when 30 units per square mile were added on the
Cape during the entire decade.
From 1950 to 2000, housing growth for Barnstable County increased nearly fivefold,
more than all other counties in the state, from 30,306 to 147,083 units.
2. Housing Market Conditions
Ownership
Census data also provides information on housing values for homeownership and rental units. While this
information is now more than eight years old, it still provides a reasonable frame of refere nce to compare
with more current values. The census indicated that the 2000 median house value was $198,500, up about
18% from the median in 1990 of $168,700. While there were no units valued at less than $100,000, a
substantial number of units were valued from $100,000 to $200,000 including 1,651 units or half the
housing stock at that time.
Table III-13
Housing Values12
2000
Value Number of Units % Units
Less than $50,000 0 0.0
$50,000 to $99,999 0 0.0
$100,000 to $149,999 609 18.8
$150,000 to $199,999 1,042 32.1
$200,000 to $299,999 974 30.0
$300,000 to $499,999 480 14.8
$500,000 to $999,999 126 3.9
$1 million or more 12 0.4
Total 3,243 100.0
Median (dollars) $198,500
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000
12 Census data is derived primarily from Assessors’ information that typically underestimates market value.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 31
The 2000 housing prices in Brewster were high in comparison to Barnstable County with a median house
value of $178,800. The median price was even lower at $162,800 for the state.
More updated and reliable market data is tracked by The Warren Group from Multiple Listing Service
information based on actual sales. This market information since 1988 is summarized in the following
table:
Table III-14
Median Sales Prices
January 1988 – December 2008
Year Months Single-family Condo (#) All Sales # Sales
2008 Jan – Dec $370,000 $251,000 (63) $334,000 228
2007 Jan – Dec 455,250 270,000 (68) 379,000 250
2006 Jan – Dec 428,000 270,000 (72) 404,500 274
2005 Jan – Dec 431,900 292,000 (105) 378,000 329
2004 Jan – Dec 415,000 255,000 (151) 330,250 388
2003 Jan – Dec 365,000 229,000 (145) 295,000 397
2002 Jan – Dec 299,700 190,000 (117) 250,000 371
2001 Jan – Dec 263,000 174,900 (121) 215,700 351
2000 Jan – Dec 229,900 147,750 (110) 179,900 403
1999 Jan – Dec 177,500 120,000 (158) 144,900 455
1998 Jan – Dec 158,000 87,700 (158) 123,500 466
1997 Jan – Dec 144,950 87,000 (129) 112,000 409
1996 Jan – Dec 137,000 84,250 (114) 111,500 377
1995 Jan – Dec 127,265 95,000 (100) 107,750 338
1994 Jan – Dec 128,000 73,450 (104) 98,500 361
1993 Jan – Dec 130,000 79,375 (84) 110,000 249
1992 Jan – Dec 128,950 77,000 (65) 115,000 282
1991 Jan – Dec 119,500 85,000 (57) 103,250 194
1990 Jan – Dec 137,300 110,000 (43) 127,000 181
1989 Jan – Dec 150,000 118,000 (81) 135,000 230
1988 Jan – Dec 145,000 139,000 (141) 140,000 342
Source: The Warren Group, April 1, 2009
The single-family home market was at its highest as recently as 2007 when the average sales price was
$455,250, and as of the end of 2008 the median had dropped to $370,000, reflecting the softening of the
housing market that most communities on the Cape and in the Boston region have experienced. Condo
values have also decreased somewhat with the median down to $251,000 as of the end of 2008 from a
high of $404,500 in 2006.
The number of total sales in Brewster ranged from a low of 181 sales in 1990 to a high of 466 in 1998. In
2008 there were 228 total sales further reflecting some slowness in the housing market. After a decline in
market prices in the early 1990’s, due largely to the region’s economic recession, the market began to
revive somewhat in the mid-90s but did not surpass the 1988 median sales price until 1999, more than a
decade later. After that the market escalated precipitously, up more than 108% from $177,500 in 1999 to
$370,000 by the end of 2008 for single-family home sales.
Table III-15 presents a sample of house sales in 2004 and 2005, demonstrating that even within a year
house prices shifted significantly upwards. Within this single year, the number and percentage of units in
Brewster Housing Production Plan 32
the price ranges below $500,000 decreased, but those in the higher ranges increased. Most of Brewster’s
sales, however, remained within the $300,000 to $500,000 price range.
Table III-15
Sample Single-Family Sales Data for Brewster
2004 – 2005
Price Range
2004 2005
# % # %
Under $300,000 9 5.6 2 1.2
$300,000 to $500,000 111 68.5 100 62.5
$500,000 to $700,000 26 16.0 34 21.3
$700,000 to $1 million 11 6.8 17 10.6
Over $1 million 5 3.1 7 4.4
Total 162 100.0 160 100.0
Source: Information from “Cape Cod’s Real Estate Voice”, Spring 2006, from Multiple Listing Service data.
Table III-16 provides comparative data for other neighboring communities.
Table III-16
Sample Single-Family Sales Data for Neighboring Communities, 2004/2005
Price Range
Orleans
2004/2005
Eastham
2004/2005
Chatham Dennis
# % # % # % # %
Under $300,000 2/9 2/8 5/2 4/2 5/2 2/1 123/78 32/22
$300,000 to
$500,000
34/27
27/25
89/79
63/68
63/52
30/26
156/201
41/58
$500,000 to
$700,000
39/31
31/29
33/28
23/24
53/50
26/25
55/33
14/10
$700,000 to
$1 million
33/26
26/24
10/2
7/2
42/37
20/19
29/21
8/6
Over $1 million 19/15 15/14 4/5 3/4 44/56 21/28 17/14 4/4
Total 127/108 100/100 141/116 100/100 207/197 100/100 380/347 100/100
Source: Information from “Cape Cod’s Real Estate Voice”, Spring 2006, from Multiple Listing Service data.
All of these towns have also confronted with high housing prices, with few if any homes priced below
$300,000 with the exception of Dennis. It should be noted, however, that even Dennis experienced a
significant drop-off of units below the $300,000 level between 2004 and 2005. Brewster and Chatham
had most of their homes priced in excess of $500,000.
Table III-17 compares Brewster’s median single-family home price to its neighbors and demonstrates that
median values in Brewster were at about the middle of the range at $411,000 as of June 2007, in
comparison to its neighbors with median values ranging from $327,000 in Dennis to $590,000 and
$600,000 in Chatham and Orleans, respectively. Brewster’s housing market is still priced considerably
higher than the County as a whole at $350,000.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 33
Table III-17
Median House Values of Brewster and Neighboring Communities
June 2007
Community Median Price
Jan-June 2007
Change from
2006
Sales Volume
Jan-June 2007
Change from
2006
Brewster $411,000 -1.0% 74 -24.5%
Chatham $590,000 -14.5% 107 14.0%
Dennis $327,000 -7.9% 163 -6.3%
Eastham $439,500 -2.3% 56 16.7%
Harwich $353,500 -8.8% 142 20.3%
Orleans $600,000 -14.3% 62 5.1%
Barnstable County $350,000 -7.1% 1,959 -1.2%
Source: The Warren Group
Data based on single-family home sales of $1,000 and above, excluding condominiums and foreclosure
deeds.
The chart below presents a summary of this sales data for Brewster and neighboring communities.
Figure III-2
Median Sales Prices: Brewster and Neighboring Communities
$0
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
Brewster Chatham Dennis Eastham Harwich Orleans County
Information from the Town Assessor on the assessed values of residential property in Brewster is
presented in Table III-18 that confirms that there are few residential properties that are valued in
the affordable range below $200,000, only 157. The bulk of these lower valued properties are
condominiums and 18 condos were valued at less than $100,000, all located on Main Street,
Daffodil Cartway, Paines Creek Road, or Millstone Road. About two-thirds of the condos were
valued in the $200,000 to $399,999 range, however, some were valued in the high ranges with
more than 10% of the units assessed above $800,000 including one unit for as much as $7.8
million. Condominiums in fact are a significant part of Brewster’s housing stock, totaling 1,470
units or about 20% of all residential units. A substantial portion of the town’s condominiums is
included in the Ocean Edge development.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 34
Most of the single-family homes, about 60%, were valued between $300,000 and $499,999,
significantly higher relative to the condos. Only 13 units were priced in the affordable range of
less than $200,000, most between $185,000 and $199,000. One house on Tar Kiln Road was
valued below the $100,000 threshold, at $99,300. On the other hand, 586 homes were assessed
beyond $800,000, representing almost 11% of the town’s single-family dwellings, more than half
of which were valued beyond $1 million.
Assessor’s data indicated that there were six mobile homes valued between $162,200 and
$212,400. There were also 146 multi-family dwellings including two- and three-family
properties as well as two homes on one lot. Values of these properties ranged considerably
including 27 properties assessed beyond $1 million.
Table III-18
Assessed Values of Residential Properties
2006
Assessment Single-family
Dwellings
Condominiums
Multi-family
Dwellings*
Total
# % # % # % # %
0-$199,999 13 0.2 144 9.8 0 0.0 157 2.2
$200,000-
$299,999
317 5.8 666 45.3 6 4.1 989 14.1
$300,000-
399,999
1,903 35.1 312 21.2 20 13.7 2,235 31.8
$400,000-
499,999
1,323 24.4 135 9.2 31 21.2 1,489 21.2
$500,000-
599,999
638 11.8 36 2.4 16 11.0 690 9.8
$600,000-
699,999
390 7.2 52 3.5 14 10.0 456 6.5
$700,000-
799,999
250 4.6 22 1.5 15 10.3 287 4.1
$800,000-
899,999
179 3.3 38 2.6 11 7.5 228 3.2
$900,000-
999,999
109 2.0 42 2.9 6 4.1 157 2.2
Over $1 million 298 5.5 23 1.6 27 18.5 348 5.0
Total 5,420 100.0 1,470 100.0 146 100.0 7,036 100.0
Source: Brewster Town Assessor, fiscal year 2006.
* Includes two-family, three-family, four-family, multiple homes on one lot, and four + unit properties, and
apartments.
Table III-19 provides a breakdown of the number of units existing within various affordability
ranges. According to Assessor’s data, almost all, 95%, of the Brewster’s single-family homes
were affordable only to households earning 120% or more of the area median income ($70,400)
in 2007 based on conventional lending terms. There were only four homes valued within the
means of those low- and moderate-income households earning at or below 80% of area median
income, or $51,600 for a household of three. Only another 57 single-family houses in Brewster
could be considered moderately-priced, affordable to households earning between 80% and 100%
of the area median income, and another 207 valued within the means of those earning between
100% and 120% of the area median.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 35
Table III-1913
Approximate Cost of Single-family Units in Brewster, 2007
Approximate
Home Price Range
Affordability Range
(% HUD Median
Family Income for
2007/3-person
households)
Single-Family Units
Available in Price Range
Number %
Less than $115,000 Less than 50%
(Less than $32,250) 1 0.02
$115,000 -
$180,499
50% - 80%
($32,250 - $51,599) 3 0.06
$180,500 -
$249,999
80% - 100%
($51,600 – $70,400) 57 1.05
$250,000 -
$294,999
100% - 120%
($70,401 - $84,480) 207 3.82
More than $295,000 More than 120%
(More than $84,480) 5,152 95.05
Total 5,420 100.00
Source: Town of Brewster Assessor’s Database for fiscal year 2006. Please note that as a standard
practice, assessed value is assumed to be 93% of actual value or potential sale price.
Another analysis of housing market data is presented in Table III-20, which demonstrates the escalation
of prices based on a breakdown of sales data from the Multiple Listing Service for single-family homes.
This data indicates that there were no longer homes available in Brewster for under $200,000 that would
be affordable to low- and moderate-income households, and even homes for less than $300,000 were
scarce. In fact the only single-family home available in the $200,000 to $299,999 range that was for sale
for less than $299,000 was a small two-bedroom unit of less than 1,000 square feet at the Ocean Edge
development for $235,000. Only five properties sold for less than $300,000 since the beginning of 2006,
and these were typically small ranches, often needing some “TLC”.
As Assessor’s data, most of the properties were priced between $300,000 and $500,000, however, more
than 10% of the single-family homes were priced above $800,000, demonstrating a robust luxury market
in Brewster. Certainly most of these high-end properties had waterfront views and/or accessibility.
It is also interesting to note that despite headlines about dire market conditions and the softening of the
housing market, housing prices did not decrease substantially and were on the rise in 2007. Median sales
prices increased from an average of $415,000 in 2006 to $424,900 as of August 21, 2007 to $455,250 by
the end of 2007. Listings in August 2007 averaged more than $600,000 and even with sales prices
approximating 95% of the listings, some significant price escalation was evident. Nevertheless, a local
realtor indicated that there was still a lot of inventory to sell with 19 homes on the market for every unit
sold during mid-summer of 2007 as opposed to a 14 to one ratio before that. Those properties that moved
the fastest tended to be on the extreme ends of the price range, below $400,000 or at the top of the luxury
market. In fact, since that time prices have dropped and the median as of June 2008 was at $385,000
based on 67 sales.
13 Figures based on 95% financing, interest of 7.0%, 30 -year term, annual property tax rate of $5.47 per
thousand, insurance costs of $1.25 per $1,000 of combined valuation of dwelling value (value x 0.5),
personal property ($100,000 fixed), and personal liability ($100,000 fixed), and private mortgage insurance
estimated at 0.3125 percent of loan amount.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 36
Table III-20
Single-family House Sales
January 2006 Through August 21, 2007
Price Range
Current
Listings
#/%
Under
Agreement
#/%
Sold 2006
#/%
Sold 2007
1/1/07-
8/21/07 #/%
Total
#/%
Less than
$199,000*
0/0.0 0/0.0 0/0.0 0/0.0 0/0.0
$200,000-299,999 5/4.1 0/0.0 2/1.0 3/3.0 10/2.1
$300,000-399,999 15/12.2 3/16.7 70/35.0 36/36.4 124/26.3
$400,000-499,999 24/19.5 3/16.7 88/43.8 22/22.2 137/29.0
$500,000-599,999 21/17.1 2/11.1 14/7.0 14/14.1 51/10.8
$600,000-699,999 14/11.4 3/16.7 12/6.0 9/9.1 38/8.0
$700,000-799,999 19/15.4 1/5.6 5/2.5 3/3.0 28/5.9
$800,000-899,999 2/1.6 3/16.7 3/1.5 5/5.0 13/2.8
$900,000-999,999 6/4.9 1/5.6 0/0.0 2/2.0 9/1.9
Over $1 million 17/13.8 2/11.1 7/3.5 5/5.0 31/6.6
Total 123/100.0 18/100.0 201/100.0 99/100.0 472/100.0
Median Price $614,500 $679,900 $415,000 $424,900 --
Source: Multiple Listing Service, August 21, 2007
Additional information on the housing market suggested that there was a great deal of property turnover
at the height of the market about two years ago with owners quickly flipping properties and reaping
substantial profits. That is not currently occurring, not only because of some slowing down of the market,
but also because of new Cape-wide building codes that now require higher hurricane resistant standards
and thus boost the costs of improvements.
Table III-21
Condominium Sales
January 2006 Through August 21, 2007
Price Range
Current
Listings
#/%
Under
Agreement
#/%
Sold 2006
#/%
Sold 2007
1/1/07-
8/21/07 #/%
Total
#/%
Less than
$199,000*
16/17.8 5/27.8 9/13.6 3/10.7 33/16.3
$200,000-299,999 40/44.4 7/38.9 34/51.5 14/50.0 95/47.0
$300,000-399,999 17/18.9 2/11.1 10/15.2 4/14.3 33/16.3
$400,000-499,999 6/6.7 1/5.6 7/10.6 4/14.3 18/8.9
$500,000-599,999 1/1.1 0/0.0 1/1.5 1/3.6 3/1.5
$600,000-699,999 2/2.2 0/0.0 2/3.0 1/3.6 5/2.5
$700,000-799,999 4/4.4 0/0.0 0/0.0 0/0.0 4/2.0
$800,000-899,999 1/1.1 2/11.1 3/ 4.6 1/3.6 7/3.5
$900,000-999,999 1/1.1 0/0.0 0/0.0 0/0.0 1/0.5
Over $1 million 2/2.2 1/5.6 0/0.0 0/0.0 3/1.5
Total 90/100.0 18/100.0 66/100.0 28/100.0 202/100.0
Median Price $284,000 $259,000 $268,000 $280,000 --
Source: Multiple Listing Service, August 21, 2007
Brewster Housing Production Plan 37
Table III-21 provides a summary of the same information for condominium sales that
demonstrates that values for these units are considerably lower than for single-family homes and
more units fall within an affordable range. There were 33 units that either sold, were pending
sale, or listed for less than $200,000, and eight (8) units for under $100,000. Those under
$100,000 were typically very small apartments of less than 300 square feet at Nickerson Village
or studio cottages at Cranberry Cove, Bay Breeze or Millstone Road. Those units between
$100,000 and $200,000 were largely at Ocean Edge or Bayview cottages. In fact prices ranged
considerably for condos, from an $86,000 studio condo at Cranberry Cove to a $1.3 million
beachfront property at Ocean Edge.
As mentioned above, the prices of condominiums are substantially lower than those for single-family
homes with median values as of August 21, 2007 of $268,000 for properties that sold in 2006 and
$280,000 for those that sold in 2007, which are about two-thirds the values of median single-family house
prices. There have not, however, been significant drops in the values of condos over the past couple of
years, although the median price of those condos under agreement is somewhat lower at $259,000, but the
sample size is small at only 18 units. On the other hand the median value of current condo listings is a bit
higher than the median for 2007 sales, although the actual sales prices will be lower.
The Ocean Edge resort contains most of the condominiums in town, but there are other condominium
developments, including more inland and less expensive developments such as The Colony, Snow Road,
Oakwood Village, and Woodview, as well as higher cost developments with water access including Sea
Pines, Cobbs Pond, and Sears Point. The bulk of the condo market is within the $200,000 to $400,000
range, however, select waterfront properties fetch between $800,000 to more than $1 million.
Multi-family structures represent a very small segment of Brewster’s housing stock, only about 146
properties according to Assessor’s data. Multiple Listing Service data included the following information
on these multi-unit properties:
An historic property built in 1835 as the Brewster Academy on an acre of land with 7 bedrooms
in the main house and two apartments in a separate guesthouse listed at $599,000.
A four-unit property on about an acre of land near Paine’s Creek Beach, including a duplex as
well as two cottages listed and sold at $499,000.
A two-unit duplex with 1,100 square feet of living space per side on Rosemary Lane, listed and
sold for $375,000.
Another duplex on Rosemary Lane that was listed for $335,000 and sold for $325,000.
Rentals
The number of rental units almost doubled between 1980 and 1990, from 388 units to 731 units but
Brewster then lost 110 of these units from 1990 to 2000, most likely through single-family homes shifting
from rental to owner-occupancy. Table III-22 provides census data on rent levels from 1980 to 2000.
After 1980, Brewster experienced substantial growth and demographic shifts as significant numbers of
homes were built based on the increasing demand of those interested in a second home or retiring to Cape
Cod. With this building boom, home prices increased significantly, including rental values, which more
than doubled from 1980 to 1990 alone, from $260 to $643. By 2000 this median rent had increased to
$770, somewhat higher than 2000 median gross rent of $723 for the County.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 38
Table III-22
Rental Costs
1980-2000
Gross
Rent
1980 1990 2000
# % # % # %
Under $200 87 22.4 42 5.8 0 0.0
200-299 142 36.6 14 1.9 7 1.1
300-499 131 33.8 111 15.2 86 13.8
500-749
0
0.0
265 36.2 136 21.9
750-999 214 29.3 195 31.4
1,000-1,499
35
4.8
58 9.3
1,500 or
more
21 3.4
No cash rent 28 7.2 50 6.8 118 19.0
Total 388 100.0 731 100.0 621 100.0
Median rent $260 $643 $770
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980. 1990 and 2000 (Summary Table 3 – sample data)
Like housing values for homeownership units, rental values tend to be underestimated in the census data,
and actual market rents are typically much higher as verified by local realtors. Internet listings of rental
properties in Brewster included the following:
Winter rental of a one-bedroom end unit at Ocean Edge for $850/month.14
Winter rental of a “cozy townhouse in Ocean Edge with loft” for $900 including 2 bedrooms.
Winter rental, referred to as a “school year condo rental”, of a two-bedroom, 2.5 bath, mostly
furnished condo for $999.
Winter rental of a two-bedroom, two-bath condo at Ocean Edge offered initially for $1,600 and
dropped down to $1,250.
Winter rental of $1,000 for a four-bedroom, two-bath house located on a “family residential road”
to run from mid-September through May or June.
A six to 12-month lease for an efficiency apartment in a private home at $800.
Year-round rental of an efficiency apartment at Daffodil Cartway near Nickerson State Park with
300 square feet of living space, “suitable for one person only” for $750. The unit had previously
been listed for $815.
Year-round rental of a three-bedroom home with two baths “with fireplace beam ceiling living
room” for $1,495.
Year-round rental of a three-bedroom, two-bath home with fireplace for $1,500.
Year-round rental for a three-bedroom home near 6A for $1,450.
Listings indicate that summer seasonal rents of homes or condos near the water can fetch up to $3,500 per
week.
C. Cost Analysis of Existing Market Conditions
The borrowing power of the median income household, using the 2000 census data, was about
$175,000,15 significantly lower than even the median house value as reported in the 2000 census of
$198,500. The affordability gap was then about $23,500 - the difference between the price of the median
priced home and what a median income household could afford. A three-person household earning at
14 All figures represent monthly rents.
15 Assumes owners pay no more than 30% of their income on housing.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 39
80% of area median income at that time, or $36,650, could afford a home priced at little more than
$128,500 based on conventional lending requirements, resulting in an affordability gap of $70,000.
As housing prices have risen at a greater rate than the household income of year-round residents, the
affordability gap in Brewster has widened, defined as the gap between the cost of housing and the portion
of income that is reasonable to pay for housing, typically defined as 30% of gross income. To afford the
median sales price of the median valued home in Brewster of $370,000 (based on The Warren Group
information as of the end of 2008), a household would have to earn approximately $92,400,16
substantially more than the adjusted 2009 median income of $77,363. Applying this updated median
income estimate of $77,363, based on the 57% change in the HUD median income levels for Barnstable
County between 2000 and 2009, would result in an affordability gap of $65,000, the difference between
what the median income household could afford ($305,000) and the median priced house ($370,000).
Therefore, from 2000 through 2008 the affordability gap widened from $23,500 to $65,000. It should be
noted that the combination of lower real estate prices and interest rates have decreased the affordability
gap from $155,000 as of July 2007 to $130,000 as of June 2008 to half that amount, $65,000, as of the
end of 2008.
For those earning at 80% of area median income, the gap was about $229,500 in mid-2007, the difference
between the maximum they could afford of $180,500 and the median home price $410,000. Due to
decreases in values and interest rates since that time, with the median price dipping to $370,000 as of end
of 2008, the gap has narrowed to $150,000 for low- and moderate-income households who can afford a
home for about $220,000.
Table III-23 presents a range of residential units that sold in 2007, from a tiny one-room condominium at
$86,000, to a two-bedroom cottage “with lots of potential” at $285,000, to a duplex and three-bedroom
Cape priced similarly, and then to more expensive homes priced well beyond the means of most Brewster
residents.
All of the listings and sales, with the exception of some tiny condominiums, are beyond the means of not
only those earning within 80% of area median income, a requirement of housing affordability under
Chapter 40B, but also are too expensive for households earning at or below the town’s 2000 median
income of $43,000 or adjusted median of $77,363. In fact there were no homes sold for under $250,000
since January 2006 that would be affordable to those earning at the median income level. It should be
noted however, that property values and interest rates have decreased since this time and new properties
coming on the market would be somewhat more affordable.
16 Figures based on 95% financing, interest of 5.5%, 30 -year term, annual property tax rate of $5.96 per
thousand, insurance costs of $1.25 per $1,000 of combined valuation of dwelling value (value x 0.5),
personal property ($100,000 fixed), and personal liability ($100,000 fixed), and private mortgage insurance
estimated at 0.3125 percent of loan amount.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 40
Table III-23
Affordability of Existing Housing17
August 2007
House Type
Recent Sale/List Prices
Estimated Annual Income
Required
Studio cottage condominium in
Cranberry Cove with 277 square feet
of living space, built in 1941,
120 days on the market
$86,000/
$89,000
$32,500
“Cute” 2-bedroom, 1 bath cottage on
Mt. Pleasant Rd. with 929 sq. ft. of
living space, 1/3-acre lot,
built in 1926, 79 days on market
$285,000/
$309,900
$80,500
Two-family duplex at Rosemary Lane,
each unit with 2 bedrooms, 1½ baths,
1,110 sq. ft. of living space, 15,246
sq. ft. lot, built in 1971, 115 days on
market
$375,000/
$375,000
$86,500
Three-bedroom, 2 bath Cape on Beach
Rose Lane, 1,862 sq. ft. of living
space, ½-acre-lot, built in 1991, large
deck and screened porch, 243 days on
market
$380,000/
$399,000
$107,500
Four-bedroom, 2½ bath, Victorian on
Satucket Road, 3,000 sq. ft. on about
1½-acre lot, includes pool, built in
1996, 4 days on market (advertises
property gets $3,500/week of rent in
summer months)
$680,000/
$699,000
$192,000
Four-bedroom, 2½ bath contemporary
Cape with Canoe Pond frontage,
3,800 sq. ft. of living space, 1.51-acre
lot, built in 2000, 163 days on the
market
$1,037,500/
$1,100,000
$294,000
Source: Multiple Listing Service, August 21, 2007.
In regard to rentals, the gross median rent of $770, according to the 2000 census, required an income of
about $30,800, which is within the means of low- and moderate-income households. Nevertheless,
approximately 1,200 or 30% of Brewster’s households would still have been unable to afford to rent at
this level based on 2000 census data. Rental listings indicate that year-round market rental listings are
actually quite a bit higher with the average three-bedroom house renting for about $1,500, affordable to a
household earning $60,000 annually, assuming utilities are included in the rents. Winter rentals are a bit
lower fetching about $1,000 per month, affordable to households earning about $40,000, once again
assuming the inclusion of utilities in the rent. Seasonal listings, particularly in desirable locations, are
getting about $3,500 per week.
17 Figures based on 95% financing, interest of 7.0%, 30-year term, annual property tax rate of $5.47 per
thousand, insurance costs of $1.25 per $1,000 of combined valuation of dwelling value (value x 0.5),
personal property ($100,000 fixed), and personal liability ($100,000 fixed), and private mortgage insurance
estimated at 0.3125 percent of loan amount, rents for two-family homes of $650, and condo fees of $200.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 41
While current housing market data tells us that most town residents do not have sufficient incomes to
afford the median sales price of $410,000 as of July 2007 and even $385,000 a year later, and about 30%
of town households cannot afford the median rent of $770 per month, it is also useful to identify numbers
of residents who were living beyond their means based on their housing costs. The 2000 census provides
data on how much households spent on housing whether for ownership or rental. Such information is
helpful in assessing how many households were overspending on housing or encountering housing
affordability problems, defined as spending more than 30% of their income on housing. Based on 1999
data, the census indicated that 234 households or 7.2% of the homeowners in Brewster were spending
between 30% and 34% of their income on housing and another 562 or 17.3% of owners were spending
more than 35% of their income on housing expenses. In regard to renters, 33 renters or 5.3% were
spending between 30% and 34% of their income on housing and another 164 or 26.4% were allocating
35% or more of their incomes for housing. This data suggests that almost 1,000 households or almost
one-quarter of all Brewster households were living in housing that is by common definition beyond their
means and unaffordable.
HUD provides additional data on housing affordability problems through its CHAS Report. This report,
based on 2000 census data for Brewster, indicates the following:
There were 254 households earning at or below 30% of area median income, referred to by HUD
as extremely low-income households, and of these 193 were owners and 61 were renters. Of
these households, 71.5% of the owners and 55.7% of the renters, or 172 total households, were
spending more than 50% of their income on housing-related expenses.
More than two-thirds of extremely low-income elderly owners were spending more than 50% of
their incomes on housing.
There were 23 seniors who rented and were spending more than 50% of their income on housing.
Of the 439 households earning between 30% and 50% of area median income, referred to as very
low-income households, more than half were spending over 30% of their income on housing and
another 30% were spending more than 50% on housing.
There were 730 households earning between 50% and 80% of median income and more than one-
quarter were spending over 30% of their income on housing with about 5% spending more than
50% on housing.
D. Subsidized Housing Inventory
Brewster is not alone in this quandary about what to do about the decreasing lack of affordable housing.
Brewster’s neighbors also have affordable housing levels below the state target, and, most, like Brewster,
face significant challenges in meeting the 10% state goal. The level of housing affordability for each of
the nearby towns is as follows:
1. Brewster – 253 units (5.8%)
2. Chatham – 175 units (4.9%)
3. Dennis – 327 units (4.0%)
4. Eastham – 59 units (2.2%)
5. Harwich – 261 units (4.4%)
6. Orleans – 298 units (9.0%)
While none of Brewster’s neighboring towns have produced enough affordable units to meet the state
target of 10% of its year round housing stock, Orleans has an almost 9% level of affordability and is only
37 units shy of meeting the 10% threshold. There has been a wide range of demonstrated progress
exhibited by the remaining towns listed above, and Brewster, at 5.8%, is towards the top of the range.
This information is visually presented in Figure III-3.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 42
Figure III-3
Level of Affordable Housing
0.00%
1.00%
2.00%
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
8.00%
9.00%
10.00%
Brewster Chatham Dennis Eastham Harwich Orleans
Communities% Affordable HousingIn recognition of pressing local needs, this Housing Production Plan suggests a range of
opportunities to meet specified local housing priorities and to bring Brewster closer to the state
10% threshold. This Plan will also set the stage for producing new units that will allow the Town
to reject unwanted Chapter 40B developments. Given past efforts in the area of affordable
housing, creating 22 units a year needed to meet production goals and exert control over new
development will be a substantial challenge. Nevertheless, affordable housing will come to
Brewster, and the Plan will provide mechanisms for the Town to guide its creation as opposed to
relying on outside development interests.
The state lists 253 affordable housing units in Brewster’s current state-approved Subsidized Housing
Inventory, 5.8% of the total year-round housing stock of 4,379 units. Therefore, the town needs to
produce at least 185 more affordable units to reach the state’s 10% goal based on the existing housing
stock. Build-out projections estimated by the state’s Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (now
renamed the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs) in 2000, indicated that Brewster
could support 1,464 additional units of housing based on current zoning, which would require at least
another 146 units be affordable to comply with the state’s 10% Chapter 40B goal. This is over and above
the 185 affordable units that are needed based on the existing housing stock, representing a projected 331
additional affordable units required at build-out – a daunting task for a small rural community.
To be counted as affordable under Chapter 40B, housing must be dedicated to long-term occupancy of
income-eligible households through resale or rental restrictions. Table III-24 presents the income limits
for the affordable units based on the 2008 HUD guidelines for the Barnstable area, including the town of
Brewster. It is directed to those earning at or below 80% of area median income adjusted by family size.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 43
Table III-24
Affordable Housing Income Limits for the Barnstable MSA
Based on 80% of Area Median Income for 2009
Number of Persons in Household Income Limit
1 $43,450
2 49,700
3 55,900
4 62,100
5 67,050
6 72,050
7 77,000
8 81,950
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Using these income guidelines a family of two (the average household size in Brewster is 2.34 persons)
could afford to purchase a house for no more than approximately $195,000. Based on housing market
information described above, the Town no longer has homes available within this price except for tiny
efficiency condominiums.
1. Current Inventory
Brewster currently has 253 units in its Subsidized Housing Inventory. Created in 1988, the
Brewster Housing Authority (BHA) manages fifty-six (56) of these units.
Huckleberry Lane: This development includes eight (8) two-bedroom units as well as
sixteen (16) three-bedroom units. Two (2) of the three-bedroom apartments are modified for
families with special needs members.
Frederick Court: In 1988, Steven Hayes, a local developer, built Frederick Court as private
condominiums that included 32 units. This development was subsequently purchased by the
state and served as the initial impetus for creating the Brewster Housing Authority to
manage the units. Units at Frederick Court are available for renters who are at least 60 years
of age and earning at or below 80% of area median income or younger persons who are
disabled. The Authority also maintains two (2) one-bedroom modified apartments for
elderly with special needs in the development. There is still more capacity in a parcel that the
BHA owns adjacent to this development, and it is the Housing Authority’s intention to
develop it as housing for developmentally disabled young adults from the Latham School
and include supportive services.
Another 195 units were developed privately by for profit or non-profit developers:
Belmont Park: In 1990, Belmont Park, a twenty-unit, single-family home development,
was completed through the state’s Home Ownership Program (HOP). The applicants for
this funding included the Town of Brewster through the Brewster Housing Partnership and
the McShane Development Corporation, a private corporation. The project is 100%
affordable with deed restrictions, which will insure that the units will remain affordable for
forty (40) years through 2030.
King’s Landing: One hundred and eight (108) of the Town's subsidized units are located in
the King's Landing apartment complex. This complex was subsidized through a Farmers
Home Administration "Flexible Subsidy" loan and is guaranteed to remain in Brewster's
Brewster Housing Production Plan 44
affordable housing inventory until 2014. Twenty-six (26) of these units are under BHA
control through the project-based Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program.
Yankee Clipper Village: In 1995, Yankee Clipper Village was completed, involving a forty-
eight (48) unit single-family homeownership project, developed under DHCD's Local
Initiative Program (LIP) by McShane Development Corporation. Twelve (12) of these units
are guaranteed affordable through deed restrictions to remain affordable for at least forty
(40) years until 2035. One of the affordable units is handicapped accessible.
Yankee Clipper II Town Houses: In 2001 the final phase of the McShane development,
Yankee Clipper II Town Houses, was completed. This six (6) unit condominium complex
included four (4) deed-restricted affordable units, which were sold for prices ranging from
$120,000 to $125,000. These units have yet to be incorporated in the Subsidized Housing
Inventory but are eligible for inclusion.
Additional Homeownership Projects: A total of four (4) deed-restricted homeownership
units were built or rehabilitated on South Orleans Road (Cape Cod Commission rehab),
Great Fields (LIP duplex), and Old Long Pond Road (Habitat for Humanity house).
Wells Court: Wells Court is the latest new development, involving Section 202 financing
and County HOME funds, to provide 24 one-bedroom units for lower income seniors who
are at least 62 years of age and earning within 50% of area median income. The project was
developed through the comprehensive permit process by the Housing Assistance
Corporation (HAC) in cooperation with the Brewster Housing Authority, the owners of the
land on which the development was built.
Of these subsidized developments, four (4) projects totaling 80 units took advantage of the Chapter 40B
comprehensive permit process, representing 32% of the current Subsidized Housing Inventory.
Additionally, the Belmont Park and Yankee Clipper Village developments based their resale formulas in
the deed riders on market value, and as a result of escalating prices have encountered difficulties
maintaining unit affordability upon turnover. Several units in the Belmont Park project have remained
affordable only because of some additional state funding.
The Affordable Housing Committee, now the Brewster Housing Partnership, is focusing on fostering
the development of affordable homeownership units. At the 2002 fall Town Meeting, the
Partnership successfully sponsored a zoning bylaw allowing affordable accessory apartments in
existing residential and commercial structures by special permit. To date four (4) such units have
been permitted but none of these meet all of the new requirements under the state’s Local Initiative
Program (LIP) to be counted as part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 45
Table III-25
Brewster’s Subsidized Housing Inventory
Project Name
# Affordable
Units
Project Type/
Financing
Use of a Comp
Permit
Affordability
Expiration Date
Frederick Court 32 Rental/667 No Perpetuity
Huckleberry Lane 24 Rental/705 No Perpetuity
Belmont Park 20 Ownership/HOP Yes Perpetuity
Great Fields Road 2 Ownership/LIP No Perpetuity
Cape Cod Comm./
S. Orleans Rd.
1 Rehab/HOME No 2010
Habitat/Old Long
Pond Rd.
1 Ownership/LIP No 2005
King’s Landing 108 Rental/MHFA 236 No 2018
Yankee Village 12 Ownership/LIP Yes 2045
Wells Court 24 Rental Yes Perpetuity
Eagle Point 3 Rental No 7-31-2020
DMR Group
Homes
16 Rental No NA
Brewster HOR
Program
1 Ownership/Rehab No 8-18-2012
CDP/LCCCDC
HOR
9 Ownership/Rehab No 12-12-2016 thru
6-30-2019
TOTAL 253
Source: Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development, January 29, 2007.
In May of 1996, the Annual Town Meeting authorized the development of four (4) Town-owned lots for
single-family affordable homes. Title issues subsequently emerged, and the lots remained entangled in a
Land Court battle until 2003. The Town requested proposals for this project and Habitat for Humanity of
Cape Cod was chosen to develop the site. Habitat received HOME Program funding from the Barnstable
County HOME Consortium as well as CPA funding to build the four homes on one of the lots, the other
three to be preserved, a large portion of which is restricted to cover the nitrogen loading from the four
homes. The Community Preservation Committee recommended $95,000 towards construction of the road
and utilities, which was approved by Town Meeting. At this time three of the homes are being built and
the fourth will be started in the spring of 2008. The houses will sell for $103,650 each to qualifying
households earning below 65% of area median income.
Additionally, the Town of Brewster approved $43,270 in Community Preservation funding to assist the
Community Development Partnership’s (formerly called the LCCCDC) efforts to purchase and
rehabilitate a studio condominium at Nickerson Park and rent the unit to a qualifying tenant. At the time
the Community Development Partnership applied for CPA funding, the unit was rented to a low-income
individual, who would have likely been displaced if the unit were sold at market value.
The Town also processed four accessory apartments through its Affordable Accessory Unit bylaw, and
has submitted documentation to DHCD to have these units counted as part of the SHI. These units were
approved prior to the changes in Local Initiative Program (LIP) guidelines that changed a number of
requirements.
In addition to new affordable housing development, Brewster can count 16 units through groups homes
managed by the state’s Department of Mental Retardation (DMR) and another ten (10) units through
Brewster Housing Production Plan 46
housing rehabilitation programs. Nine of these rehabbed units were subsidized by the Department of
Housing and Community Development (DHCD) through the Lower Cape Cod Community Development
Corporation’s (now called the Community Development Partnership) Housing Rehabilitation Loan
Program. This Program provided funding for property owners who rent year-round to Cape residents, as
well as income-eligible, single-family homeowners, to bring units up to current building, health, and
safety codes. The units are scattered throughout the town of Brewster. These units have deed restrictions
in affect for 15 years, and these restrictions are due to expire between 2012 and 2019, and thus be
eliminated from the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
There are also a number of assisted living and nursing homes in Brewster that include some
affordable units:
EPOCH Assisted Living of Brewster: EPOCH Assisted Living of Brewster is a 64-unit
facility at 855 Harwich Road, offering assisted-living care. This development was reviewed
by the Cape Cod Commission as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and the permit
included an affordable housing set-aside of seven (7) units for those earning at or below 80%
of area median income. These units do not yet have deed restrictions, however, and without
them cannot be included in the Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI).
EPOCH Senior Health Care: EPOCH Senior Health Care, located at 873 Harwich Road, is
a skilled nursing facility that also does short-term rehab. The Cape Cod Commission
reviewed the facility as a residential development and imposed an affordability requirement
of 16 beds restricted to those earning within 80% of area median income. These units,
however, will not be eligible for inclusion in the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
The Residences of Pleasant Bay: The Pleasant Bay Nursing Home is a 134-bed facility on
383 South Orleans Road, offering elder care and post-operative physical rehabilitation. A
60-unit assisted-living expansion, The Residences of Pleasant Bay, has been approved.
Because the size of this project triggered the threshold for Cape Cod Commission review as
a Development of Regional Impact, there was a set-aside requirement that six (6) of the units
be reserved for Medicaid-eligible individuals. The project has an Affordable Housing
Requirement (AHR) that is currently on record, and therefore the six units should be eligible
for counting as part of the SHI.
2. Proposed Projects
Another 11 units of affordable housing is planned for development through the following projects:
The Brewster Housing Authority, in collaboration with neighboring Latham Center, has been
pursuing the prospect of developing eight rental apartments, four with one-bedroom and four with
two-bedrooms, for individuals with developmental disabilities who are presently housed at the
Latham School. When these residents must leave the school at age 22, they encounter serious
difficulties finding permanent housing with supportive services. To accommodate this proposed
development, the Housing Authority is seeking approval from DHCD to subdivide somewhat
more than two acres from their present 10.265-acre parcel where their Frederick Court
development is located. It is planned that the Department of Mental Health (DMH) will subsidize
the units.
The Zoning Board of Appeals has approved a comprehensive permit for White Rock Commons, a
development that includes 12 new single-family homes as well as the renovation of a relocated
Brewster Housing Production Plan 47
home on the site with a total of three (3) affordable units. The project is currently under appeal at
the state’s Housing Appeals Committee (HAC).
In addition to the 253 affordable units that are currently included in the Subsidized Housing Inventory, an
additional 22 units should also be counted including:
Yankee Clipper II Townhouses – 4 units
Habitat for Humanity houses off of Slough Road – 4 units
Nickerson Park Condominium – 1 unit
Affordable Accessory Apartments – 4 units
The Residences of Pleasant Bay – 6 units
White Rock Commons – 3 units
If deed restrictions could be executed for the affordable units at EPOCH Assisted Living of Brewster and
the above units are approved by DHCD for inclusion in the SHI, another seven (7) units could be added to
the SHI for a total of 282 units or 6.4% of the year-round housing stock.
E. Gaps Between Existing Housing Needs and Current Supply
As the affordability analysis indicates in Section III.C above, significant gaps remain between what most
current year-round residents can afford and the cost of housing that is available. In fact current prices are
shutting almost everyone out of the market that does not have substantial income and financial assets.
Another look at the gaps between what housing is available in Brewster and what residents can afford to
pay is demonstrated in the following analysis.
1. Rental Housing Needs
The analysis included in Table III-26 projects a shortage of 66 rental units for low- and moderate-
income renters. This data, however, was based only on existing renters in 2000 and does not
reflect pent-up regional need for additional rental opportunities, particularly in the context of a
housing market that has seen extraordinary price increases since 2000. For rental units alone, the
median rental of $770 has climbed beyond $1,000 based on real estate listings, at least a 30%
increase. If Brewster wants to attract more young adults and service employees, it will have to
make sure that it provides additional affordable rental opportunities to enable them to live in town
as the current subsidized rental stock is inadequate to meet these needs.
Table III-26
Rental Unit Gap Analysis
2000 to 2007
Income
Group
Income
Range*
Affordable
Rent
# Renter
Households**
2000/2007
# Existing
Units***
2000/2007
Deficit/
Surplus
2000/2007
Less than
30% of AMI
$12,400 and
less
Less than
$310
61/38 11/11 -50/-27
Between 30%
and 50% of
AMI
$12,401 to
$20,650
$310 to $516 95/84 90/90 -5/6
Between 50%
and 80% of
AMI
$20,651 to
$33,000
$516 to $825 171/151 187/106 16/-45
Total 327/273 288/207 39/-66
Source: 2000 HUD SOCDS CHAS Data – Housing Problems Output for All Households
Brewster Housing Production Plan 48
* Based on 2000 HUD Income Levels for average size household of two persons.
** It can be assumed that incomes have increased since 2000, which would likely reduce some of these
numbers somewhat. The 2007 projections are based on 70% the change in these income categories
between 1989 and 1999 per the census, assuming a similar rate of change.
*** The projections assume that all 207 subsidized rental units cover those in the lowest income categories
and based on rental listings, all other rentals are beyond the means for those ear ning below 80% of area
median income.
A further analysis of the rental needs of different types of households is included in Table III-27.
This table indicates that in 2000 there were 168 renter households with housing problems, either
overcrowding or spending too much of their income on their existing housing. Just looking at the
proportionate need of seniors, small families (two to four family members) and large families
(five or more members), seniors comprise about half of those with housing-related problems,
small families (two to four family members) make -up about 36%, and large families about 14%.
Table III-27
Level of Housing Problems by Type of Renter Household
Household
by Type and
Income
Elderly
Small
Families
Large
Families
All Other
Renters
Total
< 30% AMI 8 14 NA 20 42
30-50% AMI 27 18 4 8 57
50-80% AMI 22 8 0 15 45
> 80% AMI 0 0 10 14 24
Total 57 40 14 57 168
Source: 2000 HUD SOCDS CHAS Data – Housing Problems Output for All Households
This Housing Needs Assessment suggests that the 66-unit deficit in Table III-26, based on the
difference between projected number of households and available units in their price range, and
the 168-unit level need included in Table III-27, focusing on those who are overcrowded or
paying too much, creates an approximate need for almost 240 affordable rental units in Brewster.
This Assessment suggests that these rental units be distributed as follows over the next five years
to cover about one-third of this outstanding need:
Table III-28
Projected Distribution of Rental Units
Target Renter
Households
Target Unit Size Proportion of Need # Units
Seniors One bedroom 50% 40
Small Families Two bedrooms 36% 30
Large Families Three + bedrooms 14% 12
Total 100% 82
Source: Source: 2000 HUD SOCDS CH AS Data – Housing Problems Output for All Households
This amount of rental housing will unlikely accommodate all of the pent-up regional demand, but
represents a reasonable short-term local goal.
2. Homeownership Needs
Table III-29 focuses on homeownership and demonstrates the waning supply of housing priced
within the affordable range of many existing households and suggests a substantial need for more
Brewster Housing Production Plan 49
affordable homeownership opportunities in Brewster, well above the 330 affordable units
projected to be required to get to the state’s goal of 10% at buildout.
Table III-29 demonstrates that if you do not already own a home in Brewster, you are virtually
shut-out of the housing market and even those earning at 150% of area median income are
unlikely to find a home they can afford if they do not have substantial financial assets such as
equity in a current home. First-time homebuyers earning below 150% of median area income are
unlikely to find homeownership a possibility with the exception of tiny cottage condominiums or
small ranches that are “fixer-uppers”.
Table III-29
Homeownership Affordability Analysis
2000 to 2007
Income
Group
Income Range*
Affordable
Sales Prices
#
Households
2000/2007**
# Existing Units
2007***
# Single-family/
#condos
Less than
80% of AMI
$32,600 and less Less than
$115,000
1,096/918 1/20
Total = 21
Between 80%
and 100% of
AMI
$32,601 to
$40,750
$115,000 to
$144,999
325/303 3/4
Total = 7
Between
100% and
150% of AMI
$40,751 to
$61,125
$150,000 to
$220,000
849/946 17/134
Total = 151
Sources: 2000 HUD SOCDS CHAS and Census data, Brewster Assessor’s Office
*Based on 2000 HUD Income Levels for average size household of two persons.
** It can be assumed that incomes have increased since 2000, which would likely reduce some of these
numbers somewhat. The 2007 projections are based on one-half the percentage change in these income
categories between 1989 and 1999 per the census, assuming a similar rate of change.
*** Updated assessments from Brewster Assessor’s Office.
This Housing Needs Assessment recommends that first-time homeownership opportunities be
included as a high priority in the housing strategies and production goals, either through the
development of small single-family homes or three-bedroom condominiums for young workers
and their families. However, as Table III-29 demonstrates, there is a tremendous existing gap
between the current costs of housing and what residents can afford.
Empty nesters looking to downsize from their existing single-family homes should be able to find
accessible and affordable condominiums in Brewster. However, given state requirements
regarding assets, such as not having more than $200,000 in net equity from a previous house or
an additional $75,000 in financial assets, puts many seniors out of the running for affordable
housing that can be counted as part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory. Nevertheless, such
housing does serve an important need for local seniors who want to afford to live independently
in Brewster. Some service-enriched housing for seniors with handicapped accessibility should
also be considered.
3. Special Population Needs
Besides seniors, this Housing Needs Assessment identified more than 2,000 residents with some type of
disability. Of the 2000 population age 5 to 20 years old, 210 or 10.6% indicated that they had some type
of disability. Of those aged 21 to 64, 1,291 residents, or more than one-quarter of the persons in the age
Brewster Housing Production Plan 50
range, claimed a disability. More than 87% of this group was employed, leaving another 13% of 168
residents unemployed, likely due to their disability. In regard to the population 65 years of age or older,
552 seniors or about one-quarter of those in the age group claimed some type of disability. These levels
of disability, particularly that of seniors, represent significant special needs within the Brewster
community, and the Town should try to integrate handicapped accessibility into new housing
development of up to 10% of the units created.
4. Existing Housing Condition Needs
Programs that continue to support necessary home improvements, including deleading and septic repairs
for units occupied by low- and moderate-income households, particularly the elderly living on fixed
incomes and including investor-owned properties tenanted by qualifying households, should be integrated
into Brewster’s housing efforts.
5. Summary of Priority Housing Needs
This Housing Needs Assessment suggests that over the next five years the Town of Brewster
establish the following targeted affordable housing production goals based on priority housing
needs.
Table III-30
Summary of Priority Housing Needs and Targeted Production Goals
Type of Housing Seniors/One
Bedroom Units
Small Families/
2 Bedrooms
Large Families/
3+ Bedrooms
Total
Rental 40 30 12 82
Ownership 6 6 26 38
Special Needs* (4) (4) (4) (12)
Total 46 36 38 120
Source: 2000 HUD SOCDS CHAS and Census data, Karen Sunnarborg Consulting
Production goals will chart housing development activity over the next five years based largely
on this distribution of needs.
F. Local and Regional Organizations
The town of Brewster has a number of local and regional agencies and organizations available to help
support the production of affordable housing or provide housing-related services:
1. Brewster Housing Authority
The Brewster Housing Authority manages 56 units of housing – 24 units for families on Huckleberry
Lane (state’s Chapter 705 Program) and 32 units for seniors and disabled earning at or below 80% of area
median income at Frederick Court (state’s Chapter 667 Program). It also administers project-based rental
subsidies for 26 units at Kings Landing (involving the state’s Project-based MRVP Program). The BHA
also owns the units at Huckleberry Lane and Frederick Court and is planning a new development on part
of a parcel adjacent to Frederick Court for developmentally disabled young adults.
The Housing Authority indicates that there are typically two to five Brewster residents on their wait lists
for senior units and wait times vary but are about two years for residents. For units at its Huckleberry
Lane family development, the BHA has only been taking emergency applications and has not been able to
offer units to anyone who is not considered an emergency priority applicant and therefore homeless or at
risk of becoming homeless.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 51
The Brewster Housing Authority has also been designated as the entity to monitor the affordability of
those accessory apartments that are established under the affordable accessory apartment provisions of the
Zoning Bylaw.
2. Brewster Community Preservation Committee
In September of 2000, the Community Preservation Act (CPA) was enacted to provide Massachusetts
cities and towns with another tool to conserve open space, preserve historic properties and provide
affordable housing. This enabling statute established the authority for municipalities in the
Commonwealth to create a Community Preservation Fund derived from a surcharge of up to 3% of the
property tax with a corresponding state match of up to 100% funded through new fees at the Registry of
Deeds and Land Court. Once adopted the Act requires at least 10% of the monies raised to be distributed
to each of the three categories (open space, historic preservation and affordable housing), allowing
flexibility in distributing the majority of the money to any of the three uses as determined by the
community. The Act further requires that a Community Preservation Committee of five to nine members
be established, representing various boards or committees in the community, to recommend to the
legislative body, in this case Town Meeting, how to spend the Community Preservation Fund.
In November 2004, Brewster Town Meeting adopted the CPA and ballot approval occurred in May 2005.
Brewster approved a 3% surcharge. Like the other communities on Cape Cod, Brewster voted to convert
the 3% property tax surcharge that had been committed to the Land Bank for the purchase and
conservation of open space into funding to support the Community Preservation Fund. As a result, the
Town was able to continue to receive state matching funds, as state support for the Land Bank had run
out, without raising additional taxes. The Brewster CPA requires that 50% must be spent or reserved for
open space, 10% spent or reserved for historic preservation, 10% spent or reserved for community
housing, with the remaining 30% remaining available for historic preservation, community housing or
recreation.
The Community Preservation Committee includes nine (9) members including representatives of the
Housing Authority, Conservation Commission, Historic Commission, Planning Board, and Recreation
Committee as well as four at-large citizen representatives appointed by the Board of Selectmen.
Estimates indicate that the surcharge will raise approximately $600,000 annually. With the current state
match at 100%, available funds will likely double to about $1.2 million, at least through the near future.
Despite decreases in the state matching pool because of reduced turnover of housing, many communities
are expecting related decreases in the state match, however, those which have approved the 3% surcharge,
like Brewster, will be in a better position based on current state matching formulas.
To date, Community Preservation funding for housing has been allocated to the following activities:
$95,000 for the four affordable homes that are being built by Habitat for Humanity of Cape Cod
on James Burr Road, off Slough Road.
$43,000 to the Community Development Partnership (formerly named the Lower Cape Cod
Community Development Corporation) to purchase a condominium at Nickerson Condominiums
to manage as an affordable rental unit.
$60,000 to create a buy-down program for existing affordable ownership units that come up for
resale at unaffordable prices because the resale price formula in the original deed riders was
indexed to market values (i.e., Belmont Park, Yankee Clipper Village).
3. Brewster Housing Partnership
The Brewster Housing Partnership is a Town committee involved in promoting affordable
housing in the community. The Housing Partnership has been particularly focused on fostering
the development of affordable units for ownership. For example, it provided important support for
Brewster Housing Production Plan 52
the Belmont Park development that included twenty (20) single-family homes, completed through
the state’s Home Ownership Program (HOP). The applicants for this funding included the Town of
Brewster through the Brewster Housing Partnership and the McShane Development Corporation, a
private corporation. More recently the Housing Partnership has revised the Affordable Accessory
Apartment bylaw to promote this type of housing in Brewster, providing small rental opportunities in
the community. The Housing Partnership has been substantially involved in the development of this
Housing Plan and will be the lead entity in overseeing the implementation of various housing
strategies as indicated in Section VII.
4. Brewster Council on Aging
The Brewster Council on Aging is a Town department that supports the quality of life of Brewster’s
elders through a wide variety of services. These activities include an information and referral service on a
wide range of issues, community-based services to promote independent living such as free shuttle bus
transportation (including a shuttle to medical visits in Boston), as well as in-home support services. The
Council relies heavily on local volunteers to support its activities and operates a senior center.
The Council receives numerous inquiries regarding housing, particularly regarding where elders might
find affordable housing, either rental or ownership, that is easily accessible on the ground floor or by
elevator. Particularly vulnerable seniors are those who lose a spouse that results in a substantial decrease
in their fixed incomes during a time of rising housing expenses including taxes, utilities and insurance. A
number of Brewster’s seniors prefer to move from their more isolated and increasingly difficult to
maintain single-family homes, but are finding that they cannot afford to stay in town.
The Council on Aging also works with the Town on a program that abates taxes for qualifying seniors in
exchange for services to the Town. The Town currently allows a maximum of $500 to be worked off in a
specified number of hours. In addition to this work program, the Town also has a tax exemption program
for income-eligible seniors that reduces property tax bills.
5. Cape Cod Commission
The Cape Cod Commission was created as the regional planning and regulatory agency for the
Cape. In addition to coordinating a wide range of planning and policy activities, the Commission
administers the Technical Assistance Program (TAP) that provides funds for consultants to assist
communities in promoting affordable housing. The Commission also manages the allocation of a
number of housing subsidy funds that can be made available to communities to support affordable
housing efforts including the oversight of HOME Program funds on behalf of the Barnstable
County HOME Consortium, the Soft Second Loan Program to subsidize mortgages for first-time
homebuyers, the DRI Fund Management, and the County Home Ownership Fund (CHOP).
(3225 Main Street, Barnstable, MA 02630; 508/362-3828).
6. Barnstable County HOME Consortium
This Consortium includes all municipalities in Barnstable County and provides federal HOME
Program funding to support the financing of a wide variety of housing activities. These funds are
available to all towns participating in the Consortium, including Brewster, and are administered
by the Cape Cod Commission. HOME funding for Brewster, as of the end of June 2006, was
$135,400 including $5,400 in support for two ownership units, $50,000 for Wells Court and
$80,000 for four units at Slough Road. Brewster also received $60,670 in HOME funding for the
Down Payment/Closing Cost Program, and $11,945 for two loans as part of the Homeowner
Repair Program, also as of June 30, 2006. (C/O the Cape Cod Commission; 3225 Main Street,
Barnstable, MA 02630; 508/362-3828).
Brewster Housing Production Plan 53
7. Housing Assistance Corporation (HAC)
The Housing Assistance Corporation (HAC) has proclaimed its mission to “promote and
implement the right of all people on Cape Cod and the Islands to occupy safe and affordable
housing”. This non-profit organization is working throughout the Cape as a sponsor of affordable
housing developments and has a wide range of financial and educational resources available for
renters, existing homeowners and first-time homebuyers including HOME Program funding and
rental subsidies. HAC was also the developer of Wells Court, a subsidized housing development
for qualifying seniors in Brewster. (460 West Main Street, Hyannis, MA 02601; 508/771-5400)
8. Community Development Partnership (formerly named the Lower Cape Community
Development Corporation
The Community Development Partnership was established in 1992 (named the Lower Cape Cod
CDC at that time) to promote affordable housing and economic development in the towns of the
Lower Cape. In regard to affordable housing, the organization recognized that the dwindling
supply of affordable housing was becoming a critical problem. Through its Housing
Development Program it is creating new, year-round, affordable housing units by purchasing
existing units or building new units. The organization also used to manage the Housing
Rehabilitation Program that was supported through Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds provided by the state but was suspended given funding constraints.18 (P.O. Box
1860, Main Street Mercantile, North Eastham, MA 02651; 508/240-7873)
9. Habitat for Humanity of Cape Cod
Habitat for Humanity is an ecumenical, non-profit Christian ministry dedicated to building
simple, decent homes in partnership with families in need that has grown over the past two
decades into one of the largest private homebuilders in the world. The organization has almost
1,600 U.S. affiliates and over 2,000 affiliates worldwide, including one on the Cape that has been
able to build new homes for first-time homebuyers through donated land, materials, labor and
funding as well as other special financing strategies. Brewster has one affordable house that was
developed in recent years through this organization and another four under development at
Slough Road including the construction of four three-bedroom homes on land donated by the
Town. Three of the Cape-style units are partially completed and the fourth, which will be
changed to a ranch-style for a family with a disabled child, will be started in Spring 2008. (658
Main Street, West Yarmouth, MA 02673; 508/775-3559)
18 The Housing Rehabilitation Program provided loans to private property owners who committed to
keeping their property affordable as year-round units. The terms of the loan were determined by the needs
and budget of the qualifying applicants. Since 1994 the Program improved nine (9) of these loans in
Brewster. LCCCDC is now operating a comparable program in Provincetown an d Wellfleet.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 54
IV. OBSTACLES TO DEVELOPMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES
It will be a great challenge for the town of Brewster to create enough affordable housing units to meet the
state’s 10% affordable housing standard, production goals and local needs, particularly in light of current
constraints to new development including the following:
A. Infrastructure
Challenges
As mentioned earlier, a major constraint and cost factor for new development relates to
infrastructure, particularly the total lack of sewer services and the absence of water services in
some areas of town that raise concerns among residents about impacts of any new development
on the environment, the water supply and quality in particular. The issue of water is particularly
critical on Cape Cod. Residents must rely solely on on-site septic systems unless special
treatment facilities are integrated into the new development, a costly measure that requires a
fairly large project to be feasible.
As part of the 2006 Pleasant Bay Estuary System Report, DEP has released suggested total
maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for total nitrogen (N) for the Pleasant Bay watershed that
includes a good portion of eastern Brewster. The primary goal is to lower the concentrations of
nitrogen by greatly reducing the loading from on-site subsurface wastewater disposal systems
through a variety of centralized or decentralized methods such as sewering or treatment with
nitrogen removal technology, advanced treatment of septage, upgrade/repairs of failed on-site
systems, and/or installation of N-reducing on-site systems.
Similar studies are already in process for the Namskaket and Quivett Estuary Systems, which will
result in similar state suggested nitrogen loading limits. At this time these are only suggestions by
the state. However, DEP may change these to mandated regulations, and the Town may be
required to adhere to no net nitrogen standards.
Mitigation Measures
It will be important for any new affordable housing development to address these infrastructure
constraints, septic issues in particular, and insure that there are sufficient amounts of subsidies
incorporated into the project to adequately service new residents and protect the environment.
Also, the Town will need to consider providing municipal sewer services in some areas of town
where growth could better be directed at some point in the future. For example, areas with
municipal services and commercial uses that allow multi-family housing, such as the C-H district,
should be studied for possible new infrastructure development. The Cape Cod Commission is
currently working on a mapping project that is likely to provide information to Cape communities
on likely areas for targeting increased densities.
B. Zoning
Challenges
As is the case in most American communities, a zoning bylaw or ordinance is enacted to control the use
of land including the patterns of housing development. Like most localities in the Commonwealth,
Brewster’s Zoning Bylaw embraces large-lot zoning, in Brewster’s case at least 60,000 square feet except
in the R-R district where it is 100,000 square feet and the C-H district where multi-family dwellings
require 130,000 square feet plus 10,000 per bedroom. Low housing density severely constrains the
construction of affordable housing. Minimum lot frontages of 150 feet, 25-foot side, rear and backyard
setbacks, and two-story height limits also seriously constrain affordable housing development. There are,
however, several zoning provisions included in the existing Bylaw that are meant to potentially promote
smart growth and/or more affordable units including:
Brewster Housing Production Plan 55
Affordable Accessory Apartments
The Zoning Bylaw until recently included a provision that stated “for the purpose of promoting
the development of affordable housing in Brewster for year-round residents, one accessory
apartment, incorporating up to a maximum of two bedrooms per lot may be allowed by a fifteen-
year, limited special permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals”19 subject to a number of
conditions including:
The residential lot must have at least 15,000 square feet of contiguous upland or
commercial lots of at least 10,000 square feet. If a change in the building footprint is
proposed, the units may be allowed in principal or attached accessory structures on
residential lots with 20,000 square feet or more of contiguous upland.
The owner of the property must occupy the principal dwelling or accessory unit on a
year-round basis. For commercial properties, the owner must live in Brewster or
designate a property manager residing in Brewster who will be named in the special
permit and whose residency will be confirmed.
The accessory unit cannot be larger than 900 square feet.
For the first five (5) years of the program, no more than 30 such units can be approved in
any one calendar year.
Accessory units are not allowed in detached structures unless apartments already existed
prior to approval of the bylaw.
One off-street parking space is required.
Owners of accessory units are responsible for submitting annual information to the
Building and Zoning Commissioner as well as the Brewster Housing Authority, or other
monitoring agent, verifying occupancy and management status.
Leases must be for one-year terms and are to be renewed pending recertification by the
Housing Authority or other designated monitoring agent of the tenant’s income
eligibility.
Affordability requirements must comply with the state’s Local Initiative Program.
To date and prior to this bylaw, thirty-eight (38) accessory apartment units had been permitted,
most of them for family members (so-called in-law apartments). Only four (4) affordable
accessory units were approved through the above requirements. These units are awaiting DHCD
approval as LIP units but none meet all of the more recent state requirements to be counted as
part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
The Town recently approved another revised accessory apartment bylaw at its fall of 2007 Town
Meeting. Key components of this new bylaw include:
Accessory units are allowed by right on residentially zoned lots that exceed the stipulated
area regulations by at least 25%.
One accessory unit may be allowed under special permit if the lot has more than 40,000
square feet or if the lot is residentially zoned and has at least 125% of the minimum lot
requirements for the district.
Accessory units allowed by right may be situated in attached or detached structures
provided that zoning minimum dimensional requirements are met.
Accessory units can only be created on lots with a structure or structures that existed
prior to the enactment of the bylaw.
19 Town of Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Section 179-42.1.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 56
No accessory unit can be sold separate and apart from the principle structure unless it has
been in use for at least 15 consecutive years and the ZBA grants a special permit with the
condition of remaining affordable in perpetuity.
Accessory units are allowed in commercial properties if the owner or property manager is
a Brewster resident.
Accessory units are allowed by right in commercial, industrial or business districts if the
lot meets minimum dimensional requirements. If the lot does not meet minimum
dimensional requirements, an accessory unit may be approved under special permit.
A minimum of one parking space per accessory unit is required.
Thus far no units have been permitted under these provisions.
Multi-family Dwellings20
Multi-family housing and townhouses are permitted in the C-H district (Commercial High
Density District) under a number of very restrictive conditions including that the units and
accompanying lots not comprise more than 35% of the land area, that the structures not occupy
more than 25% of the lot, at least 20% of the lot must be reserved as green space, set -backs must
be at least 150 feet from an existing roadway and at least 200 feet from the boundary of any
residential (R) district, buildings must have no more 30,000 square feet of floor space excluding
basements, and buildings must be separated from each other by at least 25 feet.
Cluster Residential Development
“The cluster residential development is intended to allow flexibility in lot sizes and building
arrangements for property owners in meeting the basic intent of the dimensional requirements of
Article V, while at the same time maintaining the existing character of the Town.”21 This
provision, while promoting a “smarter” type of development pattern, does not include any density
bonuses or other incentives for integrating any amount of affordable housing. There are a
number of clustered developments in Brewster including Wood Duck and Eastward Homes.
Major Residential Development
Major residential development is defined under the Zoning Bylaw as either the (1) land division,
whether a subdivision or not, so as to increase the number of buildable lots, unless restricted from
residential use, to more than six within any twelve-month period; or (2) issuance of building
permits for construction of more than eight dwelling units within any twelve-month period.22
Such developments require a special permit from the Planning Board and applicants must submit
a basic development plan as well as a substantially different alternative development plan. The
Board can approve the basic development plan as long as they determine it to be at least as
beneficial to the town as the alternative.
The Planning Board may authorize flexible development within a major residential development
subject to a number of conditions – 1.) the lots having reduced area are not limited to six if
frontage is on a newly created street or an existing street that has been substantially improved by
the development, 2.) each lot has frontage of at least 50 feet and a lot area of at least ½ the
required minimum, and 3.) the proposed open space is conveyed to the Town or its Conservation
Commission through a recorded restriction. All forms of residential development may be allowed
in a major residential development. In regard to the number of units allowed, the Planning Board
20 Town of Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Section 179-34. Multi-family dwellings are defined under Section
179-2 of the Zoning Bylaw as properties with three or more dwelling units.
21 Town of Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Section 179-35.
22 Town of Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Section 179-2.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 57
may approve a density bonus of up to 15% of the basic maximum, if the units are affordable
subject to the requirements of the state’s Local Initiative Program (LIP). The Planning Board
may also limit the rate of development as a condition of its approval. This bylaw was used for a
couple of large developments in the past (Wood Duck, Eastward Homes, Carson’s Way, Long
Pond, AP Newcomb-Newcomb Knolls), but the Town has not had a large development proposal
in a long time. Additionally, this bylaw has not resulted in any affordable units.
Planned Residential Development23
The Zoning Bylaw defines Planned Residential Development as “a mixed use development on a
plot of land in single or consolidated ownership, in which a mixture of residential, open space,
commercial, recreational and other uses and a variety of building types may be permitted subject
a number of conditions.24 Such conditions include a requirement that the plot of land be at least
25 contiguous acres of upland, significantly reducing prospects for use. A comprehensive
development plan and impact study must be submitted for approval by the Planning Board under
a special permit. In addition to single-family homes, two-family as well as multi-family (three
units or more) are allowed, but there are no density bonuses for incorporating affordable housing.
This bylaw has not been used to date.
Subsidized Elderly Housing
Subsidized elderly housing is allowed in most residential districts and the C-H district by special
permit from the Planning Board. At least ten (10) contiguous acres are required and the density
may not exceed more than eight (8) units per acre. Also the rules under Section 179-34,
multifamily dwellings, apply not only in the C-H district but the residential districts as well. The
bylaw also limits the number of units stating that “the provisions of this section shall not be used
to increase the town-wide number of subsidized dwelling units by more than 125 dwelling units
in excess of that number which is consistent with local needs as defined in MGL C. 40B, Section
20.”25 There are a considerable number of design requirements and the bylaw adds that the
Planning Board must determine “that the proposal would have beneficial effects which
overbalance any adverse impacts on the neighborhood or the Town”26 including a number of
considerations, among them the effect on the range of available housing choices and service to
identified housing needs. There are, however, no specific requirements for integrating
affordability into conditions for the special permit.
Mitigation Measures
This Housing Production Plan includes a number of strategies that are directed to reforming local
zoning regulations, making them “friendlier” to the production of affordable housing and smart
growth development. These include adding inclusionary zoning, further modifying accessory
apartment provisions, promoting mixed-use development, encouraging more flexible clustered
zoning, and allowing affordable housing on noncomplying lots (see Section VII.B).
C. Local Capacity
Challenges
In addition to managing 82 units of subsidized housing, the Brewster Housing Authority has been active
in supporting a number of other housing initiatives including the lease of its land for Wells Court and its
pursuit of new units for the developmentally disabled on surplus property at its Frederick Court
development. The Town of Brewster also has experience in working with regional non-profit housing
23 Town of Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Section 179-36.
24 Town of Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Section 179-2.
25 Town of Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Section 179-42.
26 Town of Brewster Zoning Byla w, Section 179-42.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 58
providers such as the Housing Assistance Corporation (HAC), Habitat for Humanity of Cape Cod and
Lower Cape Cod CDC. The Brewster Housing Partnership has actively supported new affordable
homeownership development as well as affordable accessory apartments. It will be important for the
Town to continue to establish important partnerships with developers, for profit and non-profit, and build
its capacity to promote new affordable units by aggressively reaching out for necessary technical and
financial resources in addition to securing the necessary political support for new housing initiatives and
the implementation of the Housing Production Plan.
Brewster is fortunate to have an Assistant Town Administrator who has provided professional support of
affordable housing initiatives, and it has recently received approval at its spring Town Meeting to hire a
Town Planner, which will provide an additional boost to local capacity.
Mitigation Measures
This Housing Plan suggests that the Town hire a Housing Coordinator to oversee the implementation of
the Plan. The Town will also continue to actively engage the Brewster Housing Authority, local and
regional non-profit organizations and private developers in its housing initiatives to secure important
support in the implementation of this Plan (see strategy VII.D.1 and 3).
D. School Enrollment
Challenges
While Brewster’s population almost doubled between 1980 and 2000, those under the age of five stayed
at about the same level, 359 and 353, respectively. Also, proportionately the school-age population
between five and 17 years is declining somewhat, from 18% in 1980 to 17.4% in 2000. Those under 18
years of age comprised almost one-quarter of the 1980 population, or 1,300 young persons, then
decreased on a percentage basis to about 21% of residents or 2,106 persons in 2000. Cape Cod
Commission data indicates that only 478 students were enrolled in local schools as of October 2005,
down from 537 students two years earlier. Many people with children have moved away due to the high
cost of living, lack of jobs, etc., and others are sending their kids to charter schools and private schools in
the area. Moreover, given declining enrollment, there has been some discussion about moving all of the
elementary school students to the Stony Brook School, thus freeing the Eddy Elementary School for
municipal or other purposes. Nevertheless, build-out projections indicate that the school age population
should increase by about another 600 children, which would likely tax the school system.
Mitigation Measures
This Housing Production Plan recognizes the need for a wider range of affordable housing options in
Brewster, including first-time homebuyer opportunities for young families. However, the Plan also
suggests exploring options for covering some of the added municipal costs associated with new students,
including 40R and 40S (see Section VII.B.4 for more information).
E. Transportation
Challenges
Like most of Cape Cod, Brewster encounters significant problems with traffic congestion,
particularly in the summer months when the population doubles in size. Starting in June 2006, a
new transportation system was introduced, called Flex-Route, which provides bus service
throughout the Outer Cape including Brewster. Those living within a half mile of the route can
call the service to arrange pick-up. Twelve buses were purchased through a federal grant
obtained by the National Seashore and all participating towns pay the operating expenses, with
some support from passengers via a token system. It should also be noted that Brewster’s
Council on Aging offers free transportation to area seniors, thus promoting independent living for
this part of the population. Nevertheless, public transit remains limited and largely requires
residents to have access to automobiles, further increasing the cost of living in Brewster and
Brewster Housing Production Plan 59
presenting a barrier to those low- and moderate-income residents who are more likely to feel the
financial strains of owning and maintaining a car.
Mitigation Measures
The Town will have to pay particular attention to the projected traffic implications of any new
development, working with the developer to resolve problems. One of the strategies included in this
Housing Plan is to explore higher density, mixed-use development in appropriate locations that has the
potential for reducing the reliance on the automobile (see Section VII.B.4 for details). Opportunities to
direct development to areas that are most conducive to higher densities, such as Underpass Road and
commercial corridors, may serve to reduce transportation problems somewhat.
F. Environmental Concerns
Challenges
Brewster’s six miles of coastline, including 76+ ponds, thousands of acres of protected parkland (Roland
C. Nickerson State Park, Punkhorn Parkland Conservation Area, Drummer Boy Park), the Stony Brook
Herring Run and the Cape Cod Museum of Natural History, among others, attract many thousands of
visitors annually and provide highly valued opportunities for a wide range of recreational activities.
These important natural assets need to be protected to the greatest extent possible and include, but are not
limited to, the following:
Water -- The town has 76+ ponds totaling 1,661 acres in area, and as a result, about 10% of the
town’s total 16,279 acres of area is under water and a good portion of eastern Brewster, as part of
the Pleasant Bay watershed, is an environmentally sensitive area facing more rigorous regulatory
controls by the state.
Monomoy Lens -- Brewster, along with Harwich, Dennis, Orleans and Chatham, obtains its
drinking water from a sole-source aquifer, the Monomoy Lens. Because drinking water is such a
crucial resource, the Town has enacted a Groundwater Protection Bylaw that limits development
of land within its Zone II’s, the recharge areas for its four (4) wellfields. Further, the Town has
enacted Wetland Protection Bylaws to protect against the destruction of habitat and pollution of
surface and groundwater resources.
Existing Open Space -- The Town has struggled to protect open space, which is under tremendous
development pressures. Nickerson State Park occupies 1,789 acres of the town’s land area as a
permanently protected public recreation area. As a result of both public and private efforts,
approximately 29% of the town’s land area is now permanently protected. There is a full
understanding that as build-out approaches, development pressures will increase, which further
stresses the need to actively preserve land and accommodate affordable housing within existing
and future development.
The impacts of any new development must be identified as to how its affects the environment and what
actions might be required to mitigate impacts. While regulations to protect the environment, such as
wetland bylaws and ZONE II regulations, and to protect the public health, such as Title V regulations, are
important and essential, they nevertheless present challenges to development by reducing the amount of
buildable land and increasing the time and costs of developing new housing.
Mitigation Measures
Housing strategies are largely oriented to actions that will promote smart growth and limit
impacts on the environment such as promoting accessory apartments, converting existing housing
to long-term affordability, developing infill sites in existing neighborhoods, and encouraging
mixed-use development (see Section VII.A for details on these strategies).
Brewster Housing Production Plan 60
G. Availability of Subsidy Funds
Challenges
Financial resources to subsidize affordable housing preservation and production as well as rental
assistance, have suffered budget cuts over the years making funding more limited and extremely
competitive. Communities are finding it increasingly difficult to secure necessary funding and must be
creative in determining how to finance projects and tenacious in securing these resources.
Community Preservation funding offers Brewster an important resource for affordable housing
production, as will HOME funding from the Barnstable HOME Consortium. Nonetheless, the Town will
need substantial support from regional, state and federal resources as well.
Mitigation Measures
This Housing Plan provides guidance on the use of Community Preservation Funds for affordable
housing initiatives that will enable the Town to support the production of new affordable units and
leverage other public and private funding sources, hopefully at a level well above the minimum 10%
contribution. Moreover, like other communities on Cape Cod, Brewster has access to federal HOME
subsidies, administered by the Barnstable County HOME Consortium. In an effort to better manage and
coordinate funding for affordable housing purposes, this Plan recommends that the Town hire a Housing
Coordinator (see Section VII.A.1 for details).
H. Community Perceptions
Challenges
Residents in most communities are concerned about the impacts that any new development will have on
local services and quality of life, and many may also have negative impressions of affordable housing in
general. Therefore, local opposition to new affordable housing developments is likely to be more the
norm than the exception. On the other hand, with such high real estate prices, community perceptions
have begun to tilt towards the realization that more affordable housing options are needed in the
community. More people are recognizing that the new kindergarten teacher, their grown children, or the
elderly neighbor may not be able to afford to live or remain in the community. It is this growing
awareness that is spurring communities such as Brewster to take a more proactive stance in supporting
affordable housing initiatives.
Mitigation Measures
Brewster proposes launching an ongoing educational campaign to better inform local leaders and
residents on the issue of affordable housing, to help dispel negative stereotypes, provide up-to-
date information on new opportunities and to garner political support (see details on this strategy
in Section VII.D.4). It will be important to continue to be sensitive to community concerns and
provide opportunities for residents to not only obtain accurate information on housing issues,
whether they relate to zoning or new development, but have opportunities for real input.
Moreover, this Plan proposes that the Town hold at least annual housing summits to provide
opportunities for local leaders to share information about the status of affordable housing
initiatives to better promote municipal communication and cooperation in the implementation of
various strategies (see strategy VII.D.5) as well as for local leaders to obtain ongoing training
related to affordable housing (see strategy VII.D.6).
Brewster Housing Production Plan 61
V. PROPERTY INVENTORY
The following information represents a work in progress that will be fine-tuned on an ongoing basis in
coordination with other Town Boards and Committees.
A. Publicly Owned Properties
Table V-1 lists some properties that are owned by the Town or the Brewster Housing Authority that may
be suitable for some amount of infill or clustered affordable housing development. The Town has
conducted some preliminary analysis of Town-owned property and has identified five (5) parcels that are
listed in the following table. The Town has allocated $15,000 for legal and professional services to clear
and perfect the title to these properties (this funding was allocated several years ago, and work has not yet
been completed, which the Board of Selectmen needs to insure happens as quickly as possible). Another
Town-owned site is also included that is located in the CH zone where multi-family housing is allowed.
The Brewster Housing Partnership recently submitted a letter to the Board of Selectmen encouraging the
designation of this parcel for affordable housing. The Brewster Housing Authority owns two other
parcels listed below.
Table V-1
Publicly-owned Properties with Potential for Affordable Housing Development
Parcels
Map #/
Parcel #
Total Parcel
Acres/
Estimated
# Housing
Units/Aff.
Units
Comments
BHA/Latham
School housing
site
24/46
2
8/8
Housing Authority owned site
currently part of its Frederick
Court property; Town providing
$50,000 in CPA funds for
predevelopment work
BHA senior
rental
24/45 5.8 20/20 Town donated site to HA
Underpass Rd. 26/102 3 25/25 Zoned for multi-family housing;
adjacent to Stony Brook School
Millstone Road 98/12 14.46 40/20 CPC voted to provide resources
to determine site feasibility
Hazel Lane 54/23 .56 2/2 Housing Partnership to develop
an RFP for the site
Slough Road 1 10/71 .31 2/2 Housing Partnership to develop
an RFP for the site
Slough Road 2 10/56 .40 2/2 Housing Partnership to develop
an RFP for the site
Freeman’s Way 143/4 .83 4/4 Housing Partnership to develop
an RFP for the site
TOTAL 22.6 93/78
The Town should also analyze additional municipally owned parcels that are smaller in size to determine
whether the sale of such properties, with proceeds going to the Housing Trust, would ultimately generate
more affordable units.
In addition to currently owned Town parcels, the Town of Brewster may decide to acquire privately
owned sites over the next decade for the purposes of protecting open space and developing some amount
Brewster Housing Production Plan 62
of housing, including affordable housing, through cluster development on a portion of the sites. Smaller
sites may be available as well to build affordable new starter homes on in infill basis. Some limited
opportunities may also be available through the taking of tax-foreclosed properties for affordable housing.
B. Private Properties
It is also likely that developers, non-profit and for profit, will continue to pursue comprehensive permit
applications or the standard regulatory process for affordable housing development, and it will be
incumbent on the Town to determine the best approach for negotiating with these developers to guide new
development to more appropriately satisfy local needs and requirements. One of the strategies
recommended in this Housing Production Plan is to prepare Housing Guidelines that establish general
local criteria for new housing development that would be acceptable to the Town, including the
identification of areas in town that might be more appropriate for denser development; another is to reach
out to developers to promote development opportunities in line with local priorities; and still another is to
promote accessory apartments or the conversion of existing housing to long-term affordability.
Additionally, the Town should become alert to opportunities for acquiring property that would be suitable
for some amount of affordable housing. Ideally such properties would meet a number of smart growth
principals such as:
The redevelopment of existing structures,
Infill sites development including small home development on nonconforming lots,
Development of housing in underutilized locations with some existing infrastructure,
Large enough to accommodate clustered housing,
Good carrying capacity for water and septic systems or can accommodate special treatment
facilities,
Buffer between adjacent properties, and
Located along a major road.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 63
VI. AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION GOALS
The Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) administered the
Planned Production Program since December 2002, in accordance with regulations that have enabled
cities and towns to prepare and adopt a Housing Plan that demonstrated the production of an increase of
.75% over one year or 1.5% over two-years of its year-round housing stock eligible for inclusion in the
Subsidized Housing Inventory.27 If DHCD certified that the locality had complied with its annual goals
or that it had met two-year goals, the Town could, through its Zoning Board of Appeals, deny
comprehensive permit applications without opportunity for appeal by developers for one or two-years,
respectively.
Recently adopted changes to Chapter 40B have established some new rules.28 For example, Planned
Production Plans are now referred to as Housing Production Plans. Moreover, annual goals changed from
0.75% of the community’s year-round housing stock, translating into 33 units per year or 66 units over
two years for Brewster, to 0.50% of its year-round units, meaning that Brewster will have to now produce
at least 22 affordable units annually to meet production goals through 2010. When the 2010 census
figures become available in 2011, this number will be somewhat higher.
Using the strategies summarized under Section VII and priority needs established in Section III.E, the
Town of Brewster has developed a Housing Production Program to chart affordable housing activity over
the next decade. The projected goals are best guesses at this time, and there is likely to be a great deal of
fluidity in these estimates from year to year. The goals are based largely on the following criteria:
At a minimum, at least fifty percent (50%) of the units that are developed on publicly-owned
parcels should be affordable to households earning at or below 80% of area median income – the
affordable units – and at least another 10% affordable to those earning up to 120% of area
median income – moderate-income “workforce” units – depending on project feasibility. The
rental projects will also target some households earning at or below 60% of area median income
and lower depending upon subsidy program requirements.
Projections are based on no fewer than four (4) units per acre. However, given specific site
conditions and financial feasibility it may be appropriate to decrease or increase density as long
as projects are in compliance with state Title V and wetlands regulations.
Because housing strategies include some development on privately owned parcels, production
will involve projects sponsored by private developers through the standard regulatory process or
possibly the “friendly” comprehensive permit process. The Town will continue to work with
these private developers to fine-tune proposals to maximize their responsiveness to community
interests and to increase affordability to 30% of total project units to the greatest extent feasible,
potentially infusing CPA funds where appropriate.
The projections involve a mix of rental and ownership opportunities. The Town will work with
developers to promote a diversity of housing types directed to different populations with housing
needs including families, seniors and other individuals with special needs to offer a wider range
of housing options for residents.
27 Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B, 760 CMR 31.07 (1)(i).
28 Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B, 760 CMR 56.00.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 64
Table VI-1
Brewster Housing Production Program*
Strategies by Year
Units
< 80% AMI
Units
80%-120% AMI
Total # units
Year 1 – 2009
Latham School Project/
special needs rental
8 0 8
Conversion of existing housing/
first-time homeownership
2 0 2
Private development – friendly 40B with
additional subsidies/ownership
12 4 36
Subtotal 22 4 46
Year 2 – 2010
Other BHA development/rental 20 0 20
Housing on nonconforming lots/
first-time homeownership
2 0 4
Subtotal 22 0 24
Year 3 – 2011
Mixed-use development (private dev.) 4 1 12
Conversion of existing housing/
purchase for special needs rental housing
12 0 12
Inclusionary zoning (with added subsidies) 5 2 20
Development of scattered tax title
properties/ownership
4 0 4
Subtotal 25 3 48
Year 4 – 2012
Town-owned site/
Rental
25 0 25
Conversion of existing housing/
first-time homeownership
4 0 4
Housing on nonconforming lots/
first-time homeownership
2 0 4
Inclusionary zoning 2 1 10
Private development – group home/
special needs rentals
6 0 6
Subtotal 39 1 49
Year 5 – 2013
Mixed-use development/rental 12 2 24
Development of scattered tax title
properties/ownership
8 0 8
Inclusionary zoning (with added subsidies) 5 2 20
Subtotal 25 4 52
Total 133 12 219
Brewster Housing Production Plan 65
Total = 133 affordable units (for those earning at or below 80% of area median income), 12 units (for
those earning between 80% and 120% of area median), and 74 market units with a total projected number
of housing units created of 219 units.
* Final determination of the use of existing Town-owned parcels for new affordable housing is subject
to a more thorough feasibility analysis of site conditions and Town Meeting approval. If any of the
preliminarily identified existing Town-owned properties are finally determined infeasible or do not
obtain approval from Town Meeting, it is anticipated that the projected numbers of affordable units
would be met through the acquisition of privately owned properties or private development.
These projections are therefore conservative with totals assuming homeownership projects with at least
30% of the units affordable although a mix of rental and ownership is planned to meet local needs. The
numbers would be higher in the case of rental projects with all units counting as part of the Subsidized
Housing Inventory. Additionally, these estimates do not earmark all projects as being directed to seniors,
families, individuals or special needs populations. However, this Plan projects that all of these needs will
be addressed through local development efforts during the next five years.
Meeting these production goals will be extremely challenging. Currently there is a 185-unit gap between
existing affordable units (253) and 10% of the Town’s year-round housing units (438 units). Moreover,
this gap will increase when the new census figures become available in 2010 and when a number of units
currently included in the Subsidized Housing Inventory, which participated in a Housing Rehab Program,
will dropout of the count as the affordability restrictions expire. If the Town were to meet each of its
annual production goals, obtaining certification each year, it would most likely reach the 10% state
threshold sometime towards the end of the next ten years.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 66
VII. HOUSING STRATEGIES
The strategies outlined below are based on previous plans, reports, studies, the Housing Needs
Assessment, local housing goals and the experience of other comparable localities in the area and
throughout the Commonwealth. The strategies are grouped according to the type of action proposed –
Housing Production, Planning and Regulatory Reforms, Housing Preservation and Building Local
Capacity – and categorized according to priority as those to be implemented within Years 1 and 2 and
those within Years 3 to 5. A summary of these actions is included in Appendix 2.
The strategies also reflect the recent changes to state requirements that ask communities to address all of
the following major categories of strategies to the greatest extent applicable:29
Identification of zoning districts or geographic areas in which the municipality proposes to
modify current regulations for the purposes of creating affordable housing developments to meet
its housing production goal;
o Promote mixed-use development (see strategy VII.B.4)
Identification of specific sties for which the municipality will encourage the filing of
comprehensive permit projects;
o Make suitable public land available for affordable housing (see strategy VII.A.1)
o Allow starter housing on nonconforming lots (see strategy VII.B.3)
o Promote mixed-use development (see strategy VII.B.4)
o Support private development in line with local guidelines (see strategy VII.A.2)
Characteristics of proposed residential or mixed-use developments that would be preferred by the
municipality;
o Adopt inclusionary zoning (see strategy VII.B.1)
o Allow starter housing on nonconforming lots (see strategy VII.B.3)
o Adopt Housing Guidelines (see strategy VII.B.5)
o Convert existing housing to affordability (see strategy VII.A.3)
Municipally owned parcels for which the municipality commits to issue requests for proposals to
develop affordable housing.
o Make suitable public land available for affordable housing (see strategy VII.A.1)
Participation in regional collaborations addressing housing development
o Participate in Barnstable County HOME Consortium (see strategy VII.C.2)
o Promote homebuyer counseling and other homebuyer services (see strategies VII.C.2 and
3)
It will be important to also insure that affordable units produced through this Plan get counted, to the
greatest extent possible, as part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI), applied through the Local
Initiative Program (LIP) administered by the state’s Department of Housing and Community
Development (DHCD) if another state or federal housing subsidy is not used. In addition to being used
for “friendly” 40B projects, LIP can be used for counting those affordable units as part of a Town’s
Subsidized Housing Inventory that are being developed through some local action including:
29 Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B, 760 CMR 56.03.4.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 67
Zoning-based approval, particularly inclusionary zoning provisions and special permits for
affordable housing;
Substantial financial assistance from funds raised, appropriated or administered by the city or
town; and/or
Provision of land or buildings that are owned or acquired by the city or town and conveyed at a
substantial discount from their fair market value.
In order to be counted as part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory the units must meet the following
criteria:
A result of municipal action or approval;
Sold or rented based on procedures articulated in an affirmative fair marketing and lottery plan
approved by DHCD;
Sales prices and rents must be affordable to households earning at or below 80% of area median
income; and
Long-term affordability is enforced through affordability restrictions, approved by DHCD.
Additionally, a Subsidized Housing Inventory New Units Request Form must be submitted to DHCD to
insure that these units get counted.
Some of the important tasks for insuring that the affordable units, now referred to as Local Action Units
(LAU’s), meet the requirements of Chapter 40B/LIP include:
Meet with the developer to discuss requirements for insuring that the unit(s) meets the
requirements for inclusion in the Subsidized Housing Inventory through the state’s Local
Initiatives Program (LIP).
Determine the purchase price based on LIP Guidelines.
Contact DHCD to discuss the project.
Prepare a LIP Local Action Units application submitted by the municipality (chief elected
official).
Identify a marketing agent to conduct outreach and the lottery.
Execute a regulatory agreement to further insure long-term affordability between the developer,
municipality and DHCD.
Prepare a Fair Housing Marketing Plan.
Prepare a Purchaser Application and implement the Marketing Plan.
Hold at least one information session about the lottery.
Approve applicants for eligibility in the lottery.
Prepare a letter to those eligible for inclusion in the lottery and another to those who do not
qualify.
Conduct the lottery.30
Work with winning applicants and lenders to secure mortgage commitments.
Obtain the deed rider and resale price certificate from DHCD that requires the loan commitment
letters, purchase and sale agreements, and contact info for the closing attorneys.
Work with lenders and the developer to close on the units.
30 Up to 70% of the affordable units in most developments can be reserved for those who have a connection
to the community as defined by Section C of the state’s Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan
guidelines, dated June 25, 2008.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 68
Submit necessary documentation to DHCD to have the unit counted as part of the Subsidized
Housing Inventory.
Annually recertify the continued eligibility of affordable units.
The proposed Housing Coordinator (see Section VII.D.1), another designated municipal employee, or a
consultant could coordinate this work, and associated administrative costs should come from the project
budget and could also be covered by Community Preservation funding. The affordability restrictions for
all units produced through the Local Initiative Program will be monitored by DHCD, but it is the premise
of LIP that the municipality and DHCD work together to create affordable housing and fulfill the
obligations of the affordability restrictions.
It should be noted however, that a major goal of this Plan is not only to strive to meet the state’s 10%
goal under Chapter 40B, but to also to serve local needs and there are instances where housing
initiatives might be promoted to meet these needs that will not necessarily result in the inclusion of units
in the Subsidized Housing Inventory (examples potentially include the promotion of accessory apartments
or housing for those earning between 80% and 120% of area median income).
Within the context of these compliance issues, local needs, existing resources, affordability requirements
and the goals listed in Section II of this Plan, the following housing strategies are offered for
consideration. It is important to note that these strategies are presented as a package for the Town to
consider, prioritize, and process, each through the appropriate regulatory channels. Moreover, the
proposed actions present opportunities to judiciously invest limited Community Preservation funding to
subsidize actual unit production (predevelopment funding and/or subsidies to fill the gap between total
development costs and the affordable rent or purchase prices) and leverage additional resources, modify
or create new local zoning provisions and development policies, help preserve the existing affordable
housing stock, and build local capacity.
A. Housing Production Strategies
To accomplish the actions included in this Housing Plan and meet production goals, it will be essential
for the Town of Brewster to continue to reach out to the development community and sources of public
and private financing to secure the necessary technical and financial resources. While some of the units
produced may rely on the participation of existing homeowners, most of the production will require joint
ventures with developers – for profit and non-profit – to create affordable units. For example,
competitive Requests for Proposals (RFP’s) are necessary for the selection of developers of Town-owned
property. For profit developers continue to express interest in developing housing in Brewster, and there
are a number of for profit developers whose major focus has been on affordable housing production.
There are also numbers of effective non-profit organizations that have successfully completed affordable
housing projects on Cape Cod, including in Brewster.
In addition to the active participation of the development community, it will be important for Brewster to
actively seek support from state and federal agencies. In addition to the state’s Department of Housing
and Community Development (DHCD), other state and quasi-public agencies that have resources to
support affordable and special needs housing include MassHousing, MassDevelopment, Department of
Mental Retardation, Department of Mental Health, Community Economic Development Assistance Corp.
(CEDAC), Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund, and Massachusetts Housing Investment Corporation
(MHIC). Regional resources should be considered as well including the Cape Cod Commission (CCC),
Barnstable County HOME Consortium, Housing Assistance Corporation (HAC), Habitat for Humanity of
Cape Cod and the Community Development Partnership (formerly known as the Lower Cape Cod CDC).
Because affordable housing is rarely developed without private financing, project developers will need to
reach out to private lenders as well.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 69
The following strategies provide the basic components for the Town to meet its housing production goals:
1. Continue to Make Suitable Public Land Available for Affordable Housing
Current Status: The contribution or “bargain sale” of land owned by public entities, including the Town
and Housing Authority, but not essential for public purposes is a component of production goals and the
Town has identified a list of potential publicly-owned parcels that might be developed as affordable (see
Section V.A. of this Plan for the list of properties under preliminary consideration). Final determination
of the use of these parcels for affordable housing is subject to a more thorough feasibility analysis of site
conditions and in the case of municipally-owned properties, Town Meeting approval.
In addition to currently owned Town parcels, the Town of Brewster may decide that it will acquire
privately owned sites over the next decade for the purposes of protecting open space and developing some
amount of housing, including affordable housing, through cluster development on a portion of the sites.
Smaller infill sites might be acquired as well to build affordable starter homes. Acquisitions could occur
through the private housing market, through special negotiations with existing owners who are interested
in selling their properties for a discounted price in exchange for tax advantages, or through the tax
foreclosure process.
Next Steps: The Town should develop a more formal policy for determining the future use of surplus
municipal property that brings together all interested stakeholders, including the Brewster Housing
Partnership, into the decision-making process. Moreover, there are a number of Town-owned properties,
some of which are included in Table V-1 of this Housing Plan, to which funding was appropriated two
years ago for title searches. Thus far this work has not been completed, and the Board of Selectmen
should follow-up to insure the timely completion of this important work.
The Town should also support the costs of preliminary feasibility analyses of existing Town-owned
parcels or Housing Authority owned properties, including those listed in Section V.A, or on sites
identified at a later time on the open market, through negotiations with interested sellers for reduced
prices or through tax foreclosures that might potentially include some amount of affordable housing.
Such analyses could be funded through Community Preservation funds. In fact, the Community
Preservation Committee has approved a funding request from the Brewster Housing Authority to support
predevelopment costs for the development of special needs housing. If the preliminary analysis indicates
that housing might likely be accommodated, the Town should consider further CPA support towards
project financing. For Town-owned properties, approval will be required from the Board of Selectmen
and Town Meeting to acquire and/or designate these parcels for housing development that includes
affordable housing and perhaps other uses as well.
Following the necessary approvals for the conveyance of Town-owned properties, the Town’s Chief
Procurement Officer and a housing professional (proposed Housing Coordinator, other staff person, or a
consultant) should prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit interest from developers based on the
Town’s specific project requirements and select a developer based also on identified criteria included in
the RFP. Projects may require densities or other regulatory relief beyond what is allowed under the
existing Zoning Bylaw, and this might be obtained through normal regulatory channels, if community
support is assured, or use the “friendly” comprehensive permit process through DHCD’s Local Initiative
Program (LIP) or other subsidizing agency. Additionally, the Town will need to be involved in attracting
the necessary financial, technical and political support. Evidence of municipal support is often critical
when seeking financial or technical assistance from regional, state or federal agencies.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Brewster Housing Production Plan 70
Responsible Party: Board of Selectmen
Resources Required: It would be useful to have professional support to coordinate this effort, working
with the Town’s Chief Procurement Officer to prepare a Request for Proposals, staff the developer
selection process and monitor development and construction, marketing and tenant/owner selection and
occupancy. This professional support could be covered by CPA funds directed to the proposed Housing
Coordinator, other municipal staff person or a consultant. Moreover, if the selected developer did not
have the necessary capacity to undertake the marketing and lottery for the affordable units, the designated
professional or other qualified entity might also be able to perform these functions, with project funding
through professional fees for services.
Resources will also be required to help subsidize the development. Comprehensive permits typically do
not involve external public subsidies but use internal subsidies by which the market units in fact subsidize
the affordable ones. Many communities have used the “friendly” comprehensive permit process to take
advantage of these internal subsidies, to create the necessary densities to make development feasible, and
to make it easier to navigate the existing regulatory system. Other communities are finding that they
require public subsidies to cover the costs of affordable or mixed-income residential development and
need to access a range of programs through the state and federal government and other financial
institutions to accomplish these objectives. Because the costs of development are typically significantly
higher than the rents or purchase prices that low- and moderate-income households can afford, multiple
layers of subsidies are often required to fill the gaps. Sometimes even Chapter 40B developments are
finding it useful to apply for external subsidies to increase the numbers of affordable units, to target units
to lower income or special needs populations, or to fill gaps that market rates cannot fully cover.
It is likely that a number of financial and technical resources will be required to produce affordable units
in Brewster. Appendix 3 includes summaries of many of these programs but some are highlighted below.
Predevelopment funding from the Cape Cod Commission’s Technical Assistance Program (TAP),
CPA funding, or state programs such as the Priority Development Fund, Smart Growth Technical
Assistance Program, CEDAC, MHIC, Life Initiative, etc.
Federal HOME Program financing of up to $65,000 per unit administered through DHCD for a
range of housing activities. These are competitive funding sources, and DHCD typically accepts
proposals through two funding rounds per year. The Barnstable County HOME Consortium,
administered by the Cape Cod Commission, also has HOME funding available to communities in
Barnstable County.
Possible federal financing through Low Income Housing Tax Credits to developers of affordable
housing that provide significant equity into a development. The allocating agency is DHCD and
there are typically two funding rounds per year. Other entities are also involved in providing
(syndicating) tax credits. These funds are directed to rental properties solely and are extremely
competitive.
Section 202 federal financing to non-profit organizations for the development of rental housing
targeted to very low-income seniors and those with disabilities.
Affordable Housing Program grant funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, applied
through participating banks.
Rental subsidies through the Project Based Section 8 Program or individual Section 8 vouchers
(this program is administered through the state, Housing Authorities and regional non-profit
organizations).
Section 8 to Homeownership Program, enabling Section 8 subsidy recipients to access
homeownership.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 71
Additional resources that are directed solely to first-time homebuyer projects to make
homeownership more affordable including the Soft Second Loan Program, American Dream
Downpayment Assistance Program and MassHousing First-Time Homebuyer financing.
Financing from CEDAC to support innovative forms of affordable housing including SRO’s,
transitional housing, limited equity cooperatives, etc. and to preserve existing affordable housing
developments.
OneSource Loan Program is a streamlined financing program offered jointly by MHIC and
Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund offering construction and permanent financing in a
single package.
Other state funding programs such as the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, Housing Stabilization
Fund, etc.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: 65 units
2. Support Private Development in Line with Local Guidelines
Current Status: With incentives created in the zoning bylaw to promote affordable housing (see Section
VII.B), and with local policies that provide guidance to developers on what the Town would like to see
with respect to new development (see strategy VII.B.5), the Town is in a good position to work
cooperatively with developers, both for profit and non-profit, to guide new development that incorporates
affordable units. This Housing Production Plan suggests that in addition to accessory apartments that are
already promoted through the Zoning Bylaw, new provisions should be made to encourage the following
types of housing:
Mixed-use development in appropriate locations,
Smaller infill housing on nonconforming lots,
Cluster development that is more in keeping with smart growth principles, and
Small scattered sites, like those developed by Habitat for Humanity, when developed as
affordable housing.
Support for such development could be processed through normal regulatory channels when the projects
are in basic compliance with existing zoning or could be handled through the “friendly” 40B process
offered through the state’s Local Initiative Program (LIP). Comprehensive permits have proven to be a
useful tool in many communities for projects that require significant waivers of local zoning but meet
local needs and priorities. Some of these projects have also incorporated more affordable units than those
required under Chapter 40B. Key to the success of these new developments was the partnership between
the Town and the developer to build affordable housing, the infusion of Community Preservation funding
to support the enhanced affordability of these developments and leverage other sources of financing
including the Barnstable County HOME funds and state-supported subsidy programs (see Appendix 3 for
a summary of resources), as well as the expertise of the developer in building affordable housing.
Next Steps: The Town should reach out to local developers who have been active in producing affordable
housing to discuss the Town’s interest in promoting these units, possible areas and opportunities for new
development, local guidelines and priorities for new development (see strategy VII.B.5), and the
prospects for working together in the future. This will be particularly useful after the Town has produced
Affordable Housing Guidelines and has passed key zoning changes summarized in Section VII.B.
To effectively guide development, the Town should also establish a process for reviewing local
development proposals in their early conceptual stages to provide useful feedback to developers on
preliminary plans. The Town should therefore identify a particular municipal entity to oversee this
Brewster Housing Production Plan 72
review and a staff person to coordinate the process such as the proposed Housing Coordinator, other
municipal official, or a consultant.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Brewster Housing Partnership
Resources Required: The proposed Housing Coordinator, other designated municipal official or a
consultant (could be paid by CPA funds) should take the lead in reaching out to affordable housing
developers and in staffing the local proposal review process, working with developers on the “friendly”
40B process where appropriate.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: 50 affordable units
3. Convert Existing Housing Units to Affordability
Current Status: Brewster should not overlook the potential of working on strategies to not only preserve
the affordability of the existing housing stock (see strategy VII.C.2) but to, when possible, convert
existing market units to state-defined “affordable” ones, thus insuring the long-term affordability of
existing units.
There are a variety of program strategies that provide affordability through focusing on existing dwelling
units rather than new ones. They have the potential of being helpful, though Brewster’s elevated prices
are a challenge. Examples include:
Mortgage Assistance Programs: Providing subsidies to qualified first-time homebuyers to fill the
gap between the market purchase price and the affordable price that is allowed under the state’s
Local Initiative Program (LIP).
Buy-downs: Purchase of two-family structures or other housing types, renting or reselling one
(or possibly both/several) of the units subject to a deed restriction assuring permanent
affordability.
Equity Conversion Homeownership Programs (ECHO – also known as Affordable Deed
Restriction Programs): Purchase of a restriction on housing occupied by an income-eligible
senior or other lower income household, providing public assurance (deed restriction) that the
house when resold will remain affordable and offering residents cash for rehab plus an annuity or
lump-sum subsidy.
There are examples of each of these strategies, including ones on Cape Cod. While ECHO initiatives
have been popular in communities, including Bedford, Marion, and Westport, for example, which
provided set-asides of funding; there have not been any affordable units created through this strategy to
date. The Town of Stow indicates that it has interested participants but its program design has been under
review by DHCD for months.
Buy-down programs have proven to be viable strategies in a number of communities including the
Sandwich Home Ownership Program (SHOP) implemented several years ago that produced seven (7)
affordable housing units under the coordination of HAC. HAC is trying to obtain state funding to
replicate this effort in Yarmouth with the prospects of possibly being able to expand it to other
communities some time in the future.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 73
Several towns have also adopted mortgage assistance programs. For example, the Town of Chatham has
introduced the First Time Homebuyers Assistance Program that uses up to $60,000 in CPA funds per
household to fill the gap between the market price of a home and the affordable purchase price as allowed
under the state’s Local Initiative Program (LIP). Purchasers are pre-qualified through the Program before
they are able to search in the private housing market for a qualifying home. Purchasers are also required
to attend first-time homebuyer classes and encouraged to explore more affordable mortgage financing
such as loans through the state’s Soft Second Loan Program. The Chatham Housing Authority
administers the Program.
The Town of Bourne is also introducing a mortgage assistance program, referred to as the Bourne
Housing Opportunity Purchase Program (B-HOPP). This Program involves matching those on a pre-
qualified ready to buy list (developed through a lottery) with identified properties in the private housing
market, providing the necessary subsidy to make the units affordable. Maximum subsidies are $15,000
per bedroom for single-family homes and $20,000 per bedroom for condominiums. Another aspect of B-
HOPP is to have purchasers utilize the most advantageous mortgages available, such as through the
USDA or Soft Second Program, reducing the necessary subsidy to the greatest extent possible. The
Program will also allow its CPA funds to be used to bring the dwelling up to HUD Housing Quality
Standards.
Next Steps: The Town should explore these models and determine which of these options makes the most
sense in Brewster. It should then prepare an implementation plan that outlines program procedures and
the respective roles and responsibilities of various municipal staff persons and boards and committees.
Community Preservation Funds and potentially HOME funding from the Barnstable County HOME
Consortium could be allocated to the program to provide the necessary subsidies.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Brewster Housing Partnership
Resources Required: Some professional staff time, most likely from the proposed Housing Coordinator,
other municipal official, or a consultant (paid through CPA funds), to prepare an implementation strategy
and oversee project operations. Another option is to contract with the Chatham Housing Authority to
expand their existing First Time Homebuyers Assistance Program into Brewster, to be paid on a fee for
service basis.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: 18 units
4. Promote Accessory Apartments
Current Status: To date thirty-eight (38) accessory apartment units have been permitted in Brewster,
most of them for family members (so-called in-law apartments). Only four (4) affordable accessory units
have been approved through the Affordable Accessory Apartment bylaw. These four units are awaiting
DHCD approval as LIP units but none meet all of the more recent state Local Initiative Program (LIP)
requirements to be counted as part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory, although they were submitted for
approval before the new provisions were in effect.
The Town recently approved a revised accessory apartment bylaw at its fall of 2007 Town Meeting. This
bylaw makes it easier to create accessory units, even allowing their development by-right under a number
of conditions, also allowing them in nonresidential properties and in detached structures. However, given
that the new state LIP guidelines require tenants to be selected by owners through a Ready Renters List of
pre-qualified applicants managed by the municipality, it is unlikely that many owners will choose to
Brewster Housing Production Plan 74
follow through with the affordability requirements, including entering into deed restrictions (see strategy
VII.B.6 for more information).
Wellfleet has an affordable accessory apartment bylaw that promotes the development of accessory units
where tenants meet income requirements but owners are not required to enter into deed restrictions nor
pick tenants from a Ready Renters List. The Town also has just recently initiated a new pilot initiative,
the Affordable Accessory Dwelling Unit (AADU) Loan Program, to provide qualifying local property
owners with assistance in creating affordable accessory rental units. The Wellfleet Town Meeting
approved $20,000 in Community Preservation funding to provide no interest loans which will be due as a
balloon payment in 30 years or when the unit is no longer used as an affordable accessory unit, whichever
comes first. The funding was meant to cover two to four loans to address outstanding health and/or safety
repairs in order to obtain special permit approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the acc essory
unit, however the costs of improvements will be more than what is projected under the loan program.
This loan program was developed by the Wellfleet Housing Authority (WHA) in conjunction with the
Lower Cape Cod Community Development Corporation (Lower Cape Cod CDC) and is meant to support
Wellfleet’s existing effort to promote year-round rental units, providing another incentive for property
owners to convert part of their residential or commercial properties to an affordable residential accessory
unit. Wellfleet has also passed special legislation to offer tax exemptions on the portion of the property
rented affordably.
Next Steps: The Housing Partnership should monitor and promote the existing accessory apartment
bylaw. If it is determined that the bylaw is not working effectively, it should explore other efforts to
promote affordable accessory apartments, such as Wellfleet’s, as well as initiatives in other communities,
and determine how best to move forward in encouraging accessory units locally. It will have to work
closely with the Planning Board, particularly in determining how or whether to revise the accessory
apartment bylaw (see strategy VII.B.6). For example, the Town could establish its own funding program
to support loans under specific conditions for those interested in creating accessory apartments. The loan
program, like Wellfleet’s, could be supported by CPA funding. Moreover, the Town could prepare a
Ready Renters List per LIP requirements and offer owners the opportunity to select tenants from the list,
but a deed restriction would also be necessary to have the units count as affordable and part of production
goals and the Subsidized Housing Inventory. Recent LIP changes, however, allow deed restrictions for
accessory units to be revoked upon the discretion of the property owner but the unit will be removed from
the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Brewster Housing Partnership
Resources Required: Some donated time of local leaders to monitor the use of the accessory apartment
bylaw and determine modified local policies with respect to accessory apartments and professional staff
time for implementation, most likely from the proposed Housing Coordinator, other municipal official, or
a consultant (paid through CPA funds) to prepare an implementation strategy and oversee project
operations.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: This strategy will promote units occupied by tenants earning at
or below 80% of area median income and serve an important local need for more affordable year-round
rental units. However, these units may not count as part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory unless
owners choose to take tenants from the Ready Renters List and enter into a deed restriction.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 75
B. Zoning and Planning Strategies
Housing production is contingent not only on actual development projects but on the planning and
regulatory tools that enable localities to make well informed decisions to strategically invest limited
public and private resources on housing creation. To most effectively and efficiently execute the
strategies included in this Plan and meet production goals, greater flexibility will be needed in the Town’s
Zoning Bylaw, and new tools will be required to capture more affordable units and better guide new
development to specific “smarter” locations.
The Zoning Bylaw includes a minimum lot requirement of at least 60,000 square feet as well as frontage,
setback and other requirements that are not conducive to affordable housing. This creates the likely need
for regulatory relief for any residential development that includes affordable units, possibly through the
“friendly” comprehensive permit process that overrides local zoning if not through normal regulatory
channels. Additionally, the Zoning Bylaw incorporates a number of provisions that while intended to
encourage affordable housing, have not provided sufficient incentives to realize actual new affordable
unit production and should be revisited and revised as necessary (see Section IV.B).
It should be noted once again that the Town of Brewster recently adopted an accessory apartment bylaw
to make it easier for property owners to develop affordable accessory units including provisions to allow
them by-right (see Section IV.B for details). These units fill an important need for small year-round
rental housing in Brewster and their development has strong local support.
The Town of Brewster should consider the following planning and zoning-related strategies to promote
the creation of additional affordable units and to better direct new development. These actions can be
considered as tools that the Town will have available to promote new housing opportunities, each applied
to particular circumstances and providing a powerful group of resources when available in combination.
1. Encourage More Flexible Cluster Zoning
Current Status: Brewster’s Zoning Bylaw includes provisions that allow cluster development through its
cluster residential development bylaw and major residential development bylaw. The former does not
allow any density bonuses for affordable housing and while the latter does, no affordable units have been
approved to date. Additionally, cluster development has not been promoted as a “smarter” way for
developing new sites. Cluster development can better protect the environment and the rural character of
Brewster while offering a broader range of housing options that can promote affordability.
Next Steps: The Planning Board should review model bylaws with respect to more flexible zoning
provisions and tweak the existing bylaw. Model bylaws have been produced by the Metropolitan Area
Planning Council, Massachusetts Audubon, and others in the Green Neighborhood Alliance, and adopted
by a number of Massachusetts communities. Several examples are offered on the Citizen Planner
Training Collaborative website (www.umass.edu/masscptc/examplebylaws.html) and the state’s Smart
Growth Toolkit (www.mass.gov/envir/smart_growth_toolkit/pages/SG-bylaws.html).
More incentivized density bonuses and affordability requirements should be integrated into the bylaw to
encourage this kind of development and to support project feasibility. Associated design guidelines and
review and inclusionary requirements can insure that goals are met in ways appropriate and beneficial to
the Town.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Planning Board
Brewster Housing Production Plan 76
Resources Required: The Planning Board should coordinate this effort with other appropriate local
officials, drafting the zoning amendment and coordinating the necessary approvals towards
implementation. This strategy is also likely to require the professional support from the Town Planner
with input from the proposed Housing Coordinator and/or a consultant.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: Units created under this strategy become part of some of the
private development (see strategy VII.A.2 for estimates).
2. Adopt Inclusionary Zoning
Current Status: Inclusionary zoning, not currently included in Brewster’s Zoning Bylaw, is a zoning
provision that requires a developer to include affordable housing as part of a development or potentially
contribute to a fund for such housing. This mechanism has been adopted by more than one-third of the
communities in the state to insure that any new development project over a certain size includes a set-
aside in numbers of affordable units or funding from the developer to support the creation of affordable
housing. This bylaw applies to development that typically meets local zoning requirements, but most
communities have determined it appropriate to incorporate density bonuses in their inclusionary bylaw.
Many of the municipalities that have inclusionary zoning in place are reaping the rewards of these actions
through the creation of actual affordable units and/or cash contributions to the locality for investment in
affordable housing production. Most of the bylaws include mandated percentages of units that must be
affordable, typically 10% to 20% and density bonuses31. Some also allow the development of affordable
units off-site and/or cash in lieu of actual units.
Next Steps: There are a variety of bylaws that have been adopted in localities throughout the state but
requirements vary considerably. The Executive Office of Environment and Energy’s Smart Growth
Toolkit includes a model inclusionary zoning bylaw that highlights key local decisions and makes some
commentary for consideration throughout (www.mass.gov/envir/smart_growth_toolkit/pages/SG-
bylaws.html). The Citizen Planner Training Collaborative’s website has a model bylaw with commentary
and some policies as well (www.umass.edu/masscptc/examplebylaws.html).
The Brewster Planning Board should explore models and prepare a zoning amendment that is best suited
to supporting affordable housing in Brewster. The Planning Board should prepare, adopt and present the
bylaw to Town Meeting for adoption.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Planning Board
Resources Required: One of the benefits of this strategy is that it requires very little local investment to
implement. The research and preparation of the bylaw could be performed by the Town Planner with
input from the proposed Housing Coordinator or a consultant. If the Town decided to hire a consultant,
the fee should not be more than $5,000 and could be covered by CPA funds, Cape Cod Commission’s
Technical Assistance Program (TAP), or state technical assistance funding such as DHCD’s Priority
Development Fund or the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEA) Smart Growth
TA Program.
It will be important to also insure that all affordable units produced through the bylaw get counted as part
of the Subsidized Housing Inventory, applied through the Local Initiative Program (LIP) ad ministered by
DHCD if another housing subsidy is not used. The major tasks for insuring that the affordable units, now
referred to as Local Action Units (LAUs), meet the requirements of Chapter 40B are summarized at the
31 Density bonuses allow increased densities beyond what is allowed under the Zoning Bylaw.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 77
introduction to this section. The proposed Housing Coordinator could oversee this work (see strategy
VII.D.1), the costs to be budgeted as part of the project. The monitoring of projects to insure continued
affordability based on use restrictions would be the responsibility of a designated monitoring agent,
DHCD in the case of LIP units, however towns also have a role in the monitoring process.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: Ideally the adoption of this bylaw would lead to the production
of actual housing units, but may also deliver payments in lieu of actual units to help capitalize Brewster’s
dedicated housing fund. Units counted under strategy VII.A.2.
3. Allow “Starter Home” Development on Nonconforming Lots32
Current Status: There are parcels of vacant land that at this time cannot be developed because they do not
meet the dimensional requirements of the Zoning Bylaw such as minimum lot size as well as front, rear
and side yard provisions without regulatory relief. It is likely that many of these parcels could in fact be
suitably developed as housing, and Brewster’s Zoning Board of Appeals has in fact provided special
permits for these situations in the past. Smaller lots will encourage the construction of smaller homes
under appropriate guidelines to provide some housing options that are not currently being created by the
private market as starter housing, which is a priority housing need in Brewster as identified in the
Housing Needs Assessment (see Section III).
Next Steps: The Planning Board should explore what other communities are doing with respect to these
undersized lots and work with the Zoning Board of Appeals and Housing Partnership to prepare a zoning
amendment to enable these lots to be developed based on specific criteria, including some affordability
requirements and sensitivity to groundwater protection areas.
One potential model is to consider the thrust of a bylaw that has been approved in Dennis and modify it to
meet Brewster’s needs. This bylaw allows “affordable lots” that enable nonconforming lots to be built on
by special permit if they meet the following conditions:
Contains at least 10,000 square feet and satisfies other Board of Health requirements.
Has safe and adequate access to a public or private way.
Is similar in size and shape to surrounding lots.
The dwelling cannot have more than three bedrooms with a minimum of 5,000 square feet per
bedroom.
The applicable front, rear and side yard requirements are determined by establishing an average
setback based on the homes adjacent to and across the street from the lot in question.
Where two lots are in common ownership, one of the two lots must be deed restricted to insure
permanent affordability and where more than two lots are held in common ownership, the second,
third and fifty percent of the remaining lots to be built upon shall be deed restricted as
permanently affordable (the fourth lot may be market rate, fifth affordable, sixth market rate,
etc.).
Another consideration might be to decrease the minimum lot requirement from 60,000 to 15,000 or even
10,000 square feet for two-family homes where one of the units is affordable and eligible for counting as
part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory as long as the development is in line with Title V requirements.
The development of these lots could also be promoted through the “friendly” 40B process of the state’s
Local Initiative Program (LIP).
Timeframe: Years 3-5
32 Also referred to as “noncomplying lots”.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 78
Responsible Party: Planning Board
Resources Required: The Planning Board, in coordination with the Zoning Board of Appeals and
Housing Partnership, should coordinate this effort with other appropriate local officials in determining the
feasibility of implementing this strategy in Brewster, drafting the zoning amendment and coordinating the
necessary approvals towards implementation. This strategy is also likely to require some professional
support from the Town Planner with input from the proposed Housing Coordinator or a consultant.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: Units created under this strategy become part of some of the
private development (see strategy VII.A.2 for estimates).
4. Promote Mixed-Use Development
Current Status: Brewster’s Zoning Bylaw allows mixed-use development through its Planned Residential
Development bylaw, but the bylaw requires that these mixed uses be developed on at least 25 contiguous
acres of upland. Because there are few such sites available for new development in Brewster, as well as
other onerous requirements, it is not surprising that the bylaw has never been used (see Section IV.B for
more information). Moreover, it is appropriate in a planning context to look towards promoting mixed-
uses, particularly mixed commercial and residential uses, in areas that already allow commercial
development and where somewhat higher density makes sense such as certain areas along Route 6A or
Underpass Road, including business and commercial zoning districts. Opportunities for integrating
affordable housing into mixed-use development should also be promoted in the bylaw.
There are bylaws that have been adopted in many other communities that offer models on how to
integrate housing, including affordable housing, in town or village centers and other commercial areas.
These bylaws encourage the development of housing on top of first-floor retail space, for example. The
Town of Yarmouth recently passed a Village Center Bylaw that would be worth reviewing, and the
Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) has prepared a report entitled, “Mixed Use Zoning: A
Planner’s Guide” that can be referenced. Additionally, the Citizen Planner Training Collaborative offers
several models including one adopted by the Town of Dennis. The establishment of Smart Growth
Zoning Overlay District under the state’s 40R and 40S provisions may also be helpful in promoting the
feasibility of mixed-use development (40R/40S are described in Appendix 3).
Another option would be to develop policy and design guidelines on mixed-use development and process
acceptable mixed-use development projects through the “friendly” 40B process as established under the
state’s Local Initiative Program (LIP). These policies could be incorporated into the Affordable Housing
Guidelines proposed under strategy VII.B.5.
Next Steps: The Planning Board should explore bylaws for promoting mixed-use development and
prepare a zoning amendment that best meets Brewster’s needs, which would be submitted to Town
Meeting for approval.
Timeframe: Years 3-5
Responsible Party: Planning Board
Resources Required: This strategy will require staff time from the Town Planner with input from the
proposed Housing Coordinator or a consultant.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: Units created under this strategy are counted under strategies
VII.A.1 or 2.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 79
5. Adopt Affordable Housing Guidelines – Promoting More Responsive Private Development
Current Status: “Affordable Housing Guidelines” should be considered by the Town of Brewster as a
helpful tool for promoting greater cooperation with private for profit and non-profit developers on
affordable housing production (see strategy VII.A.2). This Housing Plan incorporates production goals
that identify development opportunities leading to the potential production of at least 0.50% of the year-
round housing stock per year or at least 22 units. However, given past production, this goal is ambitious
and will require the Town to continue to work with developers to boost the level of affordable housing.
To this end the Town should consider affecting the types of housing proposals submitted through the
creation of reasonable Affordable Housing Guidelines that provide guidance on projects that will be
acceptable to the community, and therefore, more likely to avoid prolonged and often litigious battles.
Affordable Housing Guidelines, also referred to as LIP Policies or local 40B guidelines, provide an aid to
both non-profit and for profit housing developers to help them plan for residential development that will
be in line with what the community seeks in affordable housing related to scale, siting, density, levels of
affordability, location, design, etc. Through such Guidelines the developer “wins” because there is
greater predictability in what the Town is willing to approve, and the Town “wins” because it gets new
affordable units that meet reasonable locally-established development criteria that help it satisfy local
needs and production goals. These Guidelines will contribute to a more open environment where
developers who abide by these development criteria can approach the Town with the expectation that they
will likely be able to pursue their project through a “friendly” Chapter 40B process, if not normal
regulatory channels, working with instead of against the Town on housing creation strategies.
Other towns have established guidelines including the Town of Grafton, which is planning to revisit and
revise policies for “friendly” 40B projects, as well as the Town of Chatham that has established local 40B
policies.
Next Steps: The Planning Board, working in coordination with the Brewster Housing Authority, Housing
Partnership, ZBA and CPC should explore models of Affordable Housing Guidelines (also referred to as
LIP Policies, Chapter 40B Policies or Procedures), make necessary changes and share them with the
Board of Selectmen, Conservation Commission, Board of Health, Zoning Board of Appeals and other
interested boards and committees for their review and comment. The Guidelines can then be finalized
and made public.
Timeframe: Years 3-5
Responsible Party: Brewster Housing Partnership in cooperation with the Planning Board, Brewster
Housing Authority, ZBA and Community Preservation Committee
Resources Required: The donated time of local officials and various Town boards and committees and
staff time from the Town Planner, proposed Housing Coordinator, other designated municipal official or a
consultant, funded through available state technical assistance funds, CPA or the Cape Cod’s
Commission’s Technical Assistance Program (TAP).
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: These units are also counted under strategy VII.A.2.
6. Review Effectiveness of Accessory Apartment Bylaw and Modify as Necessary
Current Status: The accessory apartment bylaw was amended in the fall 2007 Town Meeting to better
promote accessory apartments and to encourage their affordability (see Section IV.B for more
information). However, changes to the state’s Local Initiative Program (LIP) established new
requirements for accessory apartments including the following:
Brewster Housing Production Plan 80
The municipality must submit an application to the state for approval of an affordable accessory
apartment program that includes an affirmative fair marketing plan and the designation of a local
project administrator responsible for oversight of the program.
No employee, business associate, or family member of the unit owner or its management
company can be selected as a tenant.
The affirmative fair marketing plan must describe the outreach for media outlets and a list of
community-based organizations that will receive notices of the availability of affordable units.
The affirmative fair marketing plan must include the establishment and maintenance of a waiting
list of qualified households applying to rent accessory apartments, referred to as the Ready
Renters List, that is used to fill vacant units and must be periodically updated. Applicants on the
list must have their eligibility reverified at the time a unit is offered to them and the list must be
supplemented as needed, but at least annually, through ongoing outreach efforts.
The tenant selection process requires that owners of available accessory apartments provide
written notice to the local project administrator who in turn refers up to three appropriately sized
households to the owner who must show the unit and then make a selection. The owners may
also request a new referral of applicants. Non-selected applicants return to the top of the Ready
Renters List.
Deed restrictions are required that run with the property so as to be binding on and enforceable
against any person claiming an interest in the property and will restrict the leasing of the
accessory apartment as a rental unit to a person or family earning at or below 80% of area median
income. The deed restriction can be revoked upon the discretion of the owner but the unit must
then be removed from the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
Rents are calculated in the same way as other LIP units.
Leases are required for a minimum term of one year.
The municipality, through the local project administrator, must recertify the eligibility of each
affordable accessory apartment annually and prepare an annual report for submission to DHCD.
Brewster’s current accessory apartment bylaw requires that all accessory apartments have deed
restrictions and comply with the state’s program.
Next Steps: Local leaders should monitor the use and effectiveness of the new bylaw and make
changes to encourage its use and reconcile the changes in state LIP guidelines. For example, the
community may decide to allow accessory apartments outside of the deed and marketing
restrictions, similar to Wellfleet’s orientation, continue to promote the affordable accessory
apartment program as required under current LIP guidelines, or allow some choice from local
units owners. (See strategy VII.A.4 for more information regarding the promotion of accessory
apartments.) If the Planning Board decides to make adjustments to the bylaw they would have to
be approved by Town Meeting.
Timeframe: Years 3-5
Responsible Party: Planning Board with support from the Housing Partnership
Resources Required: The donated time of local officials and various Town boards and committees with
support from the Town Planner, proposed Housing Coordinator, other designated Town official or a
consultant.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: May produce some affordable units but perhaps not those that
will be eligible for counting as part of the Subsidized Housing Inventory or production goals.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 81
C. Housing Preservation Strategies
Housing production is critical, but the Town also needs to be concerned that it does not lose current as
well as future units counted as part of its Subsidized Housing Inventory to the greatest extent possible and
provides resources to support the deferred home maintenance needs of seniors.
1. Reconcile Subsidized Housing Inventory
Current Status: As noted earlier in the Housing Needs Assessment (see Section III.D), in addition to the
253 affordable units that are currently included in the Subsidized Housing Inventory, additional units are
not currently counted but might be eligible including:
Yankee Clipper II Townhouses – 4 units
Habitat for Humanity houses off of Slough Road – 4 units
Nickerson Park Condominium – 1 unit
Affordable Accessory Apartments – 4 units
The Residences of Pleasant Bay – 6 units
White Rock Commons – 3 units
If deed restrictions could be executed for the affordable units at EPOCH Assisted Living of Brewster and
the above units are approved by DHCD for inclusion in the SHI, another seven (7) units could be added to
the SHI for a total of 282 units or 6.4% of the year-round housing stock.
Next Steps: The Town should continue to provide necessary information to DHCD to have units qualify
as affordable in the Subsidized Housing Inventory. If problems arise in having the units qualify under
current agreements, the Town might consider creative options in converting them to long-term
affordability, possibly through CPA subsidies (see strategy VII.A.3).
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Entity: Board of Selectmen
Resources Required: Some professional staff time, most likely from the proposed Housing Coordinator or
other designated municipal official to continue to pursue outstanding issues related to these units and their
affordability.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: Potentially as many as 22 additional affordable units added to
the Subsidized Housing Inventory but will not count towards production goals.
2. Monitor Affordability of Subsidized Housing Inventory
Current Status: Based on how housing was financed, how long the affordability requirements were
established, and other stipulations in affordability agreements, the affordable status of housing units may
be in jeopardy in many communities in the future. Brewster’s existing Subsidized Housing Inventory
includes a number of projects where affordability restrictions are currently projected to expire including:
Cape Cod Commission’s South Orleans Road unit (rehab with HOME funding) – restriction to
expire in 2010
Habitat’s Old Long Pond Road unit (LIP ownership unit) – expiration in 2005
King’s Landing – 108 units with expiration date in 2018
Yankee Village – 12 ownership units with expiring date in 2045
Eagle Point – 3 rental units expiring in 2020
Rehabilitation loans – 10 units at present due to expire between 2012 and 2019
Brewster Housing Production Plan 82
Consequently as many as 135 units might be lost to the existing Subsidized Housing Inventory. The 12
units that were part of rehab loans programs had lower subsidies per unit and 15-year affordability
restrictions and will not unfairly go off the SHI after the restrictions expire. There are, however, other
affordable housing developments with use restrictions in perpetuity or not due to expire for many years
where the continued affordability of units is in current jeopardy. Specifically, developments such as
Belmont Park and Yankee Drive involved deed restrictions that indexed resale prices to market
conditions. Given the substantial escalation of market prices in Brewster, deed riders for affordable units
that were being resold were suddenly suggesting resale prices out of the range of households earning at or
below 80% of area median income and therefore no longer eligible for inclusion in the Subsidized
Housing Inventory. The state has partnered with non-profit organizations, such as HAC and Community
Development Partnership (formerly called the LCCCDC), to provide additional subsidies, often matched
with CPA funds, to restore these units to the SHI and to exact deed restrictions subject to less volatile
indexes, currently changes in HUD’s area median income levels. Brewster’s CPC was in fact
instrumental in providing CPA funding to help maintain the affordability of units at Belmont Park and
Yankee Drive that were in danger of losing affordability.
Next Steps: It is important to insure that affordable housing units remain a part of the Town’s Subsidized
Housing Inventory for as long a period of time as possible. The Town should closely monitor the SHI
and intervene if necessary and feasible to maintain the units as affordable through the courts or through
purchase and refinancing if necessary. Once units are within several years of losing their affordability
restrictions, the Town should contact DHCD and CEDAC to ascertain the status of the units and to
prepare plans for their continued affordability. It may be necessary to also reach out to organizations and
developers that are experienced in saving expiring use units to request their possible intervention if
necessary.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Board of Selectmen
Resources Required: Some professional staff time, most likely from the proposed Housing Coordinator
or other designated municipal official to monitor the status of existing affordable units and to pursue
outstanding issues and remedies related to these units and their continued affordability.
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: While this strategy is unlikely to create new affordable units, it is
essential for maintaining existing affordable units.
3. Help Qualifying Homeowners Access Housing Assistance
Current Status: Some town residents, including seniors living on fixed incomes, are finding it
increasingly difficult to afford the costs associated with rising taxes, energy costs, insurance and home
improvements. Additionally, some seniors and those with special needs require handicapped adaptations
and repairs to help them remain in their homes. Brewster residents might also benefit from technical and
financial support in the case of septic failures and Title V compliance issues. Also, the number of
foreclosures has increased both regionally and nationally.
The Community Development Partnership (formerly called the Lower Cape Cod CDC) used to administer
the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program that provided financial and technical assistance to qualifying
property owners to make necessary home improvements. A couple of years ago the state did not renew
this funding for the CDC as well as those organizations that had operated comparable programs across the
Brewster Housing Production Plan 83
state with funding through the Community Development Block Grant. 33 There are, however, other
programs available for home repair, upgrading and de-leading. For example, the Housing Assistance
Corporation (HAC) administers several programs including:
Existing Homeowner Rehabilitation Assistance Program
Provides a no-interest, deferred payment loan to qualifying homeowners, the amount not to
exceed $25,000 and to be repaid upon the sale or refinancing of the property. The maximum
house value for participating properties is $362,000 and consequently most properties in Brewster
may not qualify. The needs of seniors, handicapped and single parents are given priority
consideration for funding, as are houses with substantial repair needs.
Get the Lead Out
With funding from MassHousing, this Program provides low-cost financing to owners of 1-4
family properties to remove lead and reduce the possibility of lead poisoning in children.
Home Modification Loan Program
Offers financial assistance to persons seeking to make modifications to their home to improve
accessibility for the physically disabled.
Weatherization
A federally-funded program to help qualifying property owners make energy-efficient home
improvements. Most households that receive fuel assistance also qualify for this program.
Heartwrap
An emergency repair program for households receiving fuel assistance that require the repair or
replacement of their heating system.
Keyspan Gas Program
Provides installation, caulking and weather stripping to income-eligible tenants and homeowners
who heat with Keyspan Gas and receive the lowered gas rate.
Cape Light Compact Efficiency Program
Offers energy-saving devices (i.e., light bulbs, water conservation and other devices) and
technical assistance to qualifying tenants and homeowners on how to save on their electrical bills.
Some participants can also qualify for a free refrigerator, freezer.
HAC also provides counseling services for first-time homebuyers and those confronting possible
foreclosure that are available to residents in Brewster.
Next Steps: Through the community educational campaign recommended in Section VII.D.4, important
information on housing improvement resources could be disseminated to real estate professionals, local
organizations and community residents. The Town, through its Council on Aging and Housing Authority
should provide the necessary education and referrals to programs sponsored by the Housing Assistance
Corporation and MassHousing for example, which provide counseling services and low-cost financing for
repair needs including de-leading, septic systems, weatherization and other home improvements.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Brewster Housing Authority and Council on Aging
Resources Required: Donated time of volunteers or some limited staff time from appropriate Town
employees such as the proposed Housing Coordinator.
33 The LCCCDC recently was awarded Small Cities CDBG funding from DHCD to reestablish this
program in Provincetown and Wellfleet.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 84
Projected # Affordable Units Produced: The available home repair programs provide needed assistance,
helping seniors and others with special needs remain independent in their homes, however, these
programs do not typically include the necessary requirements to enable properties to be included in the
SHI.
D. Capacity Building Strategies
In order to carry out the strategies included in this Housing Production Plan and meet production goals, it
will be important for the Town of Brewster to bolster its capacity to promote affordable housing
activities. This capacity includes gaining access to greater resources – financial and technical – as well as
continuing to build local political support, develop partnerships with public and private developers and
lenders, and create and augment local organizations and systems that will support new housing
production.
It will be a substantial challenge for Brewster to meet the prescribed annual affordable housing
production goal of 22 units, based on 0.50% of the town’s year-round housing stock,34 that will likely
increase to about 25 units after the next decennial census count becomes available. Housing growth will
continue to drive-up the 10% goal.
Critical to the production of affordable housing is establishing the requisite local capacity for
implementation. This capacity includes the following principal components required for launching a
more proactive approach to producing affordable housing:
Plan
This Housing Production Plan provides the necessary blueprint for prioritizing and implementing
affordable housing initiatives based on documented local needs, community input and existing
resources. Without such a Plan a community more typically responds reactively to development
proposals or comprehensive permit applications as they appear instead of having a framework in
which to proactively guide new development. The Plan will also provide important guidance on
how to invest CPA funding for housing.
Dedicated Municipal Oversight
Communities need to build a viable organizational structure to implement the Housing Production
Plan. The Town has an active Housing Partnership and Housing Authority to promote affordable
housing issues and development as well as a special account into which dedicated funding can be
deposited to support local affordable housing initiatives. Moreover, the Community Preservation
Committee (CPC) has prepared this Housing Production Plan and is committed to investing
important Community Preservation funding towards affordable housing initiatives. It will be
incumbent on the Town to promote greater coordination among these parties towards the
implementation of the Housing Plan, securing support from other important boards and
committees as well including the Planning Board and Board of Selectmen.
Professional Support
In order to oversee the implementation of the Housing Plan, the Town of Brewster will need
ongoing professional help. Most communities that are making real progress in producing
affordable housing have some dedicated staff on hand to coordinate essential activities. This Plan
recommends that the Town create a Housing Coordinator position, on at least a part-time basis,
that could be funded through Community Preservation Funds (see strategy VII.D.1). Funds to
further support this new position could come from specific development projects, which will
34 The number of year-round units is determined by the 2000 census and will increase when the 2010
census figures become available.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 85
include fees for services that the Housing Coordinator could perform to insure that qualifying
affordable units can be included in the Subsidized Housing Inventory (see LIP requirements
above) and continue to meet requirements. Consultants are also likely to be needed to offer
specialized expertise and to further supplement existing staff resources. The Town is also
fortunate to have a couple of key staff persons who have been involved in housing and planning
issues and can remain as valuable resource persons in providing ongoing professional support in
implementation.
Partnerships
The successful implementation of this Housing Production Plan will require continued access to a
wide range of resources – financial and technical – as well as establishing partnerships with a
range of organizations, funding agencies, developers and lenders on new initiatives (see strategy
VII.D.3).
Community Support
Because most of the housing strategies rely on local approvals, including those of Town Meeting,
community support for new initiatives will be essential. Strategic efforts to better inform
residents on the issue of affordable housing and specific new initiatives will help generate a
greater understanding of the benefits of affordable housing, reduce misinformation, and dispel
negative stereotypes (see strategy VII.D.4).
Specific actions to help build local capacity to meet local housing needs and production goals are detailed
below. While these strategies do not directly produce affordable units, they provide the necessary support
to implement a proactive housing agenda that ultimately will produce new units.
1. Hire a Housing Coordinator
Current Status: The Town is trying hard to expand Brewster's base of affordable housing and in addition to
the support of the Town Administrator/Selectmen's Office, which had been overseeing research and
coordination of affordable housing efforts, the Town has approved funding for a Town Planner. This
position already involves full-time responsibilities and it is unlikely that the new Planner will have the
capacity to take on most of the staff-related tasks included in this Plan outside of zoning-related activities.
Moreover, the complexity of housing issues requires significantly more staff time and specialized expertise
than is currently available.
If the Town of Brewster wants to assume a more proactive role in promoting affordable housing and
effectively implement actions included in this Housing Production Plan, it will have to augment its
capacity to coordinate these activities. While most of the strategies that are included in this Plan do not
individually involve substantial amounts of staff time from Town officials or donated time from board
and committee members, when considered altogether they require a significant time commitment and
involve some specialized expertise in housing programs, policy and development. A major need is for the
coordination and creation of programs that will not only expand the number of units available to low- and
moderate-income residents, but will also guarantee the affordability of new and existing units into the future.
Next Steps: The Board of Selectmen and Town Administrator should work with the Community
Preservation Committee to have CPA funds allocated for a qualified Housing Coordinator to effectively
oversee the implementation of various components of this Housing Plan. This position, under the
supervision of the Housing Partnership, would be responsible for overseeing all programmatic aspects of
the Local Initiative Program (LIP) assigned to the municipality (referred to by DHCD as the Local Project
Administrator) to insure that new affordable units are counted and continue to be counted as part of the
Subsidized Housing Inventory and provide additional professional support related to housing issues,
policies and programs.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 86
The Town should review job descriptions for comparable positions and obtain the necessary
funding and approvals to advertise the position and hire at least a part-time person. Various
communities have handled this position differently. For example, the Town of Marshfield issued
a Request for Proposals for a Housing Coordinator position and has hired consultants over the
past several years. The Town of Grafton has an Assistant Planner on board to assume many of
these housing-related functions based on initial guidance from a housing consultant. The Towns
of Wellfleet and Eastham are sharing a person in this position. Belmont is working with a non-
profit development organization located in a nearby community, WATCH CDC, to support its
housing activities. Holliston is working with a consultant to implement key initiatives, and at
some point in the future is likely to hire a housing professional on at least a part-time basis with
CPA funds. Weston supports a housing position with a combination of CPA and other Town
revenues. CPA funds have also been used to hire a Community Preservation Planner in Randolph
to address community housing needs and a CPA Liaison in Bridgewater to support the work of
the Community Preservation Committee, including its work on affordable housing. Sudbury has
used CPA funds to hire a part-time Housing Coordinator.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Board of Selectmen with support from the Community Preservation Committee.
Resources Required: A Housing Coordinator position would involve approximately $50,000 per year
including benefits that could be covered by Community Preservation Funds. A more part-time position
would be significantly less, more in the $25,000 to $30,000 range, and perhaps makes the greatest sense
at this time. Fees from specific development projects that will rely on the position to insure that
affordable units meet all state requirements will also be available to supplement the costs of this new
position.
2. Investigate the Feasibility of Creating a Municipal Affordable Housing Trust Fund
Current Status: Discussions with other communities regarding the success of their affordable
housing initiatives indicate that it is often critical to have accessible funds available to respond
immediately and effectively to housing opportunities as they arise. Also, many of the state
subsidy sources require local contributions either through local funds, donation of Town-owned
property, or private donations. In order to receive donations and avoid paying taxes, it is useful
for each locality to have a dedicated housing fund that offers communities greater ability to
support the development of affordable housing. Brewster established a Housing Fund through a
home rule petition that is overseen by the Board of Selectmen. The Fund has not been utilized or
received funding to date.
On June 7, 2005, the Governor signed new legislation, called the Municipal Affordable Housing
Trust Fund Act, under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44, which simplified the process of
establishing such funds. More than 40 communities have adopted these funds and many more
have plans to do so during the coming year. Previously, cities could create trusts through their
own resolution, but Towns had to get approval from the state Legislature through a home rule
petition, which is what Brewster did in 2002 and again in 2004, finally receiving approval in
2005. The existing Brewster Fund is under the complete control of the Board of Selectmen while
a statutory Municipal Affordable Housing Trust Fund involves a Board of Trustees, appointed by
the Board of Selectmen and including at least one member of the Board of Selectmen.
The state’s Municipal Affordable Housing Trust law provides guidelines on what trusts can do
and allows communities to collect funds for housing, segregate them out of the general budget
Brewster Housing Production Plan 87
into an affordable housing trust fund, and use these funds without going back to Town Meeting
for approval. It also enables trusts to own and manage real estate, not just receive and disburse
funds. The law further requires that local housing trusts be governed by at least a five-member
board of trustees, as mentioned above, appointed and confirmed by the Board of Selectmen, in the
case of towns, and including a member of the Board of Selectmen or the Town Administrator.
While the new trusts must be in compliance with Chapter 30B, the law which governs public
procurement as well as public bidding and construction laws, it is likely that most trusts will opt
to dispose of property through a sale or long-term lease to a developer so as to clearly
differentiate any affordable housing development project from a public construction project.
In regard to activity on Cape Cod, Bourne, Dennis and Yarmouth have established Municipal
Affordable Housing Trusts and have begun to capitalize them for specific projects.
Next Steps: Brewster’s Housing Partnership should investigate the feasibility of creating a new
Housing Trust under state guidelines that would offer broader powers than what now exist for the
current special housing fund. The Partnership should determine the possible benefits of this new
entity versus the existing housing fund and explore how other towns have structured their
Housing Trusts. If the Partnership determines it would be beneficial to create a Municipal
Affordable Housing Trust Fund, it should make a recommendation to the Board of Selectmen to
do so. Town Meeting approval would be required as well.
It will also be important to explore a wide range of possible fundraising options to capitalize the
Trust Fund. In addition to CPA funding and other public sector resources, the Town should also
consider private sector donations. While Bourne, Yarmouth and Dennis CPC’s have made
awards to their Housing Trusts for specific purposes, it should be noted that some communities
have decided to commit CPA funding to these Housing Trust Funds without targeting the funding
to any one specific initiative. For example, the Towns of Grafton and Sudbury are directing 10%
of their annual CPA allocation to their Trust Funds. Grafton plans to use some of the funding as
collateral for securing a line of credit with a local lending institution, thus leveraging the CPA
funds. The Trust is encouraged to apply for additional CPA funds for specific projects.
Scituate’s Town Meeting just approved a Municipal Housing Trust and funded it with $700,000
of Community Preservation funding.
Many communities are reaching out to residents for private donations of land to promote housing
affordability. Such contributions and the “bargain sale” of real estate could become a part of the
Brewster land ethic, but donations need to be promoted, nurtured, and facilitated. Inclusionary
zoning (see strategy VII.B.2), if passed, may also provide cash resources for a wider range of
possible developments that can help capitalize the Affordable Housing Trust Fund if the
developer decides to pay cash in lieu of constructing actual affordable units. Developers may also
contribute to the Housing Fund through negotiations on comprehensive permit projects or other
local developments. Developers make additional contributions to these funds if the purchase
prices for the market units are higher than the prices that were projected in their comprehensive
permit applications and profits are more than the 20% allowed under Chapter 40B.
Faith-based affordable housing initiatives are also widely viewed as effective, as reported by the
organization World Vision.35 The Housing Partnership can work with the local churches on some
additional activities that focus on affordable housing, including, for example, donations to the
Housing Fund, perhaps during Fair Housing month.
35 Shabecoff, Alice. Rebuilding Our Communities: How Churches Can Provide, Support, and Finance
Quality Housing for Low-Income Families, World Vision: Monrovia, California.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 88
Timeframe: Year 1-2
This process could be accomplished within the next year, ready for vote by the next Town
Meeting.
Responsible Party: Housing Partnership
Resources Required: The process of creating the Municipal Affordable Housing Trust Fund is
relatively straightforward and can be coordinated by the Housing Partnership in concert with the
Board of Selectmen. Once established, it will be incumbent upon the Town to support efforts to
capitalize the Fund including the commitment of CPA funding in support of affordable housing
initiatives. Other resources include the donated time of volunteers to coordinate fundraising
activities with staff support at some point in the future.
3. Establish Partnerships
Current Status: The affordability of most housing development projects relies on multiple sources of
financing involving both private and public loans and grants. Even Chapter 40B comprehensive permit
projects rely on what is referred to as “internal” subsidies where the market rate units support the costs of
the affordable ones in tandem with increased density. It will be important for the Town to encourage the
establishment of partnerships with other interested parties including non-profit organizations, lenders,
public agencies, and developers to secure the necessary financial and technical resources to create
affordable units. Future Community Preservation funding for housing will also be an essential ingredient
for supporting the implementation of this Housing Plan in addition to various state and federal housing
subsidy programs. HOME funding from the Barnstable County HOME Consortium is another important
funding source that should be tapped as well as the range of programs offered by HAC and the Lower
Cape Cod CDC to support first-time homeownership such as homebuyer counseling.
Next Steps: The Town of Brewster should work with designated developers to reach out to private, public
and non-profit entities to secure additional housing resources – technical and financial – in support of
efforts to produce new affordable housing as opportunities arise. The developer is typically responsible
for applying for these funds, but the support of the municipal government is often crucial for securing
very competitive funding. There are numerous public programs that can be helpful in financing local
housing efforts. A summary of some of these resources as well as pertinent housing regulations (e.g.,
Chapter 40B, Local Initiative Program, Commonwealth Capital, Community Preservation Act) is
included in Appendix 3.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Board of Selectmen, and in some case the Brewster Housing Partnership, will need to
provide letters of support for subsidy applications for affordable housing projects. The Community
Preservation Committee will be crucial in recommending CPA funding for housing purposes for Town
Meeting approval.
Resources Required: Funding will be needed for affordable housing initiatives, particularly the
predevelopment funding necessary to determine project feasibility (CPA funds can cover these expenses
as well as other state-funded programs). The proposed Housing Coordinator or other designated
municipal official can take the lead in applying for these funds and offer necessary support to developers
who typically apply directly for other subsidy programs. For those programs that require more
complicated and direct applications from municipal governments, such as Community Development
Block Grant funded programs accessed through the state or LIP applications, the proposed Housing
Coordinator, other designated municipal official or a consultant will be needed.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 89
4. Conduct Ongoing Educational Campaign
Current Status: Affordable housing has become a more visible issue in Brewster, largely as a result of
such high housing prices that are having homeowners, especially long-term homeowners, ponder how
they might fare in the current housing market if they did not already own a home. Affordable housing, or
the increasing lack thereof, is becoming a much-discussed issue throughout the Cape, and many
communities are trying to become more proactive on affordable housing production. While residents are
increasingly aware of steep housing prices and some are encountering difficulties affording housing in
Brewster, it is likely that many residents hold onto negative stereotypes of what affordable housing is and
what it will do to their community.
On October 30, 2007, the Brewster Community Preservation Committee sponsored a forum for local
leaders and the public to hear the results of a Housing Needs Assessment that is a substantial component
of this Housing Production Plan. During this meeting, updated information on the dwindling supply of
unsubsidized affordable housing in Brewster was presented, highlighting the current gaps between the
supply of housing and local needs (see Appendix 1 for a summary of this meeting).
The public had another opportunity to obtain information on affordable housing when the Plan was
presented to the Board of Selectmen. Additional opportunities to engage the community in discussions
on affordable housing and to present information on the issue are needed to dispel myths and help
galvanize local support, political and financial, for new affordable housing production. These outreach
efforts are mutually beneficial as they provide useful information to community residents and important
feedback to local leaders on local concerns and suggestions.
Next Steps: The presentation of this Housing Production Plan offers an opportunity to bring attention to
the issue, offering information on housing needs and proposed strategies that can help attract community
support for affordable housing initiatives. Other public education opportunities should be pursued such as
having representatives from other towns speak in public forums on innovative affordable housing
strategies, which Truro did last year; organizing panel discussions on particular housing-related topics,
and holding meetings on new local housing initiatives. These forums can help build community interest,
improve communication and garner support. It may also be feasible to have local banks support such
efforts with financial and/or technical assistance.
Once hired, the proposed Housing Coordinator could organize regular, at least annual, public forums on
affordable housing, as well as special meetings on new initiatives. Otherwise, another designated
municipal official could coordinate ongoing informational meetings. It should also be mentioned that the
Town should get the word out about existing programs and services that support homeownership,
property improvements or help reduce the risk of foreclosure including first -time homebuyer and
foreclosure prevention counseling from HAC and Lower Cape Cod CDC.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Brewster Housing Partnership
Resources Required: Staff time of the proposed Housing Coordinator or other municipal official
5. Establish Annual Housing Summits
Current Status: Most communities lack an effective mechanism for promoting regular communication
among relevant Town boards and committees on issues related to affordable housing. This coordination
is particularly important in Brewster where housing-related responsibilities are shared among a number of
Brewster Housing Production Plan 90
local entities including the Housing Partnership, Housing Authority, Community Preservation Committee,
ZBA and Planning Board.
It is useful for each locality to determine how it might more effectively communicate and coordinate
efforts on the issue of affordable housing to insure that local leaders remain apprised of housing activities
and have an opportunity for input. Some communities have attempted to promote and formalize this
communication. For example, the Town of Holliston hosted a meeting with representatives of all relevant
municipal entities to discuss affordable housing, with each board or committee providing updates
followed by a facilitated discussion regarding next steps. Additionally, some communities may determine
that it may be helpful to open these meetings to the public to foster greater community understanding and
participation in the area of affordable housing as part of the continued community education advocated
above in strategy VII.D.4.
Next Steps: The Board of Selectmen should consider formalizing an Annual Housing Summit. Such a
summit should include representatives from all local boards and committees that have a role in affordable
housing. The proposed Housing Coordinator or other designated municipal official could schedule and
coordinate the meeting and provide an annual report on housing issues and progress towards
implementing this Housing Plan.
Timeframe: Years 3-5
Responsible Party: Brewster Housing Partnership
Resources Required: Donated time of local officials, and staff time from the proposed Housing
Coordinator or other designated municipal official.
6. Encourage Training for Board and Committee Members
Current Status: Local boards such as the Community Preservation Committee, Housing Partnership,
Zoning Board of Appeals, Planning Board and other interested local leaders as well as members of the
Brewster Housing Authority, should receive training on affordable housing issues including the
comprehensive permit process, the new regulations and guidelines in particular. Well advised and
prepared board and committee members are likely to conduct Town business in a more effective and
efficient manner. New members without significant housing experience would benefit substantially from
some training and orientation regarding their responsibilities. Moreover, requirements keep changing and
local leaders must keep up-to-date. Funding for the professional development of staff, including the
Town Planner, proposed Housing Coordinator, Assistant Town Administrator, etc. would also help keep
key professionals informed and up-to-date on important new developments, best practices and
regulations.
The University of Massachusetts Extension’s Citizen Planner Training Collaborative (CPTC) offers
classes periodically throughout the year and will even provide customized training sessions to individual
communities. Examples of topics covered in their fall 2007 workshops included but was not limited to
the following:
Roles and responsibilities of Planning and Zoning Boards
How to hold the perfect public hearing
Chapter 40B
Inclusionary housing
Open space residential development
Sustainability
Brewster Housing Production Plan 91
The Massachusetts Housing Partnership has initiated the Massachusetts Housing Institute, which is “an
educational program to support municipalities and local participants to better understand the affordable
housing development process and have an effective role in initiating and implementing local solutions to
increasing housing choices”.36 This training is held over a two-day period, at least once a year. Topics
during the recent Institute, held this past June, included:
The affordable housing development process
What you should know about development finance
Getting housing built in the community
Designing for affordability – architecture, design and density
Other organizations and agencies, such as DHCD, MHP, CHAPA, and the Community Preservation
Coalition also provide conferences and training sessions on a wide variety of housing issues that would be
useful for local officials and staff persons to attend. In addition, there are numerous written resources for
localities. For example, DHCD has prepared a procedural “how to” booklet for local communities on the
development process, MHP has many technical guides for localities, and CHAPA has a wide variety of
reports on many issues related to affordable housing as well.
Next Steps: The Town’s Board of Selectmen should encourage members of appropriate committees, the
ZBA, Planning Board, Housing Partnership and Community Preservation Committee to attend statewide
and regional training sessions on housing-related issues. If fees are involved, this funding should be
made available, and the Town should earmark funds from its CPA budget to support these costs. This
training should also be accessed on an ongoing basis as membership of these boards and committees turns
over. Funding should also be made available for professional staff development opportunities.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Board of Selectmen with support from the Community Preservation Committee and
Local Housing Partnership
Resources Required: Information on available training should be tracked and made available and
attendance fees paid through the Community Preservation Fund when required, the costs potentially
ranging from $2,000 to $4,000 annually.
7. Continue to Apply for a Commonwealth Capital Score to Secure Funding from State Capital
Spending Programs
Current Status: The state established Commonwealth Capital as a policy that encourages communities to
implement smart growth measures by making municipal land use regulations more consistent with smart
growth principles. The state uses these reforms as part of the evaluation of proposals for state funding
under a number of state capital spending programs related to economic development, the environment,
transportation and infrastructure as well as housing. Municipalities have been scored based on what
progress has been made in bringing local regulations, policies and land use-related initiatives into greater
compliance with smart growth principals. This program is summarized in more detail in Appendix 3.
While the future of Commonwealth Capital was in doubt during the transition from the Romney
to Patrick administrations, particularly when the Office of Commonwealth Development that
administered the program was disbanded, the state has maintained the basic principles of
36 Massachusetts Housing Partnership, Massachusetts Housing Institute agenda for June 14 -15, 2007
Conference.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 92
Commonwealth Capital. In fact the changes for fiscal year 2008 were quite modest that included
an altered list of discretionary state programs to which the policy applies. More recently the state
made more substantive changes that are summarized in Appendix 3. It is important to note that
the completion of this Housing Plan would result in a higher score as would many of the
strategies included in this Plan such as:
Zoning for mixed-use development
Modifying the accessory apartment bylaw
Zoning for more flexible, cluster development
Inclusionary zoning
Attainment of Housing Production certification (meeting annual production goal)
Production of housing units on municipally owned land or with municipal funding
Where 66% or more of new units produced is through mixed-use development (including 40R
and TOD), cluster development, multi-family housing, single-family development on ¼ acre lots,
and/or conversion or redevelopment activities.
The Town has submitted Commonwealth Capital applications in the past and based on recent progress
with respect to zoning reforms and this planning process, anticipates improved scores in the future.
Next Steps: With staff support from the proposed Housing Coordinator or Town Planner, or other
designated municipal official, the Board of Selectmen should continue to prepare and submit the scoring
application under Commonwealth Capital prior to applying for any of the state’s capital spending
programs or as required.
Timeframe: Years 1-2
Responsible Party: Board of Selectmen
Resources Required: Will require staff time from the proposed Housing Coordinator, Town Planner, or
other municipal staff person to prepare the application for scoring under Commonwealth Capital.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 93
APPENDIX 1
Summary of Comments from Public Forum
October 30, 2007
Following a welcome by Paul Hush from the Brewster Community Preservation Committee, the project
consultant, Karen Sunnarborg, presented an overview of the Housing Needs Assessment and addressed
questions. This conversation then naturally moved to recommendations from those attending the forum
on what the Town should do to more proactively support affordable housing, particularly in light of local
concerns and challenges. The following challenges were mentioned as part of this discussion:
State affordability requirements are too onerous.
There will be new specific state thresholds for net nitrogen loading that will affect
development throughout most of Brewster.
It is important to engage the community in affordable housing efforts, and we need to
find creative ways of doing so.
Finding sites for development is more difficult than locating the necessary funding.
Brewster needs a Town Planner.
Who is going to service the growing population of seniors?
The commercial sector in Brewster is extremely small, representing only 3% of the tax
base.
Infrastructure is a critical component of new development planning.
Additionally, forum participants offered these potential strategies for promoting affordable housing in
Brewster:
Promote accessory apartments even if they might not be able to be counted as part of the
Subsidized Housing Inventory. Hopefully Town Meeting will pass the revised zoning
bylaw that will be proposed in November.
Consider spending CPA funds to support of new accessory apartments by offering home
improvement loans.
Keep looking for ways to increase local funding for affordable housing including CPA,
Town budget, Trust Fund, and other sources, including proposed special legislation to tax
properties with seasonal rentals.
Look beyond just counting units to help meet the Chapter 40B 10% affordability goal and
focus on the range of local needs.
Explore Land Trust models for effective fund raising strategies.
“Friendly” 40B’s can be a useful tool.
Do some rezoning.
Establish local partnerships and do effective outreach to key community groups and
organizations to better inform them about the issue of affordable housing. For example,
schedule a time to make a presentation to the Chamber of Commerce, either at a breakfast
or lunch meeting, and see how they may be able to assist in the Town’s efforts.
Explore strategies for integrating affordable housing throughout all neighborhoods, such
as promoting accessory apartments.
Sewer certain areas where higher density is more suitable and new development should
be promoted.
Need more areas where multi-family housing can exist and carrying capacity exists.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 94
APPENDIX 2
Summary of Housing Strategies
Strategies
Priority for Implementation
In Years 1-2 In Years 3-5 # Affordable
Units
Responsible
Party**
Housing Production Strategies
1. Make suitable public land
available for affordable housing
X 65 BOS
2. Support private development
in line with local guidelines
X 50 HP
3. Convert existing housing to
affordability
X 18 HP
4. Promote accessory apartments X * HP
Zoning and Planning Strategies
1. Encourage more flexible
cluster zoning
X * PB
2. Adopt inclusionary zoning X * PB
3. Allow starter housing on
nonconforming lots
X * PB
4. Promote mixed-use development X * PB
5. Adopt Housing Guidelines X * HP
6. Review effectiveness of accessory
apartment bylaw and modify as
necessary
X * PB/HP
Housing Preservation Strategies
1. Reconcile Subsidized Housing
Inventory
X * BOS
2. Insure long-term affordability X * BOS
3. Help qualifying homeowners
access housing assistance
X * HA/COA
Capacity Building Strategies
1. Hire Housing Coordinator X * BOS/CPC
2. Investigate creation of a municipal
affordable housing trust fund
X * HP
3. Establish partnerships X * BOS/CPC/HP
4. Conduct ongoing educational
campaign
X * HP
5. Establish annual housing
summits
X * HP
6. Encourage training for board
and committee members
X * BOS
7. Continue to apply for
Commonwealth Capital scoring
X * BOS
Indicates actions for which units are counted under other specific housing production strategies, have an
indirect impact on production, do not add to the Subsidized Housing Inventory, or cannot be counted
towards production goals.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 95
**Abbreviations
Board of Selectmen = BOS
Community Preservation Committee = CPC
Planning Board = PB
Housing Partnership = HP
Housing Authority = HA
Council on Aging = COA
Brewster Housing Production Plan 96
APPENDIX 3
Summary of Housing Regulations and Resources
I. SUMMARY OF HOUSING REGULATIONS
A. Chapter 40B Comprehensive Permit Law
The Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Law, Chapter 40B Sections 20-23 of the General Laws, was
enacted as Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969 to encourage the construction of affordable housing
throughout the state, particularly outside of cities. Often referred to as the Anti-Snob Zoning Act, it
requires all communities to use a streamlined review process through the local Zoning Board of Appeals
for “comprehensive permits” submitted by developers for projects proposing zoning and other regulatory
waivers and incorporating affordable housing for at least 25% of the units. Only one application is
submitted to the ZBA instead of separate permit applications that are typically required by a number of
local departments as part of the normal development process. Here the ZBA takes the lead and consults
with the other relevant departments (e.g., building department, planning department, highway department,
fire department, sanitation department, etc.) on a single application. The Conservation Commission
retains jurisdiction under the Wetlands Protection Act and Department of Environmental Protection, the
Building Inspector applies the state building code, and the Board of Health enforces Title V.
For a development to qualify under Chapter 40B, it must meet all of the following requirements:
Must be part of a “subsidized” development built by a public agency, non-profit organization, or
limited dividend corporation.
At least 25% of the units in the development must be income restricted to households with
incomes at or below 80% of area median income and have rents or sales prices restricted to
affordable levels income levels defined each year by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
Restrictions must run for minimum of 30 years or longer for new construction or for a minimum
of 15 years or longer for rehabilitation. Alternatively, the project can provide 20% of the units to
households below 50% of area median income. Now new homeownership must have deed
restrictions that extend in perpetuity.
Development must be subject to a regulatory agreement and monitored by a public agency or
non-profit organization.
Project sponsors must meet affirmative marketing requirements.
According to Chapter 40B regulations, the ZBA decision to deny or place conditions on a comprehensive
permit project cannot be appealed by the developer if any of the following conditions are met37:
The community has met the “statutory minima” by having at least 10% of its year-round housing
stock affordable as defined by Chapter 40B, at least 1.5% of the community’s land area includes
affordable housing as defined again by 40B, or annual affordable housing construction is on at
least 0.3% of the community’s land area.
The community has made “recent progress” adding SHI eligible housing units during the prior 12
months equal at least to 2% of its year-round housing.
The community has a one- or two-year exemption under Housing Production.
37 Section 56.03 of the new Chapter 40B regulations.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 97
The application is for a “large project” that equals at least 6% of all housing units in a community
with less than 2,500 housing units.
A “related application” for the site was filed, pending or withdrawn within 12 months of the
application.
If a municipality does not meet any of the above thresholds, it is susceptible to appeals by comprehensive
permit applicants of the ZBA’s decision to the state’s Housing Appeals Committee (HAC). This makes
the Town susceptible to a state override of local zoning if a developer chooses to create affordable
housing through the Chapter 40B comprehensive permit process.38 Recently approved regulations add a
new requirement that ZBA’s provide early written notice (within 15 days of the opening of the local
hearing) to the application and to DHCD if they intend to deny or condition the permit based on the
grounds listed above that make the application appeal proof, providing documentation for its position.
Under these circumstances, municipalities can count projects with approved comprehensive permits that
are under legal approval, but not by the ZBA, at the time.
Applicants wishing to appeal the ZBA decision based on appeal-proof grounds must notify the ZBA and
DHCD in writing within 15 days of receipt of the ZBA notice. If the applicant appeals, DHCD will
review materials from the ZBA and applicant and issue a decision within 30days of receipt of the appeal
(failure to issue a decision is a construction approval of the ZBA’s position). Either the ZBA or
application can appeal DHCD’s decision by filing an interlocutory appeal with the Housing appeals
Committee (HAC) within 20 days of receiving DHCD’s decision. If a ZBA fails to follow this procedure,
it waives its right to deny a permit on these “appeal-proof” grounds.
Recent changes to Chapter 40B also address when a community can count a unit as eligible for inclusion
in the SHI including:
40R
Units receiving Plan Approval under 40R now count when the permit or approval is filed with the
municipal clerk provided that no appeals are filed by the board or when the last appeal is fully
resolved, similar to a Comprehensive Permit project.
Certificate of Occupancy
Units added to the SHI on the basis of receiving building permits become temporarily ineligible if
the C of O is not issued with 18 months.
Large Phased Projects
If the comprehensive permit approval or zoning approval allows a project to be built in phases
and each phase includes at least 150 units and average time between the start of each phase is 15
months or less, then the entire project remains eligible for the SHI as long as the phasing schedule
set forth in the permit approval continues to be met.
38 Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969 established the Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Law
(Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B) to facilitate the development of affordable housing for low-
and moderate-income households (defined as any housing subsidized by the federal or state government
under any program to assist in the construction of low- or moderate-income housing for those earning less
than 80% of median income) by permitting the state to override local zoning and other restrictions in
communities where less than 10% of the year -round housing is subsidized for low- and moderate-income
households.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 98
Projects with Expired Use Restrictions
Units become ineligible for inclusion in the SHI upon expiration or termination of the initial use
restriction unless a subsequent use restriction is imposed.
Biennial Municipal Reporting
Municipalities are responsible for providing the information on units that should be included in
the SHI through a statement certified by the chief executive officer.
Towns are allowed to set-aside up to 70% of the affordable units available in a 40B development for those
who have a connection to the community as defined within the parameters of fair housing laws and
Section III.C of the Comprehensive Permit Guidelines including Brewster residents, employees of the
Town of Brewster (including the school district) or employees of businesses located in town.
While there are ongoing discussions regarding how the state should count the affordable units for the
purpose of determining whether a community has met the 10% goal, in a rental project if the subsidy
applies to the entire project, all units are counted towards the state standard. For homeownership projects,
only the units made affordable to those households earning within 80% of median income can be
attributed to the affordable housing inventory.
There are up to three stages in the 40B process – the project eligibility stage, the application stage, and at
times the appeals stage. First, the applicant must apply for eligibility of a proposed 40B project/site from
a subsidizing agency. Under Chapter 40B, subsidized housing is not limited exclusively to housing
receiving direct public subsidies but also applies to privately-financed projects receiving technical
assistance from the State through its Local Initiative Program (LIP) or through MassHousing (Housing
Starts Program), Federal Home Loan Bank Board (New England Fund), MassDevelopment, and
Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund. The subsidizing agency then forwards the application to the
local Board of Selectmen for a 30-day comment period. The Board of Selectmen solicits comments from
Town officials and other boards and based on their review the subsidizing agency typically issues a
project eligibility letter. Alternatively, a developer may approach the Board of Selectmen for their
endorsement of the project, and they can make a joint application to DHCD for certification under the
Local Initiative Program (for more information see description in Section I.E below).
Recent changes to 40B regulations expands the items a subsidizing agency must consider when
determining site eligibility including:
Information provided by the municipality or other parties regarding municipal actions previously
taken to meet affordable housing needs, including inclusionary zoning, multi-family districts and
40R overlay zones.
Whether the conceptual design is appropriate for the site including building massing, topography,
environmental resources, and integration into existing development patterns.
That the land valuation, as included in the pro forma, is consistent with DHCD guidelines
regarding cost examination and limitations on profits and distribution.
Requires that LIP site approval applications be submitted by the municipality’s chief executive
officer.
Specifies that members of local boards can attend the site visit conducted during DHCD’s 30-day
review period.
Requires that the subsidizing agency provide a copy of its determination of eligibility to DHCD,
the chief executive officer of the municipality, the ZBA and the applicant.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 99
If there are substantial changes to a project before the ZBA issues its decision, the subsidizing agency can
defer the re-determination of site/project eligibility until the ZBA issues its decision unless the chief
executive officer of the municipality or applicant request otherwise. New 40B regulations provide greater
detail on this re-determination process. Additionally, challenges to project eligibility determinations can
only be made on the grounds that there has been a substantial change to the project that affects project
eligibility requirements and leaves resolution of the challenge to the subsidizing agency.
The next stage in the comprehensive permit process is the application phase including pre-hearing
activities such as adopting rules before the application is submitted, setting a reasonable filing fee,
providing for technical “peer review” fees, establishing a process for selecting technical consultants, and
setting forth minimum application submission requirements. Failure to open a public hearing within 30
days of filing an application can result in constructive approval. The public hearing is the most critical
part of the whole application process. Here is the chance for the Zoning Board of Appeals’ consultants to
analyze existing site conditions, advise the ZBA on the capacity of the site to handle the proposed type of
development, and to recommend alternative development designs. Here is where the ZBA gets the advice
of experts on unfamiliar matters – called peer review. Consistency of the project with local needs is the
central principal in the review process.
Another important component of the public hearing process is the project economic analysis that
determines whether conditions imposed and waivers denied would render the project “uneconomic”. The
burden of proof is on the applicant, who must prove that it is impossible to proceed and still realize a
reasonable return, which cannot be more than 20%. Another part of the public hearing process is the
engineering review. The ZBA directs its consultants to analyze the consistency of the project with local
bylaws and regulations and to examine the feasibility of alternative designs.
New Chapter 40B regulations now add a number of requirements related to the hearing process that
include:
The hearing be terminated within 180 days of the filing of a complete application unless the
applicant consents to extend.
Allows communities already considering three (3) or more comprehensive permit applications to
stay a hearing on additional applications if the total units under consideration meet the definition
of a large project (larger of 300 units or 2% of housing in communities with 7,500 housing units
as of the latest Census, 250 units in communities with 5,001 to 7,499 total units, 200 units in
communities with 2,500 to 5,000 units, and 150 units or 10% of housing in communities with
less than 2,500 units).
Local boards can adopt local rules for the conduct of their hearings, but they must obtain an
opinion from DHCD that there rules are consistent with Chapter 40B.
Local boards cannot impose “unreasonable or unnecessary” time or cost burdens on an applicant
and bans requiring an applicant to pay legal fees for general representation of the ZBA or other
boards. The new requirements go into the basis of the fees in more detail, but as a general rule
the ZBA may not assess any fee greater than the amount that might be appropriated from town or
city funds to review a project of a similar type and scale.
An applicant can appeal the selection of a consultant within 20 days of the selection on the
grounds that the consultant has a conflict of interest or lack minimum required qualifications.
Specify and limit the circumstances under which ZBA’s can review pro formas.
Zoning waivers are only required under “as of right” requirements, not from special permit
requirements.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 100
Forbids ZBA’s from imposing conditions that deviate from the project eligibility requirements or
that would require the project to provide more affordable units that the minimum threshold
required by DHCD guidelines.
States that ZBA’s cannot delay or deny an application because a state or federal approval has not
been obtained.
Adds new language regarding what constitutes an uneconomic condition including requiring
applicants to pay for off-site public infrastructure or improvements if they involve pre-existing
conditions, are not usually imposed on unsubsidized housing or are disproportionate to the
impacts of the proposed development or requiring a reduction in the number of units other than
on a basis of legitimate local concerns (health, safety, environment, design, etc.). Also states that
a condition shall not be considered uneconomic if it would remove or modify a proposed
nonresidential element of a project that is not allowed by right.
After the public hearing is closed, the ZBA must set-aside at least two sessions for deliberations within 40
days of the close of the hearing. These deliberations can result in either approval, approval with
conditions, or denial.
Subsidizing agencies are required to issue final project eligibility approvals following approval of the
comprehensive permit reconfirming project eligibility, including financial feasibility, and approving the
proposed use restriction and finding that the applicant has committed to complying with cost examination
requirements. New Chapter 40B regulations set forth the basic parameters for insuring that profit
limitations are enforced, while leaving the definition of “reasonable return” to the subsidizing agency in
accordance with DHCD guidelines. The applicant or subsequent developer must submit a detailed
financial statement, prepared by a certified public accountant, to the subsidizing agency in a form and
upon a schedule determined by the DHCD guidelines.
If the process heads into the third stage – the appeals process – the burden is on the ZBA to demonstrate
that the denial is consistent with local needs, meaning the public health and safety and environmental
concerns outweigh the regional need for housing. If a local ZBA denies the permit, a state Housing
Appeals Committee (HAC) can overrule the local decision if less than 10% of the locality’s year round
housing stock has been subsidized for households earning less than 80% of median income, if the locality
cannot demonstrate health and safety reasons for the denial that cannot be mitigated, or if the community
has not met housing production goals based on an approved plan or other statutory minima listed above.
The HAC has upheld the developer in the vast majority of the cases, but in most instances promotes
negotiation and compromise between the developer and locality. In its 30-year history, only a handful of
denials have been upheld on appeal. The HAC cannot issue a permit, but may only order the ZBA to
issue one. Also, any aggrieved person, except the applicant, may appeal to the Superior Court or Land
Court, but even for abutters, establishing “standing” in court is an uphill battle. Appeals from approvals
are often filed to force a delay in commencing a project, but the appeal must demonstrate “legal error” in
the decision of the ZBA or HAC.
B. Housing Production Regulations
As part of the Chapter 40B comprehensive permit regulations, the Massachusetts Department of Housing
and Community Development (DHCD) is administering the Housing Production Program in accordance
with regulations that enable cities and towns to do the following:
Prepare and adopt an Housing Production Plan that demonstrates production of an increase of
.05% over one year or 1.0% over two-years of its year-round housing stock eligible for inclusion
Brewster Housing Production Plan 101
in the Subsidized Housing Inventory (22 units and 44 units, respectively, for Brewster until the
new census figures are available in 2011) for approval by DHCD.39
Request certification of compliance with the plan by demonstrating production of at least the
number of units indicated above.
Through local ZBA action, deny a comprehensive permit application during the period of
certified compliance, which is 12 months following submission of the production documentation
to DHCD, or 24 months if the 1.0% threshold is met.
For the plan to be acceptable to DHCD it must meet the following requirements:
Include a comprehensive housing needs assessment to establish the context for municipal action
based on the most recent census data. The assessment must include a discussion of municipal
infrastructure include future planned improvements.
Address a mix of housing consistent with identified needs and market conditions.
Address the following strategies including -
o Identification of geographic areas in which land use regulations will be modified to
accomplish affordable housing production goals.
o Identification of specific sites on which comprehensive permit applications will be
encouraged.
o Preferable characteristics of residential development such as infill housing, clustered areas,
and compact development.
o Municipally owned parcels for which development proposals will be sought.
o Participation in regional collaborations addressing housing development.
Plans must be adopted by the Board of Selectmen and Planning Board, and the term of an approved plan
is five (5) years.
C. Chapter 40R/40S
In 2004, the State Legislature approved a new zoning tool for communities in recognition that escalating
housing prices, now beyond the reach of increasing numbers of state residents, are causing graduates from
area institutions of higher learning to relocate to other areas of the country in search of greater
affordability. The Commonwealth Housing Task Force, in concert with other organizations and
institutions, developed a series of recommendations, most of which were enacted by the State Legislature
as Chapter 40R of the Massachusetts General Laws. The key components of these regulations are that
“the state provide financial and other incentives to local communities that pass Smart Growth Overlay
Zoning Districts that allow the building of single-family homes on smaller lots and the construction of
apartments for families at all income levels, and the state increase its commitment to fund affordable
housing for families of low and moderate income”.40
The statute defines 40R as “a principle of land development that emphasizes mixing land uses, increases
the availability of affordable housing by creating a range of housing opportunities in neighborhoods, takes
advantage of compact design, fosters distinctive and attractive communities, preserves opens space,
farmland, natural beauty and critical environmental areas, strengthens existing communities, provides a
variety of transportation choices, makes development decisions predictable, fair and cost effective and
39 Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B, 760 CMR 31.07 (1)(i).
40 Edward Carman, Barry Bluestone, and Eleanor White for The Commonwealth Housing Task Force, “A
Housing Strategy for Smart Growth and Economic Development: Executive Summary”, October 30, 2003,
p. 3.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 102
encourages community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions.”41 The key components
of 40R include:
Allows local option to adopt Overlay Districts near transit, areas of concentrated development,
commercial districts, rural village districts, and other suitable locations;
Allows “as-of-right” residential development of minimum allowable densities;
Provides that 20% of the units be affordable;
Promotes mixed-use and infill development;
Provides two types of payments to municipalities; and
Encourages open space and protects historic districts.
The incentives prescribed by the Task Force and passed by the Legislature include an incentive payment
upon the passage of the Overlay District based on the number of projected housing units as follows:
Incentive Payments
Incentive Units
Payments
Up to 20 $10,000
21-100 $75,000
101-200 $200,000
210-500 $350,000
501 or more $600,000
There are also density bonus payments of $3,000 for each residential unit issued a building permit. To be
eligible for these incentives the Overlay Districts need to allow mixed-use development and densities of
20 units per acre for apartment buildings, 12 units per acre for two and three-family homes, and at least
eight units per acre for single-family homes. Communities with populations of less than 10,000 residents
are eligible for a waiver of these density requirements, however significant hardship must be
demonstrated. The Zoning Districts would also encourage housing development on vacant infill lots and
in underutilized nonresidential buildings. The Task Force emphasizes that Planning Boards, which would
enact the Zoning Districts, would be “able to ensure that what is built in the District is compatible with
and reflects the character of the immediate neighborhood.”42
The principal benefits of 40R include:
Expands a community’s planning efforts;
Allows communities to address housing needs;
Allows communities to direct growth;
Can help communities meet production goals and 10% threshold under Chapter 40B;
Can help identify preferred locations for 40B developments; and
State incentive payments.
The formal steps involved in creating Overlay Districts are as follows:
The Town holds a public hearing as to whether to adopt an Overlay District per the requirements
of 40R;
The Town applies to DHCD prior to adopting the new zoning;
41 Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 40R, Section 11.
42 “A Housing Strategy for Smart Growth and Economic Development: Executive Summary,” p. 4.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 103
DHCD reviews the application and issues a Letter of Eligibility if the new zoning satisfies the
requirements of 40R;
The Town adopts the new zoning through a two-thirds vote of Town Meeting subject to any
modifications required by DHCD;
The Town submits evidence of approval to DHCD upon the adoption of the new zoning; and
DHCD issues a letter of approval, which indicates the number of incentive units and the amount
of payment.
The state recently enacted Chapter 40S under the Massachusetts General Law that provides additional
benefits through insurance to towns that build affordable housing under 40R that they would not be
saddled with the extra school costs caused by school-aged children who might move into this new
housing. This funding was initially included as part of 40R but was eliminated during the final stages of
approval. In effect, 40S is a complimentary insurance plan for communities concerned about the impacts
of a possible net increase in school costs due to new housing development.
D. Local Initiative Program (LIP) Guidelines
The Local Initiative Program (LIP) is a technical assistance subsidy program to facilitate Chapter
40B developments and locally produced affordable units. The general requirements of LIP
include insuring that projects are consistent with sustainable or smart growth development
principles as well as local housing needs. LIP recognizes that there is a critical need for all types
of housing but encourages family and special needs housing in particular. Age-restricted housing
(over 55) is allowed but the locality must demonstrate actual need and marketability. DHCD has
the discretion to withhold approval of age-restricted housing if other such housing units within
the community remain unbuilt or unsold or if the age-restricted units are unresponsive to the need
for family housing within the context of other recent local housing efforts.
There are two types of LIP projects, those using the comprehensive permit process, the so-called
“friendly” 40B’s, and Local Action Units, units where affordability is a result of some local
action such as inclusionary zoning, Community Preservation funding, other regulatory
requirements, etc.
Specific LIP requirements include the following by category:
Income and Assets
Must be affordable to those earning at or below 80% of area median income adjusted by
family size and annually by HUD. Applicants for affordable units must meet the program
income limits in effect at the time they apply for the unit and must continue to meet
income limits in effect when they actually purchase a unit.
For homeownership units, the household may not have owned a home within the past
three years except for age-restricted “over 55” housing.
For homeownership projects, assets may not be greater than $75,000 except for age-
restricted housing where the net equity from the ownership of a previous house cannot be
more than $200,000.
Income and asset limits determine eligibility for lottery participation.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 104
Allowable Sales Prices and Rents43
Rents are calculated at what is affordable to a household earning 80% of area median
income adjusted for family size, assuming they pay no more than 30% of their income on
housing. Housing costs include rent and payments for heat, hot water, cooking fuel, and
electric. If there is no municipal trash collection a trash removal allowance should be
included. If utilities are separately metered and payed by the tenant, the LIP rent is
reduced based on the area’s utility allowance. Indicate on the DHCD application whether
the proposed rent has been determined with the use of utility allowances for some or all
utilities.
Sales prices of LIP units are set so a household earning 70% of area median income
would have to pay no more than 30% of their income for housing. Housing costs include
mortgage principal and interest on a 30-year fixed term mortgage at 95% of purchase
price, property taxes, condo fees44, private mortgage insurance (if putting less than 20%
of purchase price down), and hazard insurance.
The initial maximum sales price or rent is calculated as affordable to a household with a
number of household members equal to the number of bedrooms plus one (for example a
two-bedroom unit would be priced based on what a three-person household could afford).
Allowable Financing and Costs
Allowable development costs include the “as is” value of the property based on existing
zoning at the time of application for a project eligibility letter (initial application to
DHCD). Carrying costs (i.e., property taxes, property insurance, interest payments on
acquisitions financing, etc.) can be no more than 20% of the “as is” market value unless
the carrying period exceeds 24 months. Reasonable carrying costs must be verified by
the submission of documentation not within the exclusive control of the applicant.
Appraisals are required except for small projects of 20 units or less at the request of the
Board of Selectmen where the applicant for the LIP comprehensive permit submits
satisfactory evidence of value.
Profits are limited to no more than 20% of total allowable development costs in
homeownership projects.
In regard to rental developments, payment of fees and profits are limited to no more than
10% of total development costs net of profits and fees and any working capital or
reserves intended for property operations. Beginning upon initial occupancy and then
proceeding on an annual basis, annual dividend distributions will be limited to no more
than 10% of the owner’s equity in the project. Owner’s equity is the difference between
the appraised as-built value and the sum of any public equity and secured debt on the
property.
For LIP comprehensive permit projects, DHCD requires all developers to post a bond (or
a letter of credit) with the municipality to guarantee the developer’s obligations to
provide a satisfactory cost certification upon completion of construction and to have any
excess profits, beyond what is allowed, revert back to the municipality. The bond is
discharged after DHCD has determined that the developer has appropriately complied
with the profit limitations.
43 DHCD has an electronic mechanism for calculating maximum sales prices on its website at
www.mass.gov/dhcd.
44 DHCD will review condo fee estimates and approve a maximum condo fee as part of the calculation of
maximum sales price. The percentage interests assigned to the condo must conform to the approved condo
fees and require a lower percentage interest assigned to the affordable units as opposed to the market rate
ones. DHCD must review the Schedule of Beneficial Interests in the Master Deed to confirm that LIP units
have been assigned percentage interests that correspond to the condo fees.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 105
No third party mortgages are allowed for homeownership units.
Marketing and Outreach (refer to state Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan guidelines
dated June 25, 2008.)
Marketing and outreach, including lottery administration in adherence with all Fair
Housing laws.
LIP requires that the lottery draw and rank households by size.
If there are proportionately less minority applicants in the community preference pool
than the proportion in the region, a preliminary lottery must be held to boost, if possible,
the proportion of minority applicants to this regional level.
A maximum of 70% of the units may be local preference units for those who have a
connection to the community as defined under state guidelines (Section C: Local
Preference section of the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan Guidelines (dated
June 25, 2008).
The Marketing Plan must affirmatively provide outreach to area minority communities to
notify them about availability of the unit(s).
Marketing materials must be available/application process open for a period of at least 60
days.
Marketing should begin about six (6) months before occupancy.
Lottery must be held unless there are no more qualified applicants than units available.
Regulatory Requirements
The affordable units design, type, size, etc. must be the same as the market units and
dispersed throughout the development.
Units developed through LIP as affordable must be undistinguishable from market units
as viewed from the exterior (unless the project has a DHCD-approved alternative
development plan that is only granted under exceptional circumstances) and contain
complete living facilities.
For over 55 projects, only one household member must be 55 or older.
Household size relationship to unit size is based on “households” = number of bedrooms
plus one – i.e., a four-person household in a three-bedroom unit (important also for
calculating purchase prices of the affordable units for which LIP has a formula as noted
above).
Must have deed restrictions in effect in perpetuity unless the applicant or municipality
can justify a shorter term to DHCD.
All affordable units for families must have at least two or more bedrooms and meet state
sanitary codes and these minimum requirements –
1 bedroom – 700 square feet/1 bath
2 bedrooms – 900 square feet/1 bath
3 bedrooms – 1,200 square feet/ 1 ½ baths
4 bedrooms – 1,400 square feet/2 baths
Appraisals may take into account the probability of obtaining a variance, special permit
or other zoning relief but must exclude any value relating to the possible issuance of a
comprehensive permit.
The process that is required for using LIP for 40B developments – “friendly” comprehensive
permit projects – is largely developer driven. It is based on the understanding that the developer
Brewster Housing Production Plan 106
and Town are working together on a project that meets community needs. Minimum requirements
include:
1. Written support of the municipality’s chief elected official, the Board of Selectmen in the
case of towns, and the local housing partnership, trust or other designated local housing
entity. The chief executive officer is in fact required to submit the application to DHCD.
2. At least 25% of the units must be affordable and occupied by households earning at or
below 80% of area median income or at least 20% of units restricted to households at or
below 50% of area median income.
3. Affordability restrictions must be in effect in perpetuity, to be monitored by DHCD
through a recorded regulatory agreement.
4. Project sponsors must prepare and execute an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan
that must be approved by DHCD.
5. Developer’s profits are restricted per Chapter 40B requirements.
The process that is required for using LIP for 40B developments – “friendly” comprehensive permit
projects – is as follows:
1. Application process
Developer meets with Town
Developer and Town agree to proposal
Town chief elected officer submits application to DHCD with developer’s input
2. DHCD review involves the consideration of:
Sustainable development criteria (redevelop first, concentrate development, be fair, restore and
enhance the environment, conserve natural resources, expand housing opportunities, provide
transportation choice, increase job opportunities, foster sustainable businesses, and plan
regionally),
Number and type of units,
Pricing of units to be affordable to households earning no more than 70% of area median income,
Affirmative marketing plan,
Financing, and
Site visit.
3. DHCD issues site eligibility letter that enables the developer to bring the proposal to the ZBA for
processing the comprehensive permit.
4. Zoning Board of Appeals holds hearing
Developer and Town sign regulatory agreement to guarantee production of affordable units that
includes the price of units and deed restriction in the case of homeownership and limits on rent
increases if a rental project. The deed restriction limits the profit upon resale and requires that the
units be sold to another buyer meeting affordability criteria.
Developer forms a limited dividend corporation that limits profits.
The developer and Town sign a regulatory agreement.
5. Marketing
An Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan must provide outreach to area minority
communities to notify them about availability of the unit(s).
Local preference is limited to a maximum of 70% of the affordable units.
Marketing materials must be available/application process open for a period of at least 60 days.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 107
Lottery must be held.
6. DHCD approval must include
Marketing plan, lottery application, and lottery explanatory materials
Regulatory agreement (DHCD is a signatory)
Deed rider (Use standard LIP document)
Purchase arrangements for each buyer including signed mortgage commitment, signed purchase
and sale agreement and contact information of purchaser’s closing attorney.
As mentioned above, in addition to being used for “friendly” 40B projects, LIP can be used for counting
those affordable units as part of a Town’s Subsidized Housing Inventory that are created as a result of
some local action. Following occupancy of the units, a Local Action Units application must be submitted
to DHCD for the units to be counted as affordable. This application is on DHCD’s web site.
The contact person at DHCD is Janice Lesniak of the LIP staff (phone: 617-573-1309; fax: 617-
573-1330; email: Janice.lesniak@state.ma.us. For resale questions contact Elsa Campbell,
Housing Specialist (phone: 617-573-1321; fax: 617-573-1330; email:
elsa.campbell@state.ma.us).
E. Commonwealth Capital45
The state established Commonwealth Capital as a policy that encourages communities to
implement smart growth by utilizing the smart growth consistency of municipal land use
regulations as part of the evaluation of proposals for state funding under a number of state capital
spending programs. Those municipalities with higher scores, will be in a more competitive
position for receiving state discretionary funding, not just for housing, but for other purposes
including infrastructure, transportation, environment, economic development, etc. The state’s
goal is to invest in projects that are consistent with Sustainable Development Principles that
include:
1. Redevelop first;
2. Concentrate development;
3. Be fair;
4. Restore and enhance the environment;
5. Conserve natural resources;
6. Expand housing opportunities;
7. Provide transportation choice;
8. Increase job opportunities;
9. Foster sustainable businesses; and
10. Plan regionally.
Applications can be submitted at any time and will be valid for the programs listed above
throughout the current fiscal year. Communities should submit applications prior to the deadline
for any Commonwealth Capital program to which they are applying to ensure that their score will
count. Applications should be submitted electronically, and each community is assigned its own
login and password.
Programs which are affected by Commonwealth Capital include the following that are operated
by the Executive Office of Administration and Finance (EOAF), Executive Office of Energy and
45 This program was created by the Romney administration and coordinated by the Office of
Commonwealth Development. While OCD has been disbanded, applications are still being accepted
Brewster Housing Production Plan 108
Environmental Affairs (EOEEA), Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development
(EOHED), Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works (EOTPW), Coastal Zone
Management (CZM), Massachusetts Office of Business Development (MOBD), Massachusetts
Office of Relocation and Expansion (MORE), and the Department of Housing and Community
Development (DHCD):
Public Works Economic Development Program (EOTPW)
Bike and Pedestrian Program (EOTPW)*
Transit Oriented Development Bond Program (EOTPW)
Community Development Action Grant Program (EOHED and DHCD)
State Revolving Fund (EOEEA and DEP)
Urban Brownfields Assessment Program (EOEEA)*
Urban Self-Help Program (EOEEA and DCS)
Drinking Water Supply Protection Grant Program (EOEEA)
Urban River Visions Program (EOEEA)*
Coastal Pollutant Remediation Grant Program (EOEEA and CZM)
Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Grant Program (EOEEA and CZM)
Off-Street Parking Program (EOAF)
Smart Growth Technical Assistance Program (for this program EOEEA will use inverse
Commonwealth Capital scores. Unlike the other 13 programs, a primary goal of this program
is to help communities with low scores improve.)
* Indicates programs that are eliminated in proposed program changes.
Draft changes to Commonwealth Capital add the following programs:
Small Town Road Assistance Program (EOTPW)
MA Opportunity Relocation and Expansion (MORE)
Jobs Capital Program (MOBD)
Water Transportation Capital Funding Program (EOTPW)
Alternative Energy Property Program (EOEEA-DOER)
The application involves a maximum score of 140 points, including bonus points. The
Commonwealth Capital score will account for 30% of the possible application points for any of
the Commonwealth Capital programs, the other 70% points related to the purpose of the
particular program and the merits of the proposed project. Communities receive points for
zoning, planning, housing, environmental, energy, transportation, and other measures that already
exist as well as measures they commit to implement by the end of 2009 (for this year’s
application). Additionally, communities can receive bonus points for successfully implementing
commitments made in their 2008 applications.
The major components of the proposed Commonwealth Capital application and corresponding
total point allocations are provided below:
Plan for and promote livable communities and plan regionally (19)
Zone for and permit concentrated development and mixed use (26)
Expand housing opportunities (21)
Make efficient decisions and increase job and business opportunities (12)
Protect land and ecosystems (21)
Use natural resources wisely (7)
Brewster Housing Production Plan 109
Promote clean energy (9)
Provide transportation choice (9)
Advance equity (6)
Promote sustainable development via other actions (10)
Bonus points for every prior fiscal year commitment implemented
A greater number of points are granted for actions that are already in place but points are also
issued for commitments that have not yet been implemented.
II. SUMMARY OF HOUSING RESOURCES
Those programs that may be most appropriate to development activity in Brewster are described below.46
A. Technical Assistance
1. Priority Development Fund47
A relatively new state-funded initiative, the Priority Development Fund, provides planning assistance to
municipalities for housing production. In June 2004, DHCD began making $3 million available through
this Fund on a first-come, first-served basis to encourage the new production of housing, especially
mixed-income rental housing. PDF assistance supports a broad range of activities to help communities
produce housing. Applications must demonstrate the community’s serious long-term commitment and
willingness to increase its housing supply in ways that are consistent with the Commonwealth’s principles
of sustainable development.
Eligible activities include community initiated activities and implementation activities associated with the
production of housing on specific sites. Community initiated activities include but are not limited to:
Zoning activities that support the program objectives include:
Incentive zoning provisions to increase underlying housing density;
Smart Growth Zoning Overlay Districts;
Inter- and intra-municipal Transferable Development Rights proposals;
Zoning that promotes compact housing and development such as by right multi-family housing,
accessory apartment units, clustered development, and inclusionary zoning;
Zoning provisions authorizing live-and-work units, housing units for seasonal employees, mixed
assisted living facilities and the conversion of large single -family structures, vacant mills,
industrial buildings, commercial space, a school or other similar facilities, into multi-family
developments; and
Other innovative zoning approaches developed by and for an individual community.
Education and outreach efforts that support the program objectives include:
Establishment of a local or regional affordable housing trust;
Development of a plan of action for housing activities that will be undertaken with Community
Preservation Act funds; and
Efforts to build local support (grass-root education) necessary to achieve consensus or approval
of local zoning initiatives.
46 Program information was gathered through agency brochures, agency program guidelines and application
materials as well as the following resources: Verrilli, Ann. Housing Guidebook for Massachusetts,
Produced by the Citizen’s Housing and Planning Association, June 1999.
47 Description taken from the state’s program description.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 110
Implementation activities associated with the production of housing in site-specific areas include but
are not limited to:
Identification of properties, site evaluation, land assembly and financial feasibility analysis; and
Development of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the disposition of land.
The PDF assistance is not available to serve as a substitute for pre-development assessment of alternative
development scenarios for parcels already controlled by an identified private developer or to supplant
municipal funds to pay staff salaries.
Eligible applicants consist of cities and towns within the Commonwealth. Municipalities may enter into
third party agreements with consultants approved by DHCD, however only a municipality will be allowed
to enter into a contract with MassHousing regarding the distribution of funds. Municipalities will be
responsible for attesting that all funds have been expended for their intended purposes.
Joint applications involving two or more communities within a region or with similar housing challenges
are strongly encouraged as a way to leverage limited resources, however, one municipality will be
required to serve as the lead.
MassHousing and DHCD reserve the right to screen applications and to coordinate requests from
communities seeking similar services. For example, rural communities may be more effectively served
by an application for a shared consultant who can work with numerous towns to address zoning
challenges that enhance housing production. Likewise, it may be more effective to support an application
for a consultant to review model zoning bylaws or overlay districts with a number of interested
communities with follow-up at the community level to support grassroots education, than it is to support
the separate development of numerous zoning bylaws. Communities submitting multiple applications
must prioritize their applications.
In exchange for the assistance, municipalities must agree to share the end product of the funded activities
with DHCD and MassHousing and with other communities in the Commonwealth through reports,
meetings, workshops, and to highlight these activities in print, on the web or other media outlets.
The agencies will focus the evaluation of applications to determine overall consistency with program
goals and the principles of sustainable development. Applications will be evaluated based on:
Eligibility of activity;
Public support;
Demonstrated need for funds;
Likelihood activity will result in production of housing;
Reasonableness of the timeline;
Readiness to proceed with proposed project;
Capacity to undertake activity;
Cost estimates and understanding of the proposed project cost;
Proposed activity having clearly defined benefits that will result in the production of housing; and
Benefits being realized within a 2-3 year-timeframe.
Applications for funding will be accepted and evaluated on a rolling review basis. In order to deploy this
assistance as effectively and efficiently as possible, or in the event the planning funds are oversubscribed,
communities that have relatively greater planning capacity and/or resources may be requested to provide
Brewster Housing Production Plan 111
some matching funds. Additional consideration and flexibility for the assistance will be made for
communities with little or no planning staff capacity or resources.
Communities may apply to DHCD for assistance of up to $50,000. The amount of funds awarded will be
a reflection of the anticipated impact on housing production. DHCD and MassHousing reserve the right
to designate proposals as “Initiatives of Exceptional Merit,” in order to increase the amount of assistance
and scope of services for certain projects.
2. Peer to Peer Technical Assistance
This state program utilizes the expertise and experience of local officials from one community to provide
assistance to officials in another comparable community to share skills and knowledge on short-term
problem solving or technical assistance projects related to community development and capacity building.
Funding is provided through the Community Development Block Grant Program and is limited to grants
of no more than $1,000, providing up to 30 hours of technical assistance.
Applications are accepted on a continuous basis, but funding is limited. To apply, a municipality must
provide DHCD with a brief written description of the problem or issue, the technical assistance needed
and documentation of a vote of the Board of Selectmen or letter from the Town Administrator supporting
the request for a peer. Communities may propose a local official from another community to serve as the
peer or ask DHCD for a referral. If DHCD approves the request and once the peer is recruited, DHCD
will enter into a contract for services with the municipality. When the work is completed to the
municipality’s satisfaction, the Town must prepare a final report, submit it to DHCD, and request
reimbursement for the peer.
3. MHP Intensive Community Support Team
The Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund is a quasi-public agency that offers a wide range of
technical and financial resources to support affordable housing. The Intensive Community Support Team
provides sustained, in-depth assistance to support the development of affordable housing. Focusing on
housing production, the Team helps local advocates move a project from the conceptual phase through
construction, bringing expertise and shared lessons from other parts of the state. The team can also
provide guidance on project finance. Those communities, which are interested in this initiative, should
contact the MHP Fund directly for more information.
4. MHP Chapter 40B Technical Assistance Program
Working with DHCD, MHP launched this program in 1999 to provide technical assistance to those
communities needing assistance in reviewing comprehensive permit applications. The Program offers up
to $10,000 in third-party technical assistance to enable communities to hire consultants to help them
review Chapter 40B applications. Those communities that are interested in this initiative should contact
the MHP Fund directly for more information.
MHP recently announced new guidelines to help cities and towns review housing development proposals
under Chapter 40B including:
State housing agencies will now appraise and establish the land value of 40B sites before issuing
project eligibility letters.
State will put standards in place for determining when permit conditions make a 40B
development “uneconomic”.
There will be set guidelines on determining related-party transactions, i.e., when a developer may
also have a role as contractor or realtor.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 112
Advice on how to identify the most important issues early and communicate them to the
developer, how informal work sessions can be effective, and how to make decisions that are
unlikely to be overturned in court.
5. Smart Growth Technical Assistance Grants
The state recently announced the availability of Smart Growth Technical Assistance Grants from the
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs that provides up to $30,000 per community to implement
smart growth zoning changes and other activities that will improve sustainable devel opment practices and
increase scores on the Commonwealth Capital application. Eligible activities include:
Zoning changes that implement planning recommendations;
Development of mixed-use zoning districts;
Completion of Brownfields inventory or site planning;
Implementation of stormwater BMPs;
Completion of Open Space Residential Design bylaws/ordinances;
Implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) bylaws/ordinances; and
Development of a Right-to-Farm bylaw/ordinance or zoning protections for agricultural
preservation.
The state requires that localities provide a match of 15% of this special technical assistance fund and
encourages communities that are interested in the same issues to apply jointly. Preference will be given
to applications that improve sustainable development practices, realize a commitment from a
community’s Commonwealth Capital application, and implement a specific Community Development or
Master Plan action. Additional preference will be offered those communities with lower Commonwealth
Capital scores to support towns that have the greatest need for improved land use practices. For FY 2006,
applications were due in mid-August for projects that must be completed by June 30, 2006, but no
applications were required in FY 2006 if one had been submitted previously. Nevertheless, communities
are able to submit supplemental information that will likely help boost their scores and competitiveness
for state discretionary resources.
B. Housing Development
While comprehensive permits typically do not involve external public subsidies but use internal subsidies
by which the market units in fact subsidize the affordable ones, communities are finding that they also
require public subsidies to cover the costs of affordable or mixed-income residential development and
need to access a range of programs through the state and federal government and other financial
institutions to accomplish their objectives and meet affordable housing goals. Because the costs of
development are typically significantly higher than the rents or purchase prices that low- and moderate-
income tenants can afford, multiple layers of subsidies are often required to fill the gaps. Sometimes even
Chapter 40B developments are finding it useful to apply for external subsidies to increase the numbers of
affordable units, to target units to lower income or special needs populations, or to fill gaps that market
rates cannot fully cover.
The state requires applicants to submit a One Stop Application for most of its housing subsidy programs
in an effort to standardize the application process across agencies and programs. A Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA) is issued by the state usually twice annually for its rental programs and
homeownership initiatives. Using the One Stop Application, applicants can apply to several programs
simultaneously to support the funding needs of a particular project.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 113
1. HOME Program
HUD created the HOME Program in 1990 to provide grants to states, larger cities and consortia of smaller
cities and towns to do the following:
Produce rental housing;
Provide rehabilitation loans and grants, including lead paint removal and accessibility
modifications, for rental and owner-occupied properties;
Offer tenant-based rental assistance (two-year subsidies); and/or
Assist first-time homeowners.
The HOME Program funding is targeted to homebuyers or homeowners earning no more than 80% of
median income and to rental units where at least 90% of the units must be affordable and occupied by
households earning no more than 60% of median income, the balance to those earning within 80% of
median. Moreover, for those rental projects with five or more units, at least 20% of the units must be
reserved for households earning less than 50% of median income. In addition to income guidelines, the
HOME Program specifies the need for deed restrictions, resale requirements, and maximum sales prices
or rentals.
The HOME Rental Program is targeted to the acquisition and rehabilitation of multi-family distressed
properties or new construction of multi-family rental housing from five to fifty units. Once again, the
maximum subsidy per project is $750,000 and the maximum subsidy per unit in localities that receive
HOME or CDBG funds directly from HUD is $50,000 (these communities should also include a
commitment of local funds in the project). Those communities that do not receive HOME or CDBG
funds directly from HUD, like Brewster, can apply for up to $65,000 per unit. Subsidies are in the form
of deferred loans at 0% interest for 30 years. State HOME funding cannot be combined with another state
subsidy program with several exceptions including the Low Income Housing Tax Credits, HIF and the
Soft Second Program.
Like all other communities on Cape Cod, Brewster is part of the Barnstable County HOME Consortium
and has access to HOME funding.
2. Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
In addition to funding for the Peer-to-Peer Program mentioned in the above section, there are other
housing resources supported by federal CDBG funds that are distributed by formula to Massachusetts.
The Massachusetts Small Cities Program that has a set-aside of Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds to support a range of eligible activities including housing development. However, at least
70% of the money must provide benefits to households earning within 80% of median income. This
money is for those nonentitlement localities that do not receive CDBG funds directly from HUD. Funds
are awarded on a competitive basis through Notices of Funding Availability with specific due dates or
through applications reviewed on a rolling basis throughout the year, depending on the specific program.
This funding supports a variety of specific programs.
The program that potentially has the greatest applicability in Brewster is the Housing Development
Support Program (HDSP) that provides gap financing for small affordable housing projects with fewer
than eight units, including both new construction and rehabilitation. Eligible activities include
development, rehabilitation, homeownership, acquisition, site preparation and infrastructure work. There
is a maximum of $500,000 plus administrative costs but the program can go up to $750,000 per project
for somewhat larger developments of up to ten units that involve mixed-use or adaptive reuse projects. A
majority of the units must be affordable. All state and federal grants cannot exceed 75% of total project
Brewster Housing Production Plan 114
costs with the exception of special needs projects where such grants can amount to 100% of total costs.
Funding involves a two-step process: 1) a notice of intent that provides basic information on the project,
and 2) the municipality may be invited to submit a full application. HDSP Program funding is extremely
competitive, and projects that receive funding through the state HOME or Housing Stabilization Fund
Programs are excluded from applying to HDSP.
There are other programs funded through the Community Development Block Grant Small Cities
Program for both homeownership and rental projects. A number of the special initiatives are directed to
communities with high “statistical community-wide needs”, however, the Community Development
Fund II is targeted to communities with lower needs scores that have not received CDBG funds in recent
years. This may be the best source of CDBG funding for Brewster besides HDSP described above.
Funding is also awarded competitively through an annual Notice of Funding Availability. DHCD also
has a Reserve Fund for CDBG-eligible projects that did not receive funding from other CDBG funded
programs or for innovative projects.
3. Housing Stabilization Fund (HSF)
The state’s Housing Stabilization Fund (HSF) was established in 1993 through a Housing Bond bill to
support housing rehabilitation through a variety of housing activities including homeownership (most of
this funding has been allocated for the MHP Soft Second Program) and rental project development. The
state subsequently issued additional bond bills to provide more funding. The HSF Rehabilitation
Initiative is targeted to households with incomes within 80% of median income, with resale or subsequent
tenancy for households within 100% of median income. The funds can be used for grants or loans
through state and local agencies, housing authorities and community development corporations with the
ability to subcontract to other entities. The funds have been used to match local HOME program funding,
to fund demolition, and to support the acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing. In addition to
a program directed to the rehabilitation of abandoned, distressed or foreclosed properties, the HSF
provides funds to municipalities for local revitalization programs directed to the creation or preservation
of rental projects. As with HOME, the maximum amount available per project is $750,000 and the
maximum per unit is $65,000 for communities that do not receive HOME or CDBG funds directly from
HUD, and $50,000 for those that do. Communities can apply for HSF funding biannually through the
One Stop Application.
4. Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program
The Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program was created in 1986 by the Federal Government to offer
tax credits to investors in housing development projects that include some low-income units. The tax
credit program is often the centerpiece program in any affordable rental project because it brings in
valuable equity funds. Tax credits are either for 4% or 9% of the development or rehab costs for each
affordable unit for a ten-year period. The 4% credits have a present value of 30% of the development
costs, except for the costs of land, and the 9% credit have a present value equal to 70% of the costs of
developing the affordable units, with the exception of land. Both the 4% and 9% credits can be sold to
investors for close to their present values.
The Federal Government limits the 9% credits and consequently there is some competition for them,
nevertheless, most tax credit projects in Massachusetts are financed through the 9% credit. Private
investors, such as banks or corporations, purchase the tax credits for about 80 cents on the dollar, and
their money serves as equity in a project, reducing the amount of the debt service and consequently the
rents. The program mandates that at least 20% of the units must be made affordable to households
earning within 50% of median income or 40% of the units must be affordable to households earning up to
60% of median income. Those projects that receive the 9% tax credits must produce much higher
percentages of affordable units.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 115
The Massachusetts Legislature has enacted a comparable state tax credit program, modeled after the
federal tax credit program. The One Stop Application is also used to apply for this source of funding.
5. Affordable Housing Trust Fund
The Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) was established by an act of the State Legislature and is
codified under Chapter 121-D of the Massachusetts General Laws. The AHTF operates out of DHCD and
is administered by MassHousing with guidance provided by an Advisory Committee of housing
advocates. The purpose of the fund is to support the creation/preservation of housing that is affordable to
people with incomes that do not exceed 110% of the area median income. The AHTF can be used to
support the acquisition, development and/or preservation of affordable housing units. AHTF assistance
can include:
Deferred payment loans, low/no-interest amortizing loans.
Down payment and closing cost assistance for first-time homebuyers.
Credit enhancements and mortgage insurance guarantees.
Matching funds for municipalities that sponsor affordable housing projects.
Matching funds for employer-based housing and capital grants for public housing.
Funds can be used to build or renovate new affordable housing, preserve the affordability of subsidized
expiring use housing, and renovate public housing. While the fund has the flexibility of serving
households with incomes up to 110%, preferences for funding will be directed to projects involving the
production of new affordable units for families earning below 80% of median income. The program also
includes a set-aside for projects that serve homeless households or those earning below 30% of median
income. Once again, the One Stop Application is used to apply for funding, typically through the
availability of two funding rounds per year.
6. Housing Innovations Fund (HIF)
The state also administers the Housing Innovations Fund (HIF) that was created by a 1987 bond bill and
expanded under two subsequent bond bills to provide a 5% deferred loan to non-profit organizations for
no more than $500,000 per project or up to 30% of the costs associated with developing alternative forms
of housing including limited equity coops, mutual housing, single-room occupancy housing, special needs
housing, transitional housing, domestic violence shelters and congregate housing. At least 25% of the
units must be reserved for households earning less than 80% of median income and another 25% for those
earning within 50% of area median income. HIF can also be used with other state subsidy programs
including HOME, HSF and Low Income Housing Tax Credits. The Community Economic Development
Assistance Corporation (CEDAC) administers this program. Applicants are required to complete the
One-Stop Application.
7. Federal Home Loan Bank Board’s Affordable Housing Program (AHP)
Another potential source of funding for both homeownership and rental projects is the Federal Home
Loan Bank Board’s Affordable Housing Program (AHP) that provides subsidies to projects targeted to
households earning between 50% and 80% of median income, with up to $300,000 available per project.
This funding is directed to filling existing financial gaps in low- and moderate-income affordable housing
projects. There are typically two competitive funding rounds per year for this program.
8. MHP Permanent Rental Financing Program
The state also provides several financing programs for rental projects through the Massachusetts Housing
Partnership Fund. The Permanent Rental Financing Program provides long-term, fixed-rate permanent
financing for rental projects of five or more units from $100,000 loans to amounts of $2 million. At least
20% of the units must be affordable to households earning less than 50% of median income or at least
Brewster Housing Production Plan 116
40% of the units must be affordable to households earning less than 60% of median income or at least
50% of the units must be affordable to households earning less than 80% of median income. MHP also
administers the Permanent Plus Program targeted to multi-family housing or SRO properties with five or
more units where at least 20% of the units are affordable to households earning less than 50% of median
income. The program combines MHP’s permanent financing with a 0% deferred loan of up to $40,000
per affordable unit up to a maximum of $500,000 per project. No other subsidy funds are allowed in this
program. The Bridge Financing Program offers bridge loans of up to eight years ranging from $250,000
to $5 million to projects involving Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Applicants should contact MHP
directly to obtain additional information on the program and how to apply.
9. OneSource Program
The Massachusetts Housing Investment Corporation (MHIC) is a private, non-profit corporation that
since 1991 has provided financing for affordable housing developments and equity for projects that
involve the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. MHIC raises money from area banks to
fund its loan pool and invest in the tax credits. In order to qualify for MHIC’s OneSource financing, the
project must include a significant number of affordable units, such that 20% to 25% of the units are
affordable to households earning within 80% of median income. Interest rates are typically one point
over prime and there is a 1% commitment fee. MHIC loans range from $250,000 to several million, with
a minimum project size of six units. Financing can be used for both rental and homeownership projects,
for rehab and new construction, also covering acquisition costs with quick turn-around times for
applications of less than a month (an appraisal is required). The MHIC and MHP work closely together
to coordinate MHIC’s construction financing with MHP’s permanent take-out through the OneSource
Program, making their forms compatible and utilizing the same attorneys to expedite and reduce costs
associated with producing affordable housing.
10. Section 8 Rental Assistance
An important low-income housing resource is the Section 8 Program that provides rental assistance to
help low- and moderate-income households pay their rent. In addition to the federal Section 8 Program,
the state also provides rental subsidies through the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program as well as
three smaller programs directed to those with special needs. These rental subsidy programs are
administered by the state or through local housing authorities and regional non-profit housing
organizations. Rent subsidies take two basic forms – either granted directly to tenants or committed to
specific projects through special Project-based rental assistance. Most programs require households to
pay a minimum percentage of their adjusted income (typically 30%) for housing (rent and utilities) with
the government paying the difference between the household’s contribution and the actual rent.
11. Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund
The Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund (MPPF) is a state-funded 50% reimbursable matching
grant program that supports the preservation of properties, landscapes, and sites (cultural resources) listed
in the State Register of Historic Places. Applicants must be municipality or non-profit organization.
Funds can be available for pre-development including feasibility studies, historic structure reports and
certain archaeological investigations of up to $30,000. Funding can also be used for construction
activities including stabilization, protection, rehabilitation, and restoration or the acquisition of a state-
registered property that are imminently threatened with inappropriate alteration or destruction. Funding
for development and acquisition projects range from $7,500 to $100,000. Work completed prior to the
grant award, routine maintenance items, mechanical system upgrades, renovation of non-historic spaces,
moving an historic building, construction of additions or architectural/engineering fees are not eligible for
funding or use as the matching share. A unique feature of the program allows applicants to request up to
75% of construction costs if there is a commitment to establish a historic property maintenance fund by
setting aside an additional 25% over their matching share in a restricted endowment fund. A round of
funding was recently held, but future rounds are not authorized at this time.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 117
12. District Improvement Financing Program (DIF)
The District Improvement Financing Program (DIF) is administered by the state’s Office of Business
Development to enable municipalities to finance public works and infrastructure by pledging future
incremental taxes resulting from growth within a designated area to service financing obligations. This
Program, in combination with others, can be helpful in developing or redeveloping target areas of a
community, including the promotion of mixed-uses and smart growth. Municipalities submit a standard
application and follow a prescribed application process directed by the Office of Business Development
in coordination with the Economic Assistance Coordinating Council.
13. Urban Center Housing Tax Increment Financing Zone (UCH-TIF)
The Urban Center Housing Tax Increment Financing Zone Program (UCH-TIF) is a relatively new state
initiative designed to give cities and towns the ability to promote residential and commercial development
in commercial centers through tax increment financing that provides a real estate tax exemption on all or
part of the increased value (the “increment”) of the improved real estate. The development must be
primarily residential and this program can be combined with grants and loans from other local, state and
federal development programs. An important purpose of the program is to increase the amount of
affordable housing for households earning at or below 80% of area median income and requires that 25%
of new housing to be built in the zone be affordable, although the Department of Housing and
Community Development may approve a lesser percentage where necessary to insure financial feasibility.
In order to take advantage of the program, a municipality needs to adopt a detailed UCH-TIF Plan and
submit it to DHCD for approval.
14. Community Based Housing Program
The Community Based Housing Program provides loans to nonprofit agencies for the development or
redevelopment of integrated housing for people with disabilities in institutions or nursing facilities or at
risk of institutionalization. The Program provides permanent, deferred payment loans for a term of 30
years, and CBH funds may cover up to 50% of a CHA unit’s Total Development Costs up to a maximum
of $750,000 per project.
C. Homebuyer Financing and Counseling
1. Soft Second Loan Program
The Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund, in coordination with the state’s Department of Housing
and Community Development, administers the Soft Second Loan Program to help first-time homebuyers
purchase a home. The Program began in 1991 to help families earning up to 80% of median income
qualify for a mortgage through a graduated-payment second mortgage and down payment assistance. Just
recently the state announced that it had lent $1 billion in these affordable mortgages. Participating
lenders originate the mortgages which are actually split in two with a conventional first mortgage based
on 77% of the purchase price, the soft second mortgage for typically about 20% of the purchase price (or
$20,000 if greater) and a requirement from the buyer of at least a 3% down payment. Borrowers do not
need to purchase private mortgage insurance that would typically be required with such a low down
payment, thus saving the buyer significant sums on a monthly basis. Program participants pay interest
only on the soft second mortgage for the first ten years and some eligible buyers may qualify for an
interest subsidy on the second mortgage as well. Additionally, some participating lenders and
communities offer grants to support closing costs and down payments and slightly reduced interest rates
on the first mortgage. Brewster is already a participating community in the Program.
2. American Dream Downpayment Assistance Program
The American Dream Downpayment Assistance Program is also awarded to municipalities or non-profit
organizations on a competitive basis to help first-time homebuyers with down payments and closing
costs. While the income requirements are the same as for the Soft Second Program, the purchase price
Brewster Housing Production Plan 118
levels are higher based on the FHA mortgage limits. Deferred loans for the down payment and closing
costs of up to 5% of the purchase price to a maximum of $10,000 can be made at no interest and with a
five-year term, to be forgiven after five years. Another loan can be made through the program to cover
deleading in addition to the down payment and closing costs, but with a ten-year term instead, with at
least 2.5% of the purchase price covering the down payment.
3. Homebuyer Counseling
There are a number of programs, including the Soft Second Loan Program and MassHousing’s Home
Improvement Loan Program, as well as Chapter 40B homeownership projects, that require purchasers to
attend homebuyer workshops sponsored by organizations that are approved by the state, Citizens Housing
and Planning Association (CHAPA) and/or HUD as a condition of occupancy. These sessions provide
first-time homebuyers with a wide range of important information on homeownership finance and
requirements. The organization that offers these workshops in closest proximity to Brewster is the
Housing Assistance Corporation or Lower Cape Cod CDC.
4. Self-Help Housing.
Self-Help programs involve sweat-equity by the homebuyer and volunteer labor of others to reduce
construction costs. Some communities have donated building lots to Habitat for Humanity to construct
affordable single housing units. Under the Habitat for Humanity program, homebuyers contribute
between 300 and 500 hours of sweat equity while working with volunteers from the community to
construct the home. The homeowner finances the home with a 20-year loan at 0% interest. As funds are
paid back to Habitat for Humanity, they are used to fund future projects.
D. Home Improvement Financing
1. MassHousing Home Improvement Loan Program (HLP)
The MHFA Home Improvement Loan Program (HILP) is targeted to one- to four-unit, owner-occupied
properties, including condominiums, with a minimum loan amount of $10,000 up to a maximum of
$50,000. Loan terms range from five to 20 years based on the amount of the loan and the borrower’s
income and debt. MassHousing services the loans. Income limits are $92,000 for households of one or
two persons and $104,000 for families of three or more persons. To apply for a loan, applicants must
contact a participating lender.
2. Get the Lead Out Program
MassHousing’s Get the Lead Out Program offers 100% financing for lead paint removal on excellent
terms that are based on ownership status and type of property. An owner-occupied, single-family home
may be eligible to receive a 0% deferred payment loan up to $20,000 that is due when the house is sold,
transferred or refinanced. An owner-occupant of a two-family house could receive up to $25,000 to
conduct the de-leading work. Maximum income limits for owner-occupants are $74,400 for one and two-
person households and $85,500 for three or more persons. Investor-owners can also participate in the
program but receive a 5% fully amortizing loan to cover costs. Non-profit organizations that rent
properties to income-eligible residents are also eligible for 0% fully amortizing loans that run from five to
20 years. Applicants must contact a local rehabilitation agency to apply for the loan.
3. Septic Repair Program
Through a partnership with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and Revenue,
MassHousing offers loans to repair or replace failed or inadequate septic systems for qualifying
applicants. The interest rates vary according to the borrower’s income with 0% loans available to one and
two-person households earning up to $23,000 and three or more person households earning up to $26,000
annually. There are 3% loans available for those one or two person households earning up to $46,000 and
three or more persons earning up to $52,000. Additionally, one to four-family dwellings and
Brewster Housing Production Plan 119
condominiums are eligible for loan amounts of up to $25,000 and can be repaid in as little as three years
or over a longer period of up to 20 years. To apply for a loan, applicants must contact a participating
lender.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 120
APPENDIX 4
Glossary of Housing Terms48
Affordable Housing
A subjective term, but as used in this Plan, refers to housing available to a household earning no more
than 80% of area median income at a cost that is no more than 30% of total household income.
Area Median Income (AMI)
The estimated median income, adjusted for family size, by metropolitan area (or county in
nonmetropolitan areas) that is adjusted by HUD annually and used as the basis of eligibility for most
housing assistance programs. Sometimes referred to as “MFI” or median family income.
Chapter 40B
The state’s comprehensive permit law, enacted in 1969, which established an affordable housing goal of
10% for every community. In communities below the 10% goal, developers of low- and moderate-
income housing can seek an expedited local review under the comprehensive permit process and can
request a limited waiver of local zoning and other restrictions, which hamper construction of affordable
housing. Developers can appeal to the state if their application is denied or approved with conditions that
render it uneconomic, and the state can overturn the local decision if it finds it unreasonable in light of the
need for affordable housing.
Chapter 44B
The Community Preservation Act Enabling Legislation that allows communities, at local option, to
establish a Community Preservation Fund to preserve open space, historic resources and community
housing, by imposing a surcharge of up to 3% on local property taxes. The state provides matching funds
from its own Community Preservation Trust Fund, generated from an increase in certain Registry of
Deeds’ fees.
Comprehensive Permit
Expedited permitting process for developers building affordable housing under Chapter 40B “anti-snob
zoning” law. A comprehensive permit, rather than multiple individual permits from various local boards,
is issued by the local zoning boards of appeals to qualifying developers.
Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD)
The state’s lead agency for housing and community development programs and policy. It oversees state-
funded public housing, administers rental assistance programs, provides funds for municipal assistance,
and funds a variety of programs to stimulate the development of affordable housing.
Fair Housing Act
Federal legislation, first enacted in 1968, that provides the Secretary of HUD with investigation and
enforcement responsibilities for fair housing practices. It prohibits discrimination in housing and lending
based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, or familial status. There is also a
Massachusetts Fair Housing Act, which extends the prohibition against discrimination to sexual
orientation, marital status, ancestry, veteran status, children, and age. The state law also prohibits
discrimination against families receiving public assistance or rental subsidies, or because of any
requirement of these programs.
48 Heudorfer, Bonnie, “Taking the Initiative: A Guidebook on Creating Local Affordable Housing
Strategies”, Citizens Housing and Planning Association with funding from the Massachusetts Housing
Partnership Fund, November 2002.
Brewster Housing Production Plan 121
Inclusionary Zoning
A zoning ordinance or bylaw that requires a developer to include affordable housing as part of a
development or contribute to a fund for such housing.
Infill Development
The practice of building on vacant or undeveloped parcels in dense areas, especially urban and inner
suburban neighborhoods. Promotes compact development, which in turn allows undeveloped land to
remain open and green.
Local Initiative Program (LIP)
A state program under which communities may use local resources and DHCD technical assistance to
develop affordable housing that is eligible for inclusion on the state Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI).
LIP is not a financing program, but the DHCD technical assistance qualifies as a subsidy and enables
locally supported developments that do not require other financial subsidies to use the comprehensive
permit process. At least 25% of the units must be set-aside as affordable to households earning less than
80% of area median income.
MassHousing (formerly the Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency, MHFA)
A quasi-public agency created in 1966 to help finance affordable housing programs. MassHousing sells
both tax-exempt and taxable bonds to finance its many single-family and multi-family programs.
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)
The term is also used for CMSAs (consolidated metropolitan statistical areas) and PMSAs (primary
metropolitan statistical areas) that are geographic units used for defining urban areas that are based
largely on commuting patterns. The federal Office of Management and Budget defines these areas for
statistical purposes only, but many federal agencies use them for programmatic purposes, including
allocating federal funds and determining program eligibility. HUD uses MSAs as its basis for setting
income guidelines and fair market rents.
Mixed-Income Housing Development
Development that includes housing for various income levels.
Mixed-Use Development
Projects that combine different types of development such as residential, commercial, office, industrial
and institutional into one project.
Overlay Zoning
A zoning district, applied over one or more other districts that contains additional provisions for special
features or conditions, such as historic buildings, affordable housing, or wetlands.
Public Housing Agency (PHA)
A public entity that operates housing programs: includes state housing agencies (including DHCD),
housing finance agencies and local housing authorities. This is a HUD definition that is used to describe
the entities that are permitted to receive funds or administer a wide range of HUD programs including
public housing and Section 8 rental assistance.
Regional Non-profit Housing Organizations
Regional non-profit housing organizations include nine private, non-profit housing agencies, which
administer the Section 8 Program on a statewide basis, under contract with DHCD. Each agency serves a
wide geographic region. Collectively, they cover the entire state and administer over 15,000 Section 8
Brewster Housing Production Plan 122
vouchers. In addition to administering Section 8 subsidies, they administer state-funded rental assistance
(MRVP) in communities without participating local housing authorities. They also develop affordable
housing and run housing rehabilitation and weatherization programs, operate homeless shelters, run
homeless prevention and first-time homebuyer programs, and offer technical assistance and training
programs for communities. The Housing Assistance Corporation (HAC) serves as Brewster’s regional
non-profit housing organization.
Regional Planning Agencies (RPAs)
These are public agencies that coordinate planning in each of thirteen regions of the state. They are
empowered to undertake studies of resources, problems, and needs of their districts. They provide
professional expertise to communities in areas such as master planning, affordable housing and open
space planning, and traffic impact studies. With the exception of the Cape Cod and Nantucket
Commissions, however, which are land use regulatory agencies as well as planning agencies, the RPAs
serve in an advisory capacity only. The Cape Cod Commission serves as Brewster’s regional planning
agency.
Request for Proposals (RFP)
A process for soliciting applications for funding when funds are awarded competitively or soliciting
proposals from developers as an alternative to lowest-bidder competitive bidding.
Section 8
Refers to the major federal (HUD) program – actually a collection of programs – providing rental
assistance to low-income households to help them pay for housing. Participating tenants pay 30% of their
income (some pay more) for housing (rent and basic utilities) and the federal subsidy pays the balance of
the rent. The Program is now officially called the Housing Choice Voucher Program.
Smart Growth
The term used to refer to a rapidly growing and widespread movement that calls for a more coordinated,
environmentally sensitive approach to planning and development. A response to the problems associated
with unplanned, unlimited suburban development – or sprawl – smart growth principles call for more
efficient land use, compact development patterns, less dependence on the automobile, a range of housing
opportunities and choices, and improved jobs/housing balance.
Subsidy
Typically refers to financial assistance that fills the gap between the costs of any affordable housing
development and what the occupants can afford based on program eligibility requirements. Many times
multiple subsidies from various funding sources are required, often referred to as the “layering” of
subsidies, in order to make a project feasible. In the state’s Local Initiative Program (LIP), DHCD’s
technical assistance qualifies as a subsidy and enables locally supported developments that do not require
other financial subsidies to use the comprehensive permit process. Also, “internal subsidies” refers to
those developments that do not have an external source(s) of funding for affordable housing, but use the
value of the market units to “cross subsidize” the affordable ones.
Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI)
This is the official list of units, by municipality, that count toward a community’s 10% goal as prescribed
by Chapter 40B comprehensive permit law.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
The primary federal agency for regulating housing, including fair housing and housing finance. It is also
the major federal funding source for affordable housing programs.