The age of broken promises
Market pinches over-55 housing
HUDSON - The Esplanade was supposed to be Ed Cobb's last home. He has a condo with a sun-splashed open floor plan and emergency call buttons in the kitchen and bathroom, just in case he takes a fall.
Cobb, a 73-year-old math teacher who raised three daughters, chose the over-55 complex specifically to avoid generational déjà vu: teenagers outside on skateboards, late-night parties, hallway commotion, and the other sort of high-spirited chaos that comes with younger families.
But harsh economic realities have prompted the Esplanade's developers to break a fundamental promise made to Cobb and dozens of his neighbors - that they would be free to grow old in a community of their peers. MP Development LLC is petitioning Hudson officials to reverse the residential age restrictions so they can sell Esplanade units to anyone, citing a state law that forbids towns from enforcing zoning burdens that make a development "uneconomical."
Cobb and dozens of other residents who bought up 90 of the 140 Hudson units, mostly at boom-market prices between $250,000 and $290,000, say they feel betrayed in what they describe as a housing bait-and-switch.
"It's like buying a car, and then two years later they come and remove the engine," said Cobb. "That's how major it is."
With more than 20,000 new over-55 units built statewide since 2000, builders of the Esplanade, as well as developers in Wellesley, Holden, Hanover, Hingham, and Sharon, are saying that age restrictions, formerly a hot marketing tool, are now hampering sales.
MP Development was not alone in 2004 when the Esplanade complex broke ground in an optimistic effort to revitalize a blighted corner of downtown Hudson. Many cities and towns around Boston were also rushing to embrace senior housing because it provided downsizing options for the state's 1.2 million residents over 55.
Developers in many towns were granted permits under the state's affordable housing law to build over-55 buildings, with the stipulation that a certain number, usually around 20 percent, be restricted for seniors with lower incomes. In return, they received an expedited pass through the often onerous local building permit process.
The red-hot trend toward over-55 buildings worried the Citizens' Housing and Planning Association, an affordable housing group, as far back as 2005, when an agency survey found how many senior-oriented units were online, and saw that new complexes were being permitted seemingly every week, said Aaron Gornstein, executive director of the agency.
"We would not be surprised to see more developers coming forward asking for this," he said.
"At some point the towns will have to look closely at it. If buildings are not full, towns collect less property taxes."
Last week, in a spirited discussion in the Esplanade's common room, residents described the builders' position as hypocritical. MP Development proposed the over-55 restrictions in the first place, and aggressively sold the units as sort of retirement Shangri-La, a two-minute walk from shops, St. Michael's Parish, the town's library, and senior center.
"Why should the seniors pay because they can't make as much money as they expected?" said Bob Cyr, 56.
Esplanade residents they don't have anything against children. Jackie Kapopoulos, a 65-year-old retired nurse from Hudson, spent 30 years raising five of her own. But in seeking a home of her own, she wanted peace, quiet, and like-minded neighbors.
"A multi-generational complex is not what I bought," she said. "I signed a deed that said 55-plus. Doesn't that have any legal weight?"
Maybe not.
Joanne Foley, a lawyer for MP Development, a partnership between Hudson developer Tony Frias and Jonathan Kraft, said the developers have a right under state law to achieve an economic return.
Under Massachusetts law, local cities and towns cannot mandate zoning conditions that prevent sales, even though the over-55 limits were first proposed and enthusiastically pushed by the developers themselves, she said.
Last week, she defended the proposed Hudson age change as unfortunate, but unavoidable.
"This is an effort to recoup some of the losses and add some velocity to sales," said Foley.
Nobody could have known that the age limits would become such an albatross as the Massachusetts real estate market softened, Foley said. Since announcing plans to build in 2004, three separate sales companies have been able to sell only 64 percent of the 140 units. The company has not yet earned back even $21 million in construction costs of the $32 million project, she said.
Around the state, some developers have had success getting local zoning board to release them from their over-55 commitment.
In Holden, a Holden Hills Country Club developer who could not sell 48 units of age-restricted housing got the town to overturn the limits last year, but at a price. Holden officials insisted he agree to a conservation restriction for a nearby 90-acre golf course.
In 2002, Quincy officials allowed an over-55 rental complex to expand its age range after developers could not rent their 196 units. Developers in Sharon also went before the planning board earlier this year with a request to rezone a proposed over-55 complex.
In a March 1 letter to Esplanade residents, the Frias-Kraft venture told Esplanade residents that it felt the change would be "beneficial" to residents and offer them more options for resale.
But resale is not what the Esplanade resident Judy Quinn had in mind.
"When we bought, I had every intention of going out of here feet first," said Quinn, 69, only partly joking. "I don't think any of us want to move again."
"We're hardly house 'flippers,' " said Lou Tagliari, 66, another retiree at the Esplanade. The former physicist and his wife, Cathy, love their second-floor unit and friendly neighbors group that gathers to watch movies like "The Lion in Winter."
"We bought with the specific, promised intention of living with people of our own age, as long as possible," Tagliari said.
In Wellesley, developer Jeff Roche briefly tried to get the over-55 restriction lifted on his new 28-unit Wellesley Hollow complex after selling only 11 units within the last year. The condo owners, some who paid more than $500,000 for two-bedroom units with quick access to Wellesley center and Route 9, didn't really object, he said.
"They understood I was not trying to turn the place into a nursery for kids," Roche said. "By design, the building is set up to attract older people."
He withdrew his request in January after just a few weeks, foreseeing an uphill battle with the town.
"One of [the selectmen] said he thought it was setting a bad precedent to grant permits and then let the builders change their ideas after the fact," said Roche.
"So I felt it would be better to keep my word to the community."
Hudson will consider the Esplanade's age change request at an April 8 zoning board of appeals meeting. Foley said the developers will contend that there is adequate precedent in a recent case in Hanover, where the state housing appeals committee overturned a local zoning board rejection of an age change in a 74-unit over-55 complex.
That building housed rental units, however. Hudson is apparently the first case involving occupant-owners, she said.
If they are successful, Foley said it is highly unlikely that families with children would be attracted to the Esplanade, which has no playground or playroom, and very little open space.
"We have no desire to impose on the comfort of the current unit owners," she said.
"It's a simple desire to fill the premises with more active adults."
And as for the residents' oft-spoken fear of living alongside skateboarding teenagers and loud parties?
"That is a building management issue," Foley said.
"The same people who created the project where these people are so happy today are the same people who will maintain appropriate management oversight of the building."
Erica Noonan can be reached at enoonan@globe.com. 