Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council removes reverter requirement for 689 Main St., clearing path for self-storage project
Summary
The City Council voted to remove a reverter clause on property at 689 Main Street, a change supporters said is needed to secure financing for a proposed self-storage development.
The Holyoke City Council voted 9 to 0 with one abstention on Wednesday to remove a reverter requirement tied to the prior transfer of 689 Main Street, a step the property owner and prospective buyer said was blocking financing for redevelopment.
Council members said the reverter clause — a condition that could force property to revert to the city under certain circumstances — had become a barrier to redevelopment for the lot. Councilor Anderson Burgos, who led committee discussion, said the current owner bought the parcel six to seven years ago and spent more than $60,000 to remove underground gasoline tanks and otherwise prepare the site for development, but repeatedly faced obstacles. He said the bank willing to finance the proposed buyer would not proceed with a loan while the reverter clause remained attached.
Attorney representation and the city law department reviewed the request and committee members said city staff including the law department, OPEB and other officials were present and comfortable with the proposed change. Councilor Gibner told the council DGR voted unanimously to recommend removing the reverter.
The order directs that the reverter requirement tied to the transfer from Jajahn (also transcribed as Jajuan/Jodh Juan) LLC to Richard Kolkowski (or his assignee) be removed so the planned purchaser may proceed with a self-storage project. Councilors discussed the owner’s history of holding and maintaining several local properties; some members noted uncertainty over the LLC spelling in the materials.
Roll call recorded nine ayes and one abstention; the council’s action does not itself approve any development project but removes the contractual limitation that staff and the attorney said had delayed redevelopment for years.
Clarifying details recorded at the meeting included the owner’s prior environmental remediation cost (about $60,000) and committee testimony that the project’s lender required removal of the reverter clause before funding would be released.
The council noted the decision aims to facilitate private development on the parcel while city staff will continue to monitor compliance with any local permitting requirements.
