Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Supportive Housing Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
North Suffolk seeks trust support after $300,000 HOME grant lost for Revere group home redevelopment
Summary
North Suffolk Community Services told the Revere Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board it lost a $300,000 HOME grant after permitting delays and is asking the trust to consider funding or partnership to close the gap for a nine-unit accessible duplex at 131 Hitchpond St.
Tim Gray, a project director at North Suffolk Community Services, told the Revere Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board at its July 2025 meeting that a redevelopment at 131 Hitchpond Street has reached about 85% completion but lost a $300,000 HOME Program grant after a months-long environmental review and permitting delay by a regional partner.
Gray said the project replaces a single home that had served five residents for 35 years with two accessible buildings totaling nine permanent units for adults with developmental disabilities referred through the Massachusetts Department of Developmental Services. He described the new units as “state of the art” for accessibility and energy efficiency but said the design was completed before an electric‑heat mandate, so the project does not include electric heat.
The developer’s financing package includes a Federal Home Loan Bank grant and a state facilities fund; Gray said the HOME grant awarded through the North Suburban Consortium was lost because a partner delayed required environmental signoffs. “We thought we’re gonna start that project in May of 2024, and we didn’t get started until October…for that reason, we lost that $300,000 grant,” Gray said.
Gray said North Suffolk intends to cover the shortfall if necessary with additional conventional financing from Citizens Bank, its primary lender, but asked the trust to consider any amount of support or help with fundraising to offset the loss. “We would be grateful for any amount of money, any commitment at all that would help us offset the loss of the HOME funds,” he said.
Board members, led by Chair Joe Gravalese, asked about the project’s scale and impact. Board members confirmed the prior structure had five units and the new development has nine (a net gain of four). At one point a board member summarized cost: “The total development cost is 2.552…a little over $2.5 million,” as stated by the presenter.
Board members discussed the trust’s limited resources and suggested using a competitive application process or seed awards to leverage other funding rather than committing a large portion of the trust fund to a single project. Gravalese said the board would pursue internal conversations about whether to create a funding round specific to supportive or extremely low‑income rental housing and explore ways to leverage trust awards to unlock state or philanthropic funds.
Gray said the project’s residents are very low income—often below 30% of area median income—and the operator will make up the revenue gap if public funds fall short. He invited board members to tour the site and offered ongoing partnership on future projects.
The board did not take a vote on any award for the Hitchpond project; members asked staff to consider a funding process that could support projects like this in future funding rounds.
