HPD: 2560 Boston Road plan grows to 483 units; financing and unit mix under review

HPD finance staff told the Housing and Land Use Committee on Dec. 16 that the 2560 Boston Road housing proposal has grown substantially and is still under financing review.

Ted, an HPD finance representative, said the project’s proposal has changed since its rezoning, noting that "whereas during ULURP, it was 333 units. They're now proposing 483, which is a significant difference." He said HPD’s finance and planning units have received new underwriting numbers from the developer and are reviewing square footage and financing assumptions, and that approval is not guaranteed until those reviews are complete.

The committee and members of the public pressed HPD about local impacts. A community member asked whether nearby schools and transportation could absorb the additional residents and whether more units would mean smaller apartments. Ted said HPD’s financing rules require a range of low‑ and moderate‑income units and that the zoning changes now in place allow "more smaller units, like one bedrooms or even studios," while also requiring a minimum share of larger units.

On affordability and allocations, Ted said the current proposal would set aside 30% of units for formerly homeless households and place roughly 70% of available units into the citywide Housing Connect lottery. He also said community preference has been reduced under recent policy changes to about 20% and encouraged early outreach to senior centers and other local organizations when the project begins marketing.

Committee members asked about building height and timing; Ted said he did not have exact height figures but expected the building to be in the "lower teens" in stories and cautioned the project could be at least three years from completion. When asked whether people displaced by a recent fire at 2910 Wallace Avenue could be given marketing preference, Ted said the development team could be asked but that marketing and lottery rules are supervised by the financing agency and any preferences must be coordinated with them.

Ted offered example affordability numbers to illustrate the AMI bands discussed: a family of three at 60% AMI has an eligible income of about $87,000, at 80% AMI about $116,000; a two‑bedroom at 60% AMI was described as roughly $2,100 per month and around $3,000 at 80% AMI; a three‑bedroom at 60% AMI was described as about $2,500 and about $3,300 at 80% AMI.

The committee did not take formal action. Vice Chair confirmed the sponsor and HPD will return next month for a full presentation by the development team with architectural and marketing details that Ted said he could not provide in detail at this meeting.