1. A Place and Base in the Heart of the Square
Mattapan, Massachusetts
FHLB Boston 16th annual Affordable Housing Development Competition
2. Janelle Chan
Loeb Fellow
2015 - 2016
Graduate School of Design | Harvard University
FACULTY ADVISOR
Donald Alexis
Caribbean Integration Community De-
velopment (CICD)
President
DEVELOPMENTPARTNER
Caribbean Integration Community
Development was founded in 2011
as a 501(c)3 nonprofit to serve the
Caribbean immigrant community and
the community at large.
CICD’s mission is to promote a diverse
and economically balanced community
by providing sound integration services
focused around economic stability,
self-sufficiency, affordable housing
advocacy, acces to health care,
promotion of small businesses, and
social enterprises.
Kendra Halliwell
ICON Architecture, Inc.
Design and Permitting
DESIGN MENTOR
Tameka Favors
CEDAC
FINANCE MENTOR
TEAM
Jonathan v
Master in Landscape Architecture Can-
didate 2017
Graduate School of Design | Harvard University
Jesica Bello
Master of Architecture in Urban Design
Candidate 2016
Graduate School of Design | Harvard University
Jason Fisher
Master of Science in Real Estate
Development Candidate 2016
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Juan Diego Izquierdo
Master of Architecture in Urban Design
Candidate 2017
Graduate School of Design | Harvard University
Courtenay Loiselle
Master of Public Administration
Candidate 2016
University of Massachusetts | Boston
Juan Santa María
Master of Architecture in Urban Design
Candidate 2017
Graduate School of Design | Harvard University
Jorge Silva
Master in Urban Planning Candidate
2017
Graduate School of Design | Harvard University
Magdalena Valenzuela
Master of Architecture in Urban
Design Candidate 2016
Graduate School of Design | Harvard University
Bella Vincent
Master in Public Administration
Candidate 2016
KennedySchoolofGovernment|HarvardUniversity
TEAM MEMBERS
4. 6 7
OVERVIEW EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Source House offers 51 units, of which 10 are market rate and 41 are affordable,
combining 2-br, 3-br and studio apartments over 6 floors in an L-shaped block.
It is located in bustling Mattapan Square, 40 minutes on transit to downtown Bos-
ton. Among its context strengths, it provides a prime opportunity by facing the his-
toric train station and at an identified site for transit-oriented development, as well
as within a cluster of burgeoning local business and innovators on the main street.
Responding to CICD’s mission, Source House is specifically designed around the
needs of low-income working families in this predominately African American com-
munity with a strong Caribbean heritage. The proposal offers sensitivity in the en-
gagement process that will ensure their needs and interests are considered, and
responding to community needs around better health, more space for children,
creative entrepreneurship, and sustainable living.
The building structure offers light-filled, cross-ventilated units that are interlocked
to maximise efficiency and eyes on the street. In addition to affordable housing,
an exciting program of internal and external uses combines in a new open space
in the heart of the Square. Source Plaza has a three-fold use—as a performance
amphitheatre, as a place to sit and meet for transit users and local shoppers, and
as a landscaped play area for children and young people to interact and play. The
program also offers Mattapan’s first central childcare center, a ‘fit and fold’ gym/
laundromat, and a dedicated music/arts room.
As CICD is yet to gain site control, the project team have tried to bridge the gap
between a conceptual, visionary project that inspires conversation and local inte-
rest in the site, and one that could assist CICD in a more practical and immediate
way, by offering a robust, realistic, liveable structure that works within this tight site.
Why Source House?
A base and place in the heart of the Square
The source is the start, the basis, the place of origin, rather than the outside or the
end of the line. It’s where we come from, renew our strength, and draw on what we
need. To source also means to get—whether it is site control, financing or tenancy.
These concepts were used to connect up a range of ideas—drawn from commu-
nity meetings, context analysis, architectural design and research—to understand
some of the program goals, design features and processes that matter most to the
local residents, businesses and future tenants connected to this site.
Working at the nexus of both the private and the public, the proposal offers an in-
viting private ‘base’—an affordable, liveable, and light-filled unit near transport and
amenities—as well as a communal ‘place’—a much-needed central meeting point
between the different cultures and generations, that is flexible around everyday
creative life in the heart of Mattapan Square.
The title of ‘source’ also acts as a placeholder, a mere starting point from which
CICD, the community and its partners can fully envision and develop affordable
housing that is both feasible and reflective of the needs and values of the people of
Mattapan. This is especially so for longer-term families, neighbours, collaborators
and friends who not only call the Square home, but see the whole built, historical
and social context together as a symbol of their resilience and community pride.
It is also recognition that community goals and buy-in will be the true source of
successful urban planning and development during this time of rapid change and
growth in Boston.
Finally, it is a hopeful offering to our developer, CICD, to help it to ‘get’ and realise
its mission on this exciting site.
Source
noun: a place from which
something comes, arises
or springs up; an origin or
foundation; the start of a
stream or river
verb: to seek information
about or consider possible
options; to find funding
Mattapan
meaning: ‘a good place to
be’ or ‘a good place to sit’,
derived from the Native
American Neponsett Tribe
traditional to the area
Family Apartments
For Extremely Low Income Families
For Very Low Income Families
For Low Income Families
Market-Rate Units
Square Feet of Community Space
Acres of Open Space
51
7
5
29
10
2,415
0.25
5. 8 9
CRITERIA
Taste of Home (Gou lakay mwen [Haitian Creole] or Sabor de Casa [Spanish]), 2015, by the Mayor’s Mural Crew.
The 122-by-10-ft mural is located at America’s Food Basket, a grocery store in Mattapan Square.
INNOVATION
Innovative duplex units contain a lower
level of communal uses combined with
an upper level of private bedrooms and
bathrooms. The unique unit design
allows for passive cross ventilation and
access to generous amounts of light
and views, while also reducing corridor
space.
Provides a mix of income levels at a key
transit node, establishing a standard for
future TOD development.
Open and inviting courtyard has
direct access to indoor public space
created by an innovative and integrated
design and finance scheme creating
a connection to the pubic realm and
Mattapan Square.
Sensitive, results based engagement
process which focuses on community
strengths and education, specific to the
people of Mattapan.
PROJECTFINANCING
PHYSICALDESIGN
Funding for an ambitious mix of 80%
affordable units and 20% market rate
units is covered by a range of sources
including public subsidy, public equity,
and long term debt financing.
Forty-oneaffordableunitsprovidehousing
opportunities for those at or below 60% of
the AMI, with a total of 7 serving the needs
of residents at or below 30% AMI.
Caribbean Integration Community
Development has established a strong
reputation for promoting affordable
housing in Boston and specifically has
recently created strong ties to the Mattapan
community.
The combination of skilled development
professionals with talented architecture,
engineering and construction teams
establishes a creative process that ensures
the successful implementation and design
excellence of Source House.
Thethoroughdesignandfinancingprocess
generated a building design that complies
with all local zoning and regulation while
simultaneously maximizing density, public
space, light, and air adjacent to a major
transit node.
ENVIRONMENTAL
SENSITIVITY
Creation of a public space inside a
private site that serves residents as
well as the community as a meeting
point. This is the core of the project, a
contained space that receives solar
exposure throughout the entire day.
Design focused on strengthening the
most important assets of the existing
community: families and cultural identity.
The building incorporates programming
that hosts Day Care and musical
performance in different times of the day.
Construction system is simple and
based in modules, in order to have a
simplified construction phase. It allows
the developer to work with 100% union
labor and doesn’t required specialized
contractor.
Duplex apartments allow floor plans to
be more efficient, gaining surface for the
units and reducing operating expenses.
Passive design to improve habitability
and environmental performance of
the building. Every apartment is cross-
ventilated and receives solar exposure
both in the morning and the afternoon due
to the orientation of the building. Location
near the Mattapan T Station, institutions
and local retail encourages walking habits
and the use of public transport.
Nine different subsidy sources are
combined with Federal Low Income
Housing Tax Credits to cover the majority
of development costs.
The financing, cash flows, and operation
of the residential units allows for a
generous amount of public community
space at ground level, a space usually
occupied by private entities.
A creative association with a construction
manager for pre-construction services
during the design the process establishes
a hedge against increasing construction
costs and shortens the construction
timeline.
PROJECTFEASIBILITY
0.4 ratio of parking spaces per unit to
discourage the use of car and incentivize
alternative means of transportation.
Covered parking spaces to reduce heat
island and soil impermeability.
Landscape project uses native species,
which adapt easily to the context.
Materials also low cost, low maintenance
and sturdy. The green parts of the plaza
are irrigated with rainwater recollected
from the roof of the building.
6. 10 11
CONTEXT SOCIAL CONTEXT
Total Population
22,600ppl
Median Age
Median Household Income
$43,329/yr
36.3
Black/African American Ethnicity
76.4%
Female-Headed Single Parent
Families
36%
English settlers arrived in Mattapan. The
Neponsett Tribe, long time inhabitants of
Mattapan, suffered a number of epidemics.
Mattapan’s population was 461 people
who were mostly descendants of the Irish,
Scottish, and English.
First banking, schools, and railroad with
more connections opened in Mattapan.
First social service, a school for orphans,
was opened.
Electric trolleys started to service Mattapan.
Housing development started in Mattapan,
and Jewish citizens currently living in Grove
Hall, Dorchester, and Roxbury expanded to
the Mattapan area, mixing with residents of
Irish, English, and Scottish ancestry.
Racial shifts began in Mattapan in the
1960s. In the 1970s, the percentage of
black residents of Mattapan increased by
48%. This was fueled by a well-intentioned
policy by Boston Mayor Kevin White to sub-
sidize and increase black home ownership
through the Boston Banks Urban Renewal
Group initiative. However, with banks provi-
ding only favorable loan terms to the Irish
and Italian neighborhoods of Dorchester
and Roxbury, black residents were left com-
peting for these homes at inflated prices, or
more cheaply in Mattapan. Mattapan now
has one of the highest black home owners-
hip rates in Massachusetts.
New immigrants began into Mattapan in-
cluding individuals from Haiti and Jamaica.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF MATTAPAN
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
0-9 10-19 20-34 35-54 55-64 65+
Boston
Mattapan
17.10%
10.20%
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
16.00%
18.00%
Mattapan City of Boston
Mattapan
City of Boston
Mattapan
Family: Husband & Wife
Family: Male
Householder, No Wife
Family: Female
Householder, No
Husband
Non-Family:
Householder Living
Alone
Non-Family:
Householder NOT Living
Alone
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
Europe Asia Africa Oceania Caribbean Mexico other
Central
America
South
America
North
America
United States Massachusetts Boston Mattapan
ROXBURY
HISTORY: CHANING DEMOGRAPHIC
1952
Slum Clearance
by BRA
1958
Washington Park
Urban Renewal
1972
The Southwest
Corridor
1973
Madison Park
Village by LRDC
1985
Community
College
1991
New Dudley
Station
2003
Washington
Commons
2013
Municipal
Center
1960s
Public Engagement &
Extension of Renewal Plan
RACE: Percentage of Black Population
INCOME: Percentage of Household Incomes
1950
1950
1960
1960
1980
1990
2000
2000
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
AGE DISTRIBUTION
Mattapan has a similar age distribution to the rest
of Massachusetts and the USA, but lacks the high
concentration of students and high-skilled young
professionals clustered in the downtown.
HOUSEHOLD TYPE
Over a third of households in Mattapan are fe-
male-headed single parent families, almost three
times the national average. This illustrates the sig-
nificant need for affordable, multi-bedroom unit
types, on-site day-care and proximity to transit for
these time constrained families
EMPLOYMENT
With unemployment currently more than 1.6 times
that of Boston, affordability of housing and lifes-
tyles is critical in the local area.
REGION OF BIRTH, FOREIGN BORN
Mattapan is home to an established and emer-
ging intergenerational African American commu-
nity with mainly Caribbean heritage, especially
from Jamaica and Haiti, with a proud history of
active community development. Affordable hou-
sing is especially important for newer immigrants.
(20% less than National Average)
STRONG COMMUNITY: Percentage of Black Population in the City of Boston
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
$14,999 and
under
$15,000 to
$24,999
$25,000 to
$34,999
$35,000 to
$49,999
$50,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 to
$99,999
$100,000 to
$149,999
$150,000 +
United States
Massachusetts
Boston
Mattapan
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
Mattapan broadly follows national trends in income levels by pro-
portion of the population, but lack those at higher income levels
able to purchase homes, with much higher than average AMIs
requiring affordable housing options.
MEDIAN VALUE PER SQ FEET
Purchasing a home closer to downtown jobs
is an out-of-reach option for many Mattapan
residents.
HOMES SOLD AS FORECLOSURE RATIOS
While there is a high level of home ownership in
Mattapan, it was also a site of significant foreclo-
sure between 2008 and 2012 for local long-term
residents.
HOUSING COST BURDEN, GREATER BOSTON
Increasing number of people paying more than 30% of
their income as rent
1990 2000 2009-2013
Renter-Occupied Households
Paying More than 30% of Income
on Rent
41.70% 39.20% 50.60%
Renter-Occupied Households
Paying More than 50% of Income
on Rent
19.60% 18.40% 26.40%
The City of Boston ‘now has a greater share of its
housing stock set aside as affordable housing
than any other major city in the country, 19
percent of its housing stock. Yet despite these
accomplishments...
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2006-02
2006-06
2006-10
2007-02
2007-06
2007-10
2008-02
2008-06
2008-10
2009-02
2009-06
2009-10
2010-02
2010-06
2010-10
2011-02
2011-06
2011-10
2012-02
2012-06
2012-10
2013-02
2013-06
2013-10
2014-02
2014-06
2014-10
2015-02
2015-06
2015-10
2016-02
Mattapan
Boston
Massachusetts
United States
$-
$50.00
$100.00
$150.00
$200.00
$250.00
$300.00
$350.00
$400.00
$450.00
$500.00
2006-02
2006-06
2006-10
2007-02
2007-06
2007-10
2008-02
2008-06
2008-10
2009-02
2009-06
2009-10
2010-02
2010-06
2010-10
2011-02
2011-06
2011-10
2012-02
2012-06
2012-10
2013-02
2013-06
2013-10
2014-02
2014-06
2014-10
2015-02
2015-06
2015-10
2016-02
Mattapan
Boston
Massachusetts
United States
1600 -
1650
1848
1880S
1890
1900 -
1930
1960 -
1980
1980 -
Present
Boston still has a significant need for more low-
income housing… With 28,400 non-elderly, low-
income renters paying an excessive share of their
income in rent, who are in need of more affordable
housing options’ HousingaChangingCity:Boston2030,CityofBoston2014
This snapshot of key statistics about Mattapan’s history, demographics,
migration and housing stress point to a region that would be well su-
pported by more affordable housing options, sensitive to local community
needs and interests. The Source House development would also sit within
an ambitious goal set by the City of Boston to build 8,000 new low-income
dwellings by 2030, and to double its overall new housing stock by 20%.
7. Mattapan Family
Service Center
PJ’s Family Child Care
Eva’s Future Scholars Childcare
Simply the Best Daycare
Discovery Schoolhouse, Inc.
12 13
Simply the Best Daycare
Mattapan Family
Service Center
PJ’s Family Child Care
Discovery Schoolhouse, Inc.
Eva’s Future Scholars Childcare
PHYSICAL CONTEXT
Scale 1:5000
0 2000
Mattapan Pediatrics
and Orthopedists
Mattapan Public Library (Opened
2009)
Mattapan Community Health
CenterHorizon Learning
Connections
ABCD Mattapan Family Service
Center
Boston Medical Center
Carney Hospital
Social Services
Health Resources
Site
4’00”
WALK
8’00”
WALK
12’00”
WALK
Scale 1:5000
0 2000
4’00” Walk
8’00” Walk
12’00” Walk
Gyms
Bicycle Racks
Bicycle Lanes
4’00”
WALK
8’00”
WALK
Scale 1:2000
0 800
4’00” Walk
8’00” Walk
Parking Lots
MBTA Red Line
Bus Routes
Public Park
Childcare Services
Site
1 Bikes, paths and gyms
The high concentration of walking and bike
paths in the area offer a significant potential for
healthier lifestyles, but more gyms are needed in
the Square.
2 Strong services hub
An affordable housing development and a new
public space in the Square will sit within an
emerging nexus of important social services.
3 Transit vs parking
Significant car parking already exists around this
rail and bus transit node lessening the need to
provide additional public parking on the site.
4 A place for children
To support the high number of working families,
the Square would be well-served with a new place
for children to play and be cared for.
2 4
1 3
Mattapan residents rely greatly on public tran-
sit despite the area being underserved tby re-
gular good quality connections, particularly for
their employment needs. The expense of car
ownership in this lower-income area and other
compounding disadvantages such as higher
instances of disability in the community are two
potential reasons.
8. 14 15
An opportunity for Transit-Oriented
Development in Mattapan Square
Affordable transit-oriented housing can
be both a sustainable social and cultural
investment and a central element of the
economic development and revitalization
of an area. The transit reliant tenants of
Source House, as well as budding busi-
nesses, entrepreneurs and service provi-
ders around Mattapan Square, would all
reap the agglomeration benefits of con-
centrated, affordable development in this
central and walkable location.
What is a Transit-Oriented
Development?
Transit-oriented development (TOD) is
high density, high quality development that
occurs within a 10-minute or ¼ mile walk
of a train or public transit station.
TODs are typically mixed-use develo-
pments that include residential, retail,
services and civic use. By concentrating
purchasing power and foot traffic in one
place around an existing transit node, the
aim is to combat traffic congestion, protect
greenfields, justify greater public transit in-
vestment and generate vibrant, village-like
economic and social activity for residents
and visitors alike. It also brings the buying
power of consumers closer to retailers wi-
thout increasing a need for parking resour-
ces or increased resources to support new
traffic to the retail center (MEDI, 76-80).
Even with land use adjustment and inclu-
sionary zoning policy to encourage new
affordable housing as cities grow, predo-
minately market-rate TODs can have an
adverse affect on surrounding housing
affordability and can contribute towards
displacement of lower income residents.
A major factor is demographic and cul-
tural change, where increasing numbers
of high-income singles and older people
are trending away from suburban lifestyles
and towards convenient, desirable urban
experiences, thereby fuelling demand at
higher rents for compact living in econo-
mic centers (Source www.tod.org).
However, mixed-income TODs that reach
a wide range of AMIs can offer people of
all incomes the chance to live in well de-
signed complexes in safer neighborhoods
near well-funded schools and services,
with greater access to jobs and opportuni-
ties.Italsohelpsextendfinancialresources
further to allow for more affordable units.
Location efficiency: an emerging trend
for a range of incomes and life stages
‘People want greater convenience in their
time-constrained lives. Far-flung greenfield
homes may cost less, but filling the gas
tank burns holes in wallets. Both empty
nesters and their young adult offspring
gravitate to live… with pedestrian-accessi-
ble retail, restaurants, parks, supermarkets
and offices… at subway or light-rail sta-
tions…’ (Urban Land Institute 2007, 14).
‘Providing housing for a mix of incomes
also allows families to continue living in the
same community, even as children grow
up and look for their own apartments or
homes, and parents grow older and want
to down-size their living arrangements.
The socio-economic diversity that
mixed-income housing provides for also
enhances community stability and sustai-
nability, and ensures that low-income hou-
seholds are not isolated in concentrations
of poverty… the mixing and mingling of
people from diverse backgrounds and ex-
periences promotes innovation by increa-
sing the opportunities for people to share
and combine ideas from different pers-
pectives and traditions’ (Center for Transit
Oriented Development 2009).
In line with a growing policy interest in
Smart Growth, including at the Federal
level, transit oriented housing and related
development is identified as a key
priority in both the Mattapan Economic
Development Initiative (2006) and the
Fairmont-Indigo Corridor Redevelopment
Plan (2012).
There are many TOD site speficic
strengths of Mattapan Square and the
Source House location. The goal of
the development aims at capitalizing
on great transit-oriented resources
and aligning the community around a
positive and intelligent mission.
• Directly adjacent to the historic Ashmont-
Mattapan High Speed Line, or ‘Mattapan
Trolley’, as well as collector bus systems,
on which a high proportion of low-income
Mattapan residents rely on.
• Train station is a prominent feature of the
town center, with place-making potential.
• High density, walkable district within
10-minute walk circle surrounding train
station.
• Half a mile away from the planned Blue Hill
Avenue Station on the Fairmount Line.
• A regional node containing a mixture of uses
in close proximity.
• In close proximity to the so-called ‘missing
link’ in the Neponset River Greenway
walking trail between Pope John Paul Park
II and Mattapan Square, which is due to be
completed in 2016.
• Contributing towards Mattapan as a genuine
transit-oriented cluster, bringing 51 rental
units and X# residents into the heart of the
Square at full occupancy.
THETRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT CASE FOR MATTAPAN SQUARE
Growing TOD Developments
In the Boston region, TODs are already
underway nearby in Revere, Roxbury and
Jamaica Plain, more locally at the old police
station on Morton Street in Mattapan, and
even across the road from the proposed
Source House site. In early 2016, the MBTA
invited a public Request For Proposal to
develop the 2.5 acre car park across from
Source House, after community push-back
duetolackofcommunityengagementona
earlier private proposal for a charter school.
The RFP called instead for residential uses,
focusing on market-rate ownership or coo-
perative housing with a portion devoted to
affordable housing in line with City of Bos-
ton’s Inclusionary Zoning of 13% affordable
housing (BRA 2015).
Worked at home
Public Transportation
Bicycle
Walked
Other
LOCALRESIDENTSUSECARSLESS...
...ANDPUBLICTRANSPORTMORE!
THEREISALSOPOTENTIALFORGREATERWALKABILITY
86.10%
31.78%
United States
United States
Massachusetts
Massachusetts
Boston
Boston
Mattapan
Mattapan
80.02%
38.18%
45.25%
47.25%
15.2%
3.8%
56.05%
77.73%
of workers in Boston walk
to their jobs
of workers in Mattapan
walk to their jobs
IDENTIFIEDCOMMUNITYVISION
‘Each of the three commercial focus areas
has characteristics that make higher density
redevelopment feasible. For example,
Mattapan Square and Morton Street
Village are perfect candidates for transit-
oriented development because of their
close proximity to transit stations and the
existence of vacant or under-utilized parcels
of land’. (MEDI, 82)
‘The Action Agenda’s housing strategies
include a recommendation for high density
mixed-use buildings in the commercial
centers. Individuals who choose to live in
this type of location typically place a high
value on convenient transit access’. (MEDI,
63)
‘New multi- family housing of a density higher
than the surrounding context should be
allowed and encouraged directly adjacent
to transit stations. New transit-oriented
housing promotes transit use, walkability,
and activity for Main Streets businesses.
Existing isolated uses (such as commercial
or light industrial) near rail stations should
be transformed to create new housing
opportunities at key neighborhood building
locations’. (FICRP, 10).
CONTEXT OPPORTUNITY
9. 16 17
LOCAL
VOICES
LISTENING
“..help us elevate
the things that we
have. We are not
disadvantaged at
every turn. We have
assets that we want
to advance. We just
don’t always have
the resources”
Creative entrepreneur
and Mattapan resident
POLITICAL CONTEXT
Residents of Mattapan, both homeown-
ers and renters, whether recently arrived
or there for three generations, are expe-
riencing real and significant econom-
ic and built environment change at the
local level. A number of sites slated for
much-needed affordable housing de-
velopment close to or identified with the
Source House site have pending RFPs,
with community position/s on their out-
comes still to be determined.
Engagement therefore involved more
than just capturing a few vox-pops and
headshots and extrapolating these into
an apparent narrative. Many people the
team spoke to had, and continue to be,
passionately involved in live processes to
support or resist certain types of develop-
ment in their area, with some being im-
pacted in a very personal way at the time
of writing this proposal, with not everyone
agreeing. In this instance, as in much of
community development, quick visits by
outsiders to seek random information on
potentially contentious sites fell well out-
side engagement best practice.
The team is therefore especially grate-
ful to both CICD and to residents who
attended meetings in full view of their
own community to inform our work and
student experience. The opportunity to
learn about the current political context
of housing development in Mattapan
influenced not only the objectives of
Source House, but also how informa-
tion has been collected and presented.
To be sensitive to these issues within the
research needs of the competition, im-
ages are kept to a minimum and stock
images are primarily used. In addition,
where speech quotes were collected
from individual people with permission
via interviews, we have deliberately pre-
sented them overleaf without names
being attributed. We acknowledge that
this permission was not provided in or-
der to represent the whole community
as a single voice, or to indicate support
for housing development at this site.
The team interpreted the ‘community outreach’ component of community
responsiveness in two ways:
• Listening: documenting how the team listened to and interpreted the needs and visions of
the community in order to define the goals and design of Source House
• Engaging: through this learning, how a developer might go about designing a successful
engagement process that would include, represent and empower local residents and target
tenants, in the event of a live development of the proposed site.
STEPS WE TOOK
Initial community meeting—the team
presented their assignment objectives
to a live meeting of over 20 influential lo-
cal residents, including representatives
from major community development
organizations, art collectives, health
service providers and youth leadership
representatives.
Background research—after visiting
the site and area at different times of day
and weather, the team examined a num-
ber of these previous visioning processes
from over the last 10 years.
This included the Fairmount Indigo Plan-
ning Initiative, Mattapan United Com-
munity Interviews, Roxbury/Mattapan/
Dorchester Transit Needs Study, Mat-
tapan Economic Development Action
Agenda, MBTA feasibility studies and
public presentations on TODs, as well as
the objectives of local collectives, such as
the Open Streets/Open Studios Initiative,
Mattapan United Community Contract
and Fairmount Innovation Labs.
Each of these processes has a different
development target and took place with-
in specific contexts and research frame-
works. However, while not over-general-
izing on the importance of each specific
visioning outcome, if a process were to
be run on the Source House site, it is pos-
sible that some of the following themes
may well emerge:
• High-quality affordable housing that
does not displace current residents
and businesses, and is context specif-
ic to Mattapan’s rich history of diversi-
ty and community
• Livable, walkable and safe private and
public spaces, especially for the many
children, youth and larger families in
the area, with a particular focus on im-
proving the character and desirability
of Mattapan Square and maximizing
the station
• A focus on healthier lifestyles, due to
the high incidence of diabetes
• An opportunity for creative entrepre-
neurship, including within the built
environment itself, such as through
place-making and positive re-brand-
ing Mattapan and a cultural arts des-
tination
• Other issues that were not able to be
physically accommodated for Source
House, but could be considered on
additional concept developments or
different financing constraints, include
the issue of the area being an identi-
fied food desert, with the response be-
ing a fresh food market and/or a night-
time sit-down restaurant.
Design-thinking in action—the team
then observed a live community vision-
ing process run locally for the wider
Mattapan Square area of which the site
is a part, based around place-making.
The team heard strongly that com-
munity members were tired of both
visioning processes and externally
driven agendas. They expressed
having engagement fatigue with-
out seeing the locally driven action
they have been fighting for, or from
seeing no follow-up investment or
action at all. A key point was the
importance of the engagement
process itself, that it had to be lo-
cally-led through long-standing lo-
cal relationships to be relevant and
meaningful.
“I have a long family lineage here, par-
ents, grandparents. Its really about ac-
cess. Arts and culture are hard to ac-
cess, a lot of the time arts are not part of
development conversations, its always
a secondary priority. But this can be an
economic driver. Mattapan is such a
positive, dynamic place underneath the
stereotypes. Its time to push this effort”
“We want to be a part of the process
long before they break ground. Is it first
come first serve? Can anyone live in the
new development, or is it for the local
residents only? I don’t know what the
rules are…”
“We avoid the Square as much as
possible because we don’t think it’s
safe. Increase the Square’s safety, and
Boston’s Hubway bike sharing system
could be brought to the area, creating
a healthy travel option and greater trans-
portation equity”
“People are tired of the way the city
looks. The look just declines as you take
the Bus 28 down the line. It’s the same
brown brick we’ve had for years and
years”
“Kids can’t really play close to the
Square. In addition, small affordable
units and large families can make things
very crowded inside people’s homes.
Simple things like good storage and
break out areas mean people and toys
are not all jammed in together in one tiny
space. Many older affordable complex-
es in Mattapan don’t even have basic
parcel pick up”
ARTS TRAINING ACTIVE TRANSIT VIBRANCYSIMPLE MEASURES
Images: Mattapan Food and Fitness Coalition
10. 18 19
While the City of Boston has an explicit goal to develop more affordable hous-
ing through its Boston 2030 plan, and is pursuing siginficant community outreach
through Imagine 2030, individual communities will need to be active, organised
and vocal to connect with and influence these meetings. Small CDCs in other Bos-
ton neighbourhoods have been successful in gaining site control from large
LINKTO CITY HALL
UX
#SEO
GETTHE FACTS
Feel like people who come to Mattapan to engage havent read your 13 previous
visioning documents? Run a day with young people in Search Engine Optimization
and have a Wiki-day, to make sure people get the right hits when they search Mat-
tapan.
A simple but vital process is recommended throughout the engagement phase:
regular and accessible community training in development financing, as well as the
Fair Housing Act. this will help local people understand how the project becomes
feasible, unit by unit, and who could live there.
Its not just about community thinking and doing things differently. Designers and
developers can also gain insight through User Experience: creating an opportunity
to live in affordable housing, take similar bus routes to work, and see how their
own children adn friends use the space. This will help to bring sensitivity to the final
design.
Ultimately, whatever
community goals are
generated in even the
best practice engage-
ment process, those
goals must be reflect-
ed in the final RFP for
a project, and be fea-
sible both financially
and politically.
ENGAGING
SAMPLE IDEAS GENERATED
• ‘yarn bombs—it’s new but older women still know about traditional patterns’
• ‘we want people to feel invited, and to stop there’
• ‘temporary art that can change and be moved over time, not just murals’
• ‘the buildings need vibrancy and color’
• ‘performances, especially in the evening—maybe spoken word’
DESIGN-THINKING + PLACE-MAKING
The team attended an interactive community workshop sponsored by
Mattapan Cultural Arts Development, Powerful Pathways Consulting,
Boston Society of Architects Foundation and Boston Design Week in April
2016.
It focussed on the idea that as Boston resurges as a force for design, efforts are
needed to make sure the process is equitable. It demonstrated how strategies to
engage under-served communities and people of color are vital in every stage of
the housing process, where the story of the whole neighbohood, not just individual
buildings, is vital for community wellbeing, and to redress a history of being exclu-
ded from urban development processes.
When considering the external spaces around Source House, design thinking
could be applied to develop inclusive communities and connect the development
and the site to existing creative, civic activity and design skills in the area.
EXAMPLE OF A LOCAL ENGAGEMENT TACTIC
INNOVATIVE
APPROACHES
SPECIFIC TO
MATTAPAN
11. 20 21
DESIGN
3 BEDROOM DUPLEX 2 BEDROOM DUPLEX 2 BEDROOM DUPLEX3 BEDROOM
2 BEDROOM STUDIO2 BEDROOM DUPLEX
Milton
BlueHillsAvenue
Fairm
ountIndigoLine
Ashmont -
Mattapan Trolley
Mattapan
Station
The site is located in the southern part of
Mattapan, near the border that divides
the city of Boston and Milton, 9.4 miles
South of Downtown Boston. It is connec-
ted to the city by public transit through
the Red Line and the Ashmont- Matta-
pan Trolley. It is also connected by bus
through the Blue Hills Corridor, the main
commercial street in the area. The main
strengths of the site are its location near
the Mattapan Square station and seve-
ral bus lines. The Neponset River Trail is
also in close proximity, giving access to
the local population to nature and physi-
cal activity.
The intersection of Blue Hills Avenue,
Cummins Highway and River Street is
mostly dedicated to commercial activity,
which makes the Mattapan Station Area
the heart of the main retail destination in
the neighborhood. It is also the location
of several public services such as the
Mattapan Community Health Center, the
Mattapan Branch of the Boston Public Li-
brary, the US Post Office, a Bank of Ame-
rica and several local churches. There is
also a high proportion of empty lots in the
area, most of which are being used as
surface parking lots. The site where the
project is proposed is currently functio-
ning as one.
In terms of zoning, the site is inside the
Mattapan Square Community Com-
mercial Subdistrict (CC). The maximum
Floor Area Ratio is 4 and the Maximum
Building Height is 55 feet. Article 60 of
the Greater Mattapan Neighborhood
SITE ANALYSIS BUILDING ORGANIZATION
District establishes Residential Develo-
pment Incentives to encourage mixed-
use commercial and residential develo-
pment in appropriate commercial areas
of Mattapan, with a particular focus on
Affordable Housing. These incentives
include: An increase in the allowed buil-
ding height of ten feet, and an increa-
se in the allowed FAR of 0.5, for any
project in which more than fifty percent
of the Gross Floor Area included, wi-
thout taking into account any additional
Gross Floor Area permitted pursuant to
this section, is devoted to Residential
Uses, and no less than fifteen percent
of all Dwelling Units included qualify as
Affordable Housing. The site is currently
owned by the City of Boston. The deve-
loper has proposed to acquire the site
from the city in 2 different ways: since it
is an Affordable Housing project, to buy
it for $100 or to lease it for 99 years at Net
Present Value, which is approximately
$175 annually.
12. 22 23
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTION
Source House provides transit-oriented living with
bike storage and a public plaza visible from the
train and welcoming to commuters.
Community plans have expressed a need for very
local places to exercise, as well as clean clothes
on-site, both of which are almost non-existent in
current older affordable housing complexes in
Mattapan.
‘Fit & Fold’ installs exercise equipment alongside
washers and dryers to give people an opportunity
to get an aerobic workout while waiting for their
wash.
This is drawn from an existing innovation
developed by the Central Detroit Christian
Community Development Corporation serving
the Piety Hill district between New Center and
Boston Edison in Detroit, funded by the Kresge
Foundation.
The roof of Source House is utilized as a
sustainable opportunity and employs a rainwater
harvesting system. In addition, solar panels
occupy a majority of the roof to capitalize
on another source of renewable energy. The
orientation of the building in the site aims to
have optimal conditions for daylighting and solar
access.
Interior units are designed for habitability and
security inside the development.In addition, all
of the apartments on the building have direct
access or views into the Source Plaza, in order
to create equal living conditions for all residents.
Cross ventilation is another feature that improves
habitability and environmental performance of
the building. Community planters are located
within the Source Plaza to provide access to local
food and encourage local residents to engage in
sustainable planting strategies.
SUSTAINABILITY &
GREEN LIVING
A music room acts as the new community
gathering space for performances and music
related activites. The space also provides
significant storage and daylight space for practice
and lessons.
The interior performance space is complimented
by a dynamic and active outdoor performance
amphitheater. The space is flexible and utilizes
an interchangable stage and seating area.
ARTS&PERFORMANCE
Within the Source Plaza, common terraces for
lounging and relaxing are available in addition to a
half basketball court for athletic activity. For younger
children there is a playground with a safe rubber
surface material which provides a place where
children to play within sight of parents and day care
providers.
Storage adjacent to covered parking and in
proximity to the plaza provide extra storage for
children’s toys and allows for maximum space for
living in compact units with large families.
Childcare fees in the Boston area area among the
most expensive in the nation. Low income families
receiving Department of Early Education and
Childhood Care vouchers to assist with childcare
payments often go unused due to unavailable
childcare centers. In Mattapan alone, some daycare
centers near Source House are not accepting new
children into their programing.
Childcare at Source House would help alleviate the
strain on working families living in and near the area,
especially single parents who are working, offering
an array of programs and services including reading
programs, access to nearby ABCD Summer Works
program, and a low child to teacher ratio. Head Start
has offered a support letter for the Source House
initiative (see sources).
HEATLH&WELL-BEINGCHILDREN, FAMILIES,
AND YOUTH
FIT&FOLD
VERTICALCIRCULATION
PARKING
MUSICROOM/DAYCARE
COMMUNITYPLANTERS SOURCEPLAZA
TERRACES
The Source House proposal offers a new feature
in the neighborhood to add to the revitalization of
Mattapan Square. It offers a ‘place’, an inviting,
public meeting space for locals and visitors, as
well as foot traffic for businesses; and a ‘base’,
a new affordable housing complex adding
to local services and amenities. A source for
interaction, integration, and recreation, for health
and wellbeing, art and performance, and where
children can play.
About the building | The disposition of the
building, parallel to the street and aligned to the
northern limit of the site, is the answer to create
a contained open space inside the site. The
character of this space is both public and private.
It is public in the sense that it will be naturally
connected to the entire neighborhood because
of its program, and private because it creates a
sense of containment that will provide security to
the tenants. This central space is what we call the
Source. Supported by the shape of the building,
the surrounding programs and the sunlight, this
space is the core of the project, and the built form
deploys itself around it.
The programs around the central space are pub-
lic and open to the entire surrounding community.
The idea of locating these public programs on the
first floor is for them to serve as a mediator be-
tween the street and the new public space, keep-
ing a clear limit but at the same time connecting
them. The envelope of these mediatory spaces is
transparent, to keep a visual connection between
public and private. These programs come from
the context of the neighborhood: the musical per-
formance and family life. The entire building is de-
signed around the idea of families and community
coming together: the apartments are mostly fam-
ily units, community spaces in the first floor are
dedicated to musical performance and child care,
and the central space is a place of gathering. Oth-
er community uses include a laundry room which
is visually connected to the central space and the
building’s access, and a “fit and fold” room for
tenants who need a flexible space to exercise.
DESIGNBRIEF
Source House architectural project is based on
the premise of being efficient in the use of space
on the site. Construction system is also designed
to maximize cost and space efficiency. While it´s
not a modular system, the building’s structure is
designed in modules that are repeated through-
out the entire building plan in all of its levels. Every
apartment starts form a basic construction unit, and
then extra components are added depending on
each apartment requirements. This is very import-
ant to fulfill the developer’s expectations to build the
project with a 100% union contractor who can use
local workers on the site. Since the system is simple
and repeatable, it does not requires highly trained
workforce to be a part of the construction team, and
opens up the possibilities for jobs for younger or in-
experienced workers in the neighborhood. On the
upper floors, every two floors we have left an open
terrace as intermediate scale public spaces. They
add more eyes on the street and can make partic-
ipant of what is happening on the central space to
neighbors from a distance. Storage is a big con-
cern inside the community. Since usually Affordable
Housing units don´t have enough storage space on
them, we have considered it in three different levels.
First, on a private level, each apartment is equipped
with enough storage space inside the unit, for food,
clothes, chattels and smaller gear. There is a sec-
ond shared storage room on the first floor for larger
things. For the public uses, the common room for
day care and musical performance also leaves an
important space to store musical instruments and
toys.
Since Blue Hills Avenue is connected to Downtown
Boston by a bike lane, and to incentivize the use of
alternative modes of transportation, Source House
also provides a bicycle storage facility inside the
building.
3’
7”
6”
Horizontal Spacing
1.0’
Mounting Units
Anamu
(petiveria alliacea)
Pot Marigold (calendula officialis)
Cayenne Pepper (capsicum annum)
Suspension Cables
6”6.5
7”
11 90°
8”
2.25”
4.5”
Iron Tree Grating
Engineered Soil
Drainage System
Expanded Tree Pit
7’
4’
13. RIVER
STREET
CAR ACCESS
BIKE STORAGE
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS
DISABILITY PARKING
MUSIC ROOM / DAYCARE ROOM
SOURCE PLAZA
MECHANICAL ROOM
STORAGE
ADMINISTRATION
MAIN HALL
LAUNDRY ROOM
TRASH ROOM
STAGE
PLAYGROUND AREA
24 25
SLEEPING AREA
TOYS STORAGE
INSTRUMENTS STORAGE
MUSIC PRACTICE
DANCE CLASSES AREA
CHOIRE CLASS
BASKETBALL HOOP/SPORTS
FLEXIBLE SITTING SPACE
COMMUNITY PLANTER AREA
PLAYGROUND AREA STAGE FOR MUSIC & KIDS PERFORMANCES
FLEXIBLE SITTING/AUDIENCE
OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA
CLASS/ACTIVITIES AREA
INDOOR RECREATION AREA
SITE PLAN
0 10 30 ft
16. Per the Fair Housing Act, multi-family housing must meet accessibility require-
ments. Type-A units require full compliance with all accessibility codes at the
completion of construction. 25% (13 units) of Source House units are Type-A
compliant.
30 31
TYPICALUNITS
2 Bedroom
800 SQ FT
0 5 10 15
Studio
395 SQ FT
3 Bedroom
910 SQ FT
19
20
41
19
45
20
0 5 10 15
2 Bedroom Duplex
805 SQ FT
3 Bedroom Duplex
1000 SQ FT
1st FLOOR
2nd FLOOR
1st FLOOR
2nd FLOOR
19
20
45
10
19
20
45
10
10
17. 32 33
VIEWOFTHEPUBLICPLAZA
3’
7”
6”
Horizontal Spacing
1.0’
Mounting Units
Anamu
(petiveria alliacea)
Pot Marigold (calendula officialis)
Cayenne Pepper (capsicum annum)
Suspension Cables
6”6.5
7”
11 90°
8”
2.25”
4.5”
Iron Tree Grating
Engineered Soil
Drainage System
Expanded Tree Pit
7’
4’
LANDSCAPEDESIGNDETAILS
The landscape strategy emphasizes
modularity and durability in construc-
tion, drawing inspiration from local ma-
terials in utilizing concrete and brick in
construction. Moveable exterior furni-
ture allows residents the opportunity to
configure the space to suit their needs,
and modular hanging planters (allotted
to each apartment) provides a space to
cultivate the spices and herbs utilized in
traditional cuisine. The planting strategy
focuses again on low cost, low mainte-
nance options. Honey locust (gleditsia
tricanthos), winter berry (ilex verticil-
lata), and liriope (liriope muscari) are
all plants that require limited care and
maintenance– tolerant of drought, salt
damage, and neglect, these plants will
lend beauty to the space even when
suffering from neglect. >
18. 34 35
RAINWATER TANK
OUTDOOR LED LIGHTING
PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS
RESPONSIBLE MATERIAL SOURCING
RAINWATER RECYCLE
LOCAL FACTORS:
QUALITY TRANSIT ACCESS
QUALIFIED CENSUS TRACT
REDUCED PARKING FOOTRPINT
DENSE/DIVERSE DEVELOPMENT
COVERED OPEN-AIR GARAGE
(HEAT ISLAND REDUCTION)
CROSS VENTILATED WINDOWS
LARGE PUBLIC SPACE
(36% SITE FOOTPRINT)
LOW-WATER/LOW-MAINTENANCE PLANTINGS
HABITAT RESTORATION/NATIVE PLANTING
SENSITIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT
BIKE FACILITIES
N
SUMMER SOLSTICE (71˚)
SOLAR ASPECT
WINTER SOLSTICE (24˚)
SECTIONDIAGRAM
The orientation of the building in the
site also aims to have the better con-
ditions of sun lighting, habitability and
security inside the apartments. All of
the apartments on the building have
access or look into the Source, in order
to create equal living conditions for all
residents.
Cross ventilation is another feature to
improve habitability and environmen-
tal performance of the building. It is
achieved by generating duplex apart-
ments, which have a first floor for pub-
lic uses (living room, dining room and
kitchen) and a second floor for private
uses (bedrooms and bathroom). This
also allows eliminating corridors every
two floors, increasing floor plan effi-
ciency.
19. 36 37
BENEFITS SMART GROWTH
MixLandUses.
Source House is a mix of affordable
housing,retail,andcommunityspace.
FORSMARTHGROWTH
1
Theprinciplesofsmartgrowthguidedevelopment
in a way that maximize beautiful, diverse, and
financially strong communities which improve the
qualityofresident’slives. SourceHouseembodies
the principles of smart growth, offering residents
opportunitytolivetheirbestlives.
Takeadvantageofcompact
buildingdesign.
Source House maximizes a small and
oddlyshapedlot,creating51affordableand
marketrateresidences.
2
Providearangeofhousing
opportunitiesandchoices.
Property creates opportunity for family
housing in a vibrant, diverse community
neartransitopportunities.
3
Createwalkableneighborhoods.
Property is highly walkable, with access to
a number of public transit opportunities and
proximity to amenities such as health care,
banking, and shopping in a neighborhood
currently undergoing a great deal of public
investment.
4
Fosterdistinctive,attractive
communitieswithastrongsense
ofplace.
A unique buidling design offers space for
residents and members of the community
to gather and share in ways currently not
offered in Mattapan Square, including
opportunities for sharing of art and music,
community gathering space, and access
to fresh food. Additionally, the increase in
residents creates an attractive source of
consumerstoattractnewbusinesses.
6
Preserveopenspace,farmland,
naturalbeautyandcritical
environmentalareas.
The current use of the property is a parking
lot, and a beautiful, modern building
improves upon the current appearance, as
well as usefulness, of the area. Additionally,
courtyard space and roof gardens offer
residentsopportunitiestobesurroundedby
nature in an urban environment as well as a
viewtothenearbyNeponsetRivertrail.
7
Strengthenanddirectdevelopment
towardexistingcommunities.
Mattapan Square has been in existence for
alongtimeasacentrallocationinMattapan,
but is currently struggling economically.
The development allows for an infusion
of resources and residents nearer to the
Square with more access and bringing
buyingpowertothearea.
9
Provideavarietyoftransportation
choices.
Property is near several types of transit
including bus, trolley, and bike path. The
property will offer bicycle storage space for
residentswhochoosetotravelbybike.
5
Makedevelopmentdecisions
predictable,fair,andcosteffective.
Property developed with input from the
community and in a way which offers
residents affordable housing with amenities
they have expressed interest in. Property
built using energy efficient and affordable
materials.
10
Encouragecommunitycollaboration
indevelopmentdecisions.
Property Developer has strong ties to the
community and property was developed
withthecommunityvoiceandbasedonthe
desiresofthecommunity.
8
10 PRINCIPLES
The optimal density for the site was arrived at
througharigorousandcooperativeeffortofdesign,
finance,andsocialsustainabilitygoals.
The small and unique shape of the site presnted
a challenge to create the maximum number of
affordable housing options combined with a
vibrant public space at the heart of the Mattapan
community.
The design strategy for Source House creates
efficientresidentialfloorswithuniqueinteriorlayouts
thatwraptheedgesofthesitetocreateagenerous
courtyard. The design allows for social interaction
which was previously unavailable in the area and
represents the best use of existing space to create
affordablehousinginanurbansetting.
Ultimately,SourceHousebringsnewbuyingpower
to the area, encouraging more local businesses
and establishing a sustianable development
patternforMattapan.
DENSITY
SUSTAINABILITY
11
14
3
0
110
77
LOCATION AND TRANSPORATION (LT)
LEED for Neighborhood Development Location
Sensitive Land Protection
High Priority Site
Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses
Access to Quality Transit
Bicycle Facilities
Reduced Parking Footprint
Green Vehicles
SUSTAINABLE SITES (SS)
Construction Activity Pollution Prevention
Site Assessment
Site Development—Protect or Restore Habitat
Open Space
Rainwater Management
Heat Island Reduction
Light Pollution Reduction
WATER EFFICIENCY (WE)
Outdoor Water Use Reduction
Indoor Water Use Reduction
Building-Level Water Metering
Tdoor Water Use Reduction
Indoor Water Use Reduction
Cooling Tower Water Use
Water Metering
ENERGY AND ATMOSPHERE
Fundamental Commissioning And Verification
Minimum Energy Performance
Building-Level Energy Metering
Fundamental Refrigerant Management
Enhanced Commissioning
Optimize Energy Performance
Advanced Energy Metering
Demand Response
Renewable Energy Production
Enhanced Refrigerant Management
Green Power And Carbon Offsets
15
8
5
21
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES (MR)
Storage And Collection of Recyclables
Construction And Demolition Waste Management Planning
Building Life-Cycle Impact Reduction
Building Product Disclosure & Optimization-Environmental Product Declarations
Building Product Disclosure & Optimization-Sourcing Of Raw Materials
Building Product Disclosure & Optimization-Material Ingredients
Construction And Demolition Waste Management
INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (EQ)
Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance
Environmental Tobacco Smoke Control
Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies
Low-Emitting Materials
Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan
Indoor Air Quality Assessment
Thermal Comfort
Interior Lighting
Daylight
Quality Views
Acoustic Performance
INNOVATION (IN)
Innovation
Leed Accredited Professional
REGIONAL PRIORITY (RP)
Regional Priority
POSSIBLE POINTS
TOTALS
LEED v4 /BUILDING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Certified
40-49 points
Silver
50-59 points
Gold
60-79 points
Platinum
80 + points
20. Total Market (20%) Affordable (80%)
ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET
Property Management Fee 4% 27,432$ 5,379$ 22,053$
Property Management Payroll 65,000$ 12,745$ 52,255$
Payroll Taxes & Benefits 18% 11,700$ 2,294$ 9,406$
Legal 5,000$ 980$ 4,020$
Audit / Accounting 15,000$ 2,941$ 12,059$
Marketing 5,500$ 1,078$ 4,422$
Telephone 5,035$ 987$ 4,048$
Office Supplies 8,000$ 1,569$ 6,431$
Asset Management 12,000$ 2,353$ 9,647$
Resident Services DHC 12,000$ 2,353$ 9,647$
Misc. 1.50% 2,500$ 490$ 2,010$
SUBTOTAL: ADMINISTRATIVE 169,167$ 33,170$ 135,997$
OPERATIONAL BUDGET
Maintenance Payroll 50,000$ 9,804$ 40,196$
Payroll Taxes & Benefits 18% 9,000$ 1,765$ 7,235$
Janitorial Services 10,000$ 1,961$ 8,039$
Landscaping / Grounds Maint. 5,000$ 980$ 4,020$
Repairs 10,000$ 1,961$ 8,039$
Trash Removal 10,000$ 1,961$ 8,039$
Elevator Maintenance 2.00 10,000$ 1,961$ 8,039$
Snow Removal 10,000$ 1,961$ 8,039$
Extermination 75.00 3,825$ 750$ 3,075$
Alarm / Sprinkler Maint. 10,000$ 1,961$ 8,039$
Security 10,000$ 1,961$ 8,039$
Misc. 1.50% 2,067$ 405$ 1,662$
SUBTOTAL: OPERATION 139,892$ 27,430$ 112,462$
UTILITIES BUDGET
Electricity $300 15,300$ 3,000$ 12,300$
Gas $300 15,300$ 3,000$ 12,300$
Water & Sewer $350 17,850$ 3,500$ 14,350$
SUBTOTAL: UTILITIES 48,450$ 9,500$ 38,950$
OTHER EXPENSES
Real Estate Taxes 47,115$ 9,238$ 37,877$
Insurance 18,000$ 3,529$ 14,471$
SUBTOTAL: OTHER EXPENSES 65,115$ 12,768$ 52,348$
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 422,624$ 82,868$ 339,757$
Total Per Unit Operating Expenses 8,287$ 8,287$ 8,287$
38 39
FINANCES
FINANCESUMMARY
Hard Costs
Soft Costs
Reserves and Fees
USES
Hard Costs
$ 14,319,079
81%
Soft Costs
$2,205,148
Reserves & Fees
$1,167,440
+ $ 100 Acquisition
12%
7%
Total Development Costs
$17,692,963
Total Public Subsidies
Federal LIHTC 9% Fund
$6,650,000
Source House will be financed primarly by
public subsidies and an equity contribution
of$6,650,000. Theremainingdevelopment
costs will be covered by a permanent loan
of $3,305,461. The equity contribution will
be comprised of funds from the Federal
Low Income Housing Tax Credits of
$6,650,000andfrom CaribbeanIntegration
Community Development of $112,475. An
assemblage of public subsidies accounts
for $7,750,000 towards the development
and allows the Source House to provide
80% of total units as affordable.
The various sources of funding allow for
total costs of $17,692,963 to develop and
construct a 51 unit multi-family housing
complex with ground floor community
space. Additionally, the development
budget accounts for 20 covered parking
spaces , a bike room, laundry and fitness
facilities, and additional resident storage.
The property in Mattapan will be acquired
by Caribbean Integration Community
Development for $100, allowing the site to
be realized as a vibrant social and housing
complex rather than an under utilized
surface parking lot as it currently exists
today.
Acquisition of the property will be followed
by an investment of $14,319,979 of
hard costs for building construction
and $2,205,418 of soft costs for design,
engineering, permitting, appraisal and
other contingencies and fees. Finally, an
additional $1,167,440 will be secured for
capital reserves and developer fees. The
overall capital structure and the resulting
uses of funds was organized with the goal
of maximizing the proportion of affordable
units and providing welcoming and
useful community space for the benefit
of Mattapan. The building’s location in
close proximity to the Mattapan transit
station requires density of housing and
activity. The creative and intelligent use of
public subsidies provides the direction and
support for the Source House to become
the focal point of social and residential
activity in Mattapan Square.
$7,750,000
Subsidies
Permanent Loan
Equity
SOURCES
Public Subsidies
Permanent Loan
$ 7,750,000
$ 3,305,461
Equity
$ 112,475 Developer
44%
19%
37% + $ 6,650,000 LIHTC 9%
Affordable / Market Units
80%/20%
OPERATINGBUDGET
PublicSubsidy/AffordableUnit
$189,024
PUBLICSUBSIDY
OPERATIONS
CONSTRUCTIONCOSTS
PublicSubsidy/TotalNumberofUnits
$151,961
HardCosts/SquareFoot
$243
HardCosts/Unit
$280,784
AnnualOperatingCosts/SquareFoot
$8,287
OperatingCosts/Unit
$7.17
DevelopmentCosts/SquareFoot
$300
DevelopmentCosts/Unit
$346,920
PropertyTax/Unit
$924
21. Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15
REVENUE 41
60% AMI 29
1 Bedroom Studio 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
2 Bedroom 8 117,216$ 119,560$ 121,952$ 124,391$ 126,878$ 129,416$ 132,004$ 134,644$ 137,337$ 140,084$ 142,886$ 145,743$ 148,658$ 151,631$ 154,664$
2 Bedroom Duplex 16 234,432$ 239,121$ 243,903$ 248,781$ 253,757$ 258,832$ 264,009$ 269,289$ 274,674$ 280,168$ 285,771$ 291,487$ 297,316$ 303,263$ 309,328$
3 Bedroom 3 49,464$ 50,453$ 51,462$ 52,492$ 53,541$ 54,612$ 55,704$ 56,819$ 57,955$ 59,114$ 60,296$ 61,502$ 62,732$ 63,987$ 65,267$
3 Bedroom Duplex 2 32,976$ 33,636$ 34,308$ 34,994$ 35,694$ 36,408$ 37,136$ 37,879$ 38,637$ 39,409$ 40,198$ 41,002$ 41,822$ 42,658$ 43,511$
50% AMI 5
1 Bedroom Studio 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
2 Bedroom 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
2 Bedroom Duplex 5 61,020$ 62,240$ 63,485$ 64,755$ 66,050$ 67,371$ 68,718$ 70,093$ 71,495$ 72,925$ 74,383$ 75,871$ 77,388$ 78,936$ 80,515$
3 Bedroom 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
3 Bedroom Duplex 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
30% AMI 7
1 Bedroom Studio 2 15,960$ 16,279$ 16,605$ 16,937$ 17,276$ 17,621$ 17,974$ 18,333$ 18,700$ 19,074$ 19,455$ 19,844$ 20,241$ 20,646$ 21,059$
2 Bedroom 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
2 Bedroom Duplex 5 44,325$ 45,212$ 46,116$ 47,038$ 47,979$ 48,938$ 49,917$ 50,915$ 51,934$ 52,972$ 54,032$ 55,113$ 56,215$ 57,339$ 58,486$
3 Bedroom 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
3 Bedroom Duplex 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
POTENTIAL GROSS INCOME (PGI) 555,393$ 566,501$ 577,831$ 589,387$ 601,175$ 613,199$ 625,463$ 637,972$ 650,731$ 663,746$ 677,021$ 690,561$ 704,373$ 718,460$ 732,829$
Vacancy 3% (16,662)$ (16,995)$ (17,335)$ (17,682)$ (18,035)$ (18,396)$ (18,764)$ (19,139)$ (19,522)$ (19,912)$ (20,311)$ (20,717)$ (21,131)$ (21,554)$ (21,985)$
EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME (EGI) 538,731$ 549,506$ 560,496$ 571,706$ 583,140$ 594,803$ 606,699$ 618,833$ 631,209$ 643,834$ 656,710$ 669,845$ 683,241$ 696,906$ 710,844$
Operating Expenses (OpEx) (339,757)$ (349,950)$ (360,448)$ (371,262)$ (382,399)$ (393,871)$ (405,688)$ (417,858)$ (430,394)$ (443,306)$ (456,605)$ (470,303)$ (484,412)$ (498,945)$ (513,913)$
NET OPERATING INCOME (NOI) 198,974$ 199,556$ 200,048$ 200,444$ 200,741$ 200,931$ 201,011$ 200,975$ 200,816$ 200,528$ 200,105$ 199,542$ 198,829$ 197,962$ 196,932$
Capital Expenditures (CapEx Reserves) (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$ (16,400)$
CASH FLOW BEFORE DEBT SERVICE 182,574$ 183,156$ 183,648$ 184,044$ 184,341$ 184,531$ 184,611$ 184,575$ 184,416$ 184,128$ 183,705$ 183,142$ 182,429$ 181,562$ 180,532$
Debt Service (DS) (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$ (158,760)$
Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR) 1.15 1.15 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.15 1.15 1.14 1.14
FREE & CLEAR CASH FLOW 23,814$ 24,396$ 24,888$ 25,284$ 25,580$ 25,771$ 25,851$ 25,814$ 25,655$ 25,368$ 24,945$ 24,381$ 23,669$ 22,802$ 21,771$
Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15
REVENUE 10
1 Bedroom Studio 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
2 Bedroom 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
2 Bedroom Duplex 8 120,000$ 122,400$ 124,848$ 127,345$ 129,892$ 132,490$ 135,139$ 137,842$ 140,599$ 143,411$ 146,279$ 149,205$ 152,189$ 155,233$ 158,337$
3 Bedroom 2 34,800$ 35,496$ 36,206$ 36,930$ 37,669$ 38,422$ 39,190$ 39,974$ 40,774$ 41,589$ 42,421$ 43,269$ 44,135$ 45,018$ 45,918$
3 Bedroom Duplex 0 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
POTENTIAL GROSS INCOME (PGI) 154,800$ 157,896$ 161,054$ 164,275$ 167,560$ 170,912$ 174,330$ 177,817$ 181,373$ 185,000$ 188,700$ 192,474$ 196,324$ 200,250$ 204,255$
Vacancy 5% (7,740)$ (7,895)$ (8,053)$ (8,214)$ (8,378)$ (8,546)$ (8,716)$ (8,891)$ (9,069)$ (9,250)$ (9,435)$ (9,624)$ (9,816)$ (10,013)$ (10,213)$
EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME (EGI) 147,060$ 150,001$ 153,001$ 156,061$ 159,182$ 162,366$ 165,613$ 168,926$ 172,304$ 175,750$ 179,265$ 182,851$ 186,508$ 190,238$ 194,043$
Operating Expenses (OpEx) (82,868)$ (85,354)$ (87,914)$ (90,552)$ (93,268)$ (96,066)$ (98,948)$ (101,917)$ (104,974)$ (108,123)$ (111,367)$ (114,708)$ (118,149)$ (121,694)$ (125,345)$
NET OPERATING INCOME (NOI) 64,192$ 64,648$ 65,087$ 65,510$ 65,914$ 66,300$ 66,665$ 67,009$ 67,330$ 67,627$ 67,898$ 68,143$ 68,358$ 68,544$ 68,698$
Capital Expenditures (CapEx Reserves) (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$ (4,000)$
CASH FLOW BEFORE DEBT SERVICE 60,192$ 60,648$ 61,087$ 61,510$ 61,914$ 62,300$ 62,665$ 63,009$ 63,330$ 63,627$ 63,898$ 64,143$ 64,358$ 64,544$ 64,698$
Debt Service (DS) (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$ (48,154)$
Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR) 1.25 1.26 1.27 1.28 1.29 1.29 1.30 1.31 1.32 1.32 1.33 1.33 1.34 1.34 1.34
FREE & CLEAR CASH FLOW 12,038$ 12,494$ 12,933$ 13,356$ 13,760$ 14,146$ 14,511$ 14,855$ 15,176$ 15,473$ 15,744$ 15,989$ 16,204$ 16,390$ 16,544$
40 41
OPERATING PRO FORMA : AFFORDABLE UNITS
InitialAffordableRateDSCRStabilizedAffordableRateVacancy
ASSUMPTIONS
TotalNumberof AffordableUnits
41 3% 1.15
OPERATING PRO FORMA : MARKETRATE UNITS
Ten total market rate units are comprised of
8 two-bedroom units and 2 three-bedroom
units. Yearly revenue for those units is based
on 5% average vacancy and market rents
of $1,250 per month and $1,450 per month,
respectively.
Forty-one total affordable units are distributed
among studios, two-bedroom, and three-
bedroom layouts. Rents for these units
are capped by maximum rents provided
throughtheBostonRedevelopmentAuthority
Inclusionary Development Policy based on
area median income. Of the forty-one total
affordableunits,7aredesignatedforresidents
with 30% of AMI, 5 are for 50% AMI, and the
remaining 29 affordable units are designed
for60%AMI.
The resulting cash flows from affordable units
arebasedon3%averagevacancyduetothe
high demand for affordable housing metro
Boston area. Operating expenses for all fifty-
oneresidentialunitsisbasedon$8,287costs
perunitperyearaccountedforintheoperating
budget. Theoverallcashflowsprovidea1.25
debtservicecoverageratioforthemarketrate
unitsanda1.15ratioforaffordableunits.
InitialMarketRateDSCR
TotalNumberofMarketRateUnits
StabilizedMarketRateVacancy
ASSUMPTIONS MARKETRATE & AFFORDABLE PRO FORMA SUMMARY
2BedroomMarketRateRent
3BedroomMarketRateRent
10
1.25
5%
$1,250/mo.
$1,450/mo.
22. FUNDING SOURCES
42 43
Low Income Housing Tax Credit 9%
[LIHTC] | Federal LIHTC funding is dis-
tributed to each state on a per-capita ba-
sis and, allocated through state finance
agencies. In Massachusetts, the Depart-
ment of Housing and Community De-
velopment (DHCD) allocated the funds
based on a project’s adherence to the
Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP).
All units receiving tax credit assistance
must have 20% or more households
earning no more than 50% of area medi-
an income or 40% or more households
earning no more than 60% of the area
median income. In addition, ten percent
of the total units must be reserved for
persons or families earning less than
30% of area median income.
The QAP limits LIHTC funding to
$250,000 per unit and a maximum of
$1,000,000 per project, per year (even
though it is recommended for a proj-
ect of our scope and scale to assume
no more than $7,000,000 of total credits
over ten years. Assuming we could sell
each dollar of credit for $.95, we could
produce a yield of $6,650,000.
DHCD HOME Investment Partnership
Program | HOME funds can be used
for the acquisition and/or rehabilitation of
existing structures for rental use, includ-
ing distressed or failed properties, or for
the new construction of rental projects.
Projects seeking HOME funds must
have a minimum of 5 HOME-assisted
units. All units receiving HOME assis-
tance must be occupied by house-
holds earning no more than 60% of the
area median income. At least 20% of
the HOME units must be affordable to
households earning no more than 50%
of area median income.
The DHCD HOME awards new afford-
able housing developments $50,000
per qualifying unit up to a maximum
of $750,000 per project in the form of
a 30-year deferred payment loan at 0%
interest. Our financial model assumes
the full award amount.
Affordable Housing Trust Fund
[AHTF] | The purpose of the Affordable
Housing Trust Fund is to support the
creation or preservation of housing that
is affordable to people with incomes that
do not exceed 110% of the area median
income, as defined by HUD. Funding is
limited to the lesser of $1,000,000 per
project or $50,000 per assisted unit. Our
model assumes full award amount.
Commercial Area Transit Node
Housing Program [CATNHP] |
DHCD offers funding assistance to fi-
nance the development of residential
rental housing units, including units
above commercial space, located ei-
ther within a Neighborhood Commer-
cial Area, limited to projects offering 25
units or less, or a Transit-Oriented De-
velopment located proximate to a Pub-
lic Transit Node, for projects containing
more than 25 units (as it is our case).Not
less than 51% of the units assisted by
the program must benefit persons earn-
ing not more than 80% of the area medi-
an income. In addition, for purposes of
this demonstration initiative, DHCD will
define “proximity to transit” to be con-
sistent with the definition of an “Eligible
Location” as defined in the regulations
for the Transit Oriented Development
Infrastructure and Housing Support Pro-
gram (TOD). The total amount of CATN-
HP funds requested per eligible project
may not exceed $1,000,000 or $50,000
per unit. CATNHP assistance is pro-
vided in the form of a 30-year deferred
payment loan at 0% interest. Our model
assumes full award amount.
Neighborhood Housing Trust Funds
[NHT] | The NHT can provide funding
assistance to projects serving 80% of
the area median income or below. Proj-
ects serving households earning below
50% of the area median income and
special needs populations are given
preference. Preference is also provid-
ed to projects near transit inclusive of
family-sized units with 2+ bedrooms.
As a rental project, Source House must
remain affordable in perpetuity in order
continue to qualify. Grants are limited
to $750,000 per project. Our model as-
sumes full award amount.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SOFT DEBT AND GRANTSSENIORDEBT
Massachusetts Housing Finance
Authority (MHFA) | The construction
and permanent loans will be provided
by The Massachusetts Housing Finance
Authority, MHFA. At a interest rate of
4.5% during the construction period
which will remain the same when the
project reaches stabilization since the
financing rolls into a permanent loan.
Community Based Housing Trust
[CBH] | The CBH fund provides de-
ferred payment loans to non-profit
developers for the development and
redevelopment of integrated housing
for people with disabilities. Housing
for people with disabilities should be
designed to integrate people with dis-
abilities into the community as fully as
possible. In the most integrated, least
restrictive housing environment, sup-
port services should be available when
necessary to help ensure a successful
tenancy and lease compliance. Tenants
occupying units assisted by the CBH
program must have incomes at or be-
low 80% of the area median income.
CBH will provide permanent, deferred
payment loans for a term of 30 years.
CBH funds may cover up to 50% of a
CBH unit’s Total Development Cost up
to a maximum of $750,000 per project.
However, only projects that provide a
high level of the desired features of CBH
housing including universal design and
visibility are likely to qualify for the max-
imum amount. Our model assumes full
award amount, seeing that we qualify
all the preferred requirements.
Housing Innovations Funds [HIF] |
HIF provides funding for the creation
and preservation of alternative forms
of affordable housing. The principles of
smart growth and sustainable develop-
ment should be reflected in the project
application. Not less than 50% of the
occupants of HIF housing shall be per-
sons whose income is less than 80% of
the area median income as determined
by HUD, and not less than 25% of the
occupants may be persons whose in-
come is less than 30% of the area me-
dian income. Loans are limited to not
more than 50% of the total develop-
ment costs, with a maximum HIF loan
of $500,000 in the form of a permanent,
deferred payment loan for a term of 30
years. Our model assumes full amount.
Affordable Housing Program [FHBL
AHP] | The Affordable Housing Pro-
gram (AHP) allows the Federal Home
Loan Bank of Boston to address, in
partnership with member institutions,
affordable-housing needs primarily in
communities across New England.
AHP funding can be used to finance
rental housing in which at least 20%
of the units are for households with in-
comes that do not exceed 50% of the
median income for the area. Examples
of eligible uses include multifamily rental
housing. Additional points are given to
projects that also include units between
51% - 80% of the area median income.
Direct subsidy in the form of grants is
limited to $500,000 per project. There is
a maximum total subsidy including both
grants and subsidized interest loans of
$1,000,000 per project. Our model as-
sumes a $500,000 subsidy.
Inclusionary Development Program
Funds [IDP] | Creating and maintain-
ing a diversified housing stock that is
accessible, affordable, and energy-effi-
cient are important priorities for the City
of Boston.
The Boston Redevelopment Authori-
ty implements the City’s Inclusionary
Development Policy (IDP) to preserve
access to affordable housing opportu-
nities in all of Boston’s neighborhoods.
The number of on-site affordable units
should not be less than 15% of the total
number of market rate units being built,
or 13% of the total number of residential
units in the development.
The rents for the qualifying units should
be affordable to households earning
less than or equal to 70% of the area
median income. The affordable rental
units should be affordable for at least
50 years. Unit design should follow the
BRA guidelines for affordable unit de-
sign. Our model assumes we could
receive up to $1,000,000 of funds from
the BRA.
Mayor Walsh Affordable Housing
Grant | On March, 2016, Mayor Martin
Walsh announced $28 million in fund-
ing awards to support the creation of
affordable housing throughout Boston.
The funding aims to preserve or pro-
duce housing units, and comes in part
from federal and local resources and in
other parts from Linkage funds, award-
ed through Boston’s Neighborhood
Housing Trust. Projects that meet the
following criteria could be considered
for funding:
Affordable housing developments that
utilize City owned land; developments
with costs below the per unit limits, and
do not rely on constrained resources,
so that the project may move into devel-
opment and construction more quickly;
affordable housing developments that
provide units that serve the disabled
community, vulnerable or special needs
populations, elders, veterans, artists,
or aging-out youth; acquisition of unre-
stricted housing developments in order
to stabilize tenancies and provide long-
term affordability for a mix of incomes;
developments that are at high risk of
losing their affordability within five years.
Because Mattapan has not experienced
significant development of affordable
housing, and thus has not received
much funding from the city, we believe
the high percentage of affordable units
our project will provide poses a good
opportunity for the city to invest in Mat-
tapan. Our model assumes $1,000,000
of funding could be received from this
program.
Total expected funds from subsidies:
$7,750,000
