13° and Sunny
Image
On November 17, the Franklin Town Council voted to rescind their vote of support for the “Friendly” 40b project at 444 East Central St.
Even though that legislation passed and a letter was sent to the State asking that Franklin be removed as a joint applicant to the project through the Local Initiative Program (LIP), the project has still rolled on and is expected to be approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) `with conditions’ on December 23rd.
The Town Administrator and ZBA have apparently moved ahead on this project because they received a letter from the General Counsel of the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC), Derya Samadi, in response to a request by the developer asserting that the Franklin Town Council could not rescind based simply on “council membership changes.”
Accordingly, Samadi wrote, `regardless of the outcome of any potential Town Council vote to rescind support based on council membership changes, EOHLC will not amend, withdraw, or rescind the’ Project Eligibility Letter (PEL) ‘on that basis.’ The PEL is a crucial document in Massachusetts for affordable housing developments, especially under Chapter 40B. PELs are issued by the EOHLC to confirm a project meets state criteria, allowing the developer to proceed to local zoning board review for a comprehensive permit, overriding local zoning. “Therefore, the project sponsor is entitled to continue the public hearing process before the Franklin Zoning Board of Appeals,” Samadi explained.
However, opponents of the project said that determination by Samadi was based on incorrect information. In the legislation for action the Franklin Town Council stated:
“As a result of many material changes to the project after local approval was granted, the Franklin Town Council signed a letter on August 28, 2025 indicating that they no longer approved the amended project.”
Since this most recent ruling was based on information provided by the developer that was apparently not correct, a new ruling needs to be requested, providing the general counsel with the correct information, they insist.
“The Franklin Town Council’s decision to rescind support for the Local Initiative Program (LIP) was based on material changes to the project, not simply the seating of a new council. This fact was documented in the council’s official rescinding letter and reinforced by a letter from the previous council, which originally approved the LIP but later confirmed the project had changed substantially,” explained Councilor Jane Callaway-Tripp. Both letters were submitted to the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC), yet to date no acknowledgment has been received, “raising concerns about whether the accurate basis for the rescind is being properly recognized,” added Callaway-Tripp
Long Story Gets Longer
The project has generated heat but little light over the months that it has been inching forward. One of the clearest statements came on September 25, 2025 when Lori Macaskill, a resident of Stewart Street in Franklin, MA, read a letter at the ZBA meeting from Representative Jeff Roy that lent credence to the idea that with the town above its required minimum of 10 percent affordable housing, it was up to the town as to whether or not to continue the “Friendly” process. Today, more than two months later, Roy said, he is still following the issue closely, “but do not see a role for the state while the issue is pending before the ZBA.”
Earlier in the year, the EOHLC wrote to an abuttter, in a similar vein, stating, “If a developer is already in the ZBA public hearing process of a Friendly 40b filed under the LIP program and the town, who has partnered and written a letter in support for that project, now decided to withdraw its support (through a letter from the CEO aka Town Council), what happens to the project? Without the town support, the project would no longer be able to proceed under LIP. However, the developer could apply for a project eligibility letter and then a comprehensive permit on its own through a different program.”
So, for the moment the question appears to be whether the EOHLC general counsel can be reached in a timely manner with the clarifying information about the Town Council’s actions, whether that will happen before the ZBA finishes its process and, ultimately, whether the Town and the Town Council would have recourse if the string of decisions based on faulty or incomplete information were enabling a continuation of the project.
