Project Spotlight: 61 N Pleasant

Conversion of a 3-family to a 7-unit apartment building.

Name: 61 N Pleasant

Address: 61 N Pleasant St, Bradford, VT 05033

About the project: Beneath the decades of neglect, 61 N Pleasant is actually a beautiful old building centrally located in the village center right off of Main Street. Built in 1900, the property sits within the Historic District—which is key for state and federal tax credit eligibility. The building is currently set up as a 3-family with 1,200 SF of unfinished barn space, another 300 SF of unfinished storage space within the main building, and two units that could realistically be split in half to create more affordable living space. The plan is to completely renovate the interior, replace the roof, improve the façade, convert the building to seven units, and landscape the surrounding property.

Project financials: Coming soon.

Where we are (☑️ = complete; 🔵 = in progress):

• ☑️ Acquisition

• ☑️ Schematic design and scope of work

• ☑️ Town approvals

• 🔵 Building permits

• 🔵 Construction funding (equity, debt, tax credits, etc)

• Renovation

• Lease up

Relevant links:

• Floor plans as of 1/6/2022

• Site plan review (10/18/2021): cover letter, site plan, floor plans, proposed façade modifications

• Pre-renovation photos

Note: the space below will be updated in journal-entry fashion as progress on the project is made. To stay up-to-date, go ahead and subscribe:

---

January 8th, 2021

We received approval from the Bradford Planning Commission on our site plan and historic district review to convert the 3-family building into 7 apartments.

With that hurdle cleared, we’re moving onto the state permitting process. 

Before I get into that though, I’ll take a quick step back.

There are three critical steps to complete before starting a construction project—town approvals, state permitting, and funding. Sounds obvious, but the order of operations isn’t necessarily (at least to me). And what I’m finding is that the order changes on a project-by-project basis.

For 501 Main, I started with securing funding, then moved to approvals, then to state permitting. Being my first ground up development, that was logical. I needed to know I could finance the project before investing the time, energy, and capital into developing plans and seeking town approval. 

I’m approaching 61 N Pleasant differently, partly because it’s less complex (renovation vs new construction) and partly because I think there’s a more efficient way to sequence events. 

I’ve made the mistake previously of trying to raise capital from investors too early only to see the project fall through. Not only is this demoralizing, it’s poor form from a reputational standpoint. I wanted to avoid this happening with 61 N Pleasant.

For this reason, I chose to close on the property before locking in the renovation funding. It wasn’t practical to attempt to pinpoint a renovation budget without having gone through town approvals or state permitting. Either step can introduce complexity that will drive up costs. I had certainly run the numbers based on an expected budget yet, in my mind, it wasn’t worth soliciting investment until those numbers could be solidified. 

I’m glad I waited.

While there wasn’t any material impact to scope coming out of town approvals, I can’t say the same for state permitting.

After a few initial conversations with a state fire marshal (Vermont’s de facto building inspector), some unanticipated items surfaced which will affect scope and budget:

1. Requirement for stamped architectural drawings

2. Potential requirement for increased tread depth and riser height on the two existing staircases

3. Potential requirement for two ground floor units designed to Fair Housing Act standards, in addition to the ADA-compliant unit already planned (see my earlier post on Accessibility Requirements for more details)

#1 is a definite requirement. #2 and #3 are pending clarification. 

Stamped plans seem excessive given we’re not doing any new construction or adding/removing load-bearing walls. Ultimately, this means I’ll need to hire a licensed architect at $100/hr to redraft the floor plans I’ve already created in their own software, do a full code analysis, and develop staircase, fire-rated wall, and fire-rated door details—easily thousands of dollars.

It’s not that the building and fire codes are a problem. Of course any renovations we do would adhere to the appropriate codes. That said, I have trouble seeing the benefit of involving a licensed architect here when I can just as effectively produce floor plans and the requested details. I’m not pretending to be an architect or belittling the intricacies of their profession. I just think their time could be better utilized elsewhere solutioning more difficult projects.  

As one architect that I spoke to about this told me: code analysis is supposed to be done by the fire marshal. The 0.8% of project costs in state permit fees is designed to cover the time required for the fire marshal to review plans. It seems appropriate that they would conduct a code analysis.

I can imagine a more streamlined process in the future where developers work directly with the fire marshal on less complex projects. In theory, this exists. And there’s an expedited permit application for projects less than $200,000 that shouldn’t require stamped plans (which 61 N Pleasant qualifies for). That said, the fire marshal still has the power to require plans if/when they see fit.

For reference, here are the before and after of each floor:

Take a look at the original floor plan file to zoom in.

I’ll let you be the judge. Regardless, for now at least, we’ll push forward with formal architectural drawings. 

November 21st, 2021

The Bradford Planning Commission (PC) held the public hearing for 61 N Pleasant this past week. As a quick recap, I had submitted an application to convert the existing 3-family into a 7-unit apartment building.

61 N Pleasant is located in the Village Residential district where buildings with 5+ units are allowed by right. A site plan review is still required to allow the PC to check for things like parking, trash screening, lighting, and drainage. But at least we know there won’t be a density issue.

Because the property is also located in the Historic District, a separate review is required to moderate any alterations to the building’s exterior. I was able to combine both reviews into a single hearing since both are conducted by the PC.

The board will remain in deliberative session for a few weeks so I won’t speculate on the outcome of the hearing.

But I will take a second on the Historical District plan review. It was my first time going through the process and figured others might find some useful insight in recounting the process.

Any change to the exterior of a building in the Historic District (any side, not just façade) has to be approved by the PC—this includes changes to siding, roof line, windows, and architectural details. In order to communicate proposed changes effectively, the applicant is expected to prepare some sort of sketch, drawing, or plan that visualizes the alterations.

61 N Pleasant is a beautiful, old building built in 1900. Very neglected, but full of the architectural character that is both visually attractive and difficult to replicate affordably in today’s labor market. Intricate custom millwork and carpentry has since been relegated to the stratosphere of luxury homebuilding.

Below is my submission for the proposed exterior changes to front of 61 N Pleasant.

Essentially, my request was to:

• Replace all original wooden windows with new, more durable and efficient fiberglass ones. Same size, different material. That said, I would like to salvage the original windows if possible, but I can’t determine whether that’s financial feasible until I uninstall them and start the restoration process. My goal is to secure the option ahead of time to replace them should I need to later on.

• Remove the barn door and the adjacent entryway to the right hand side. The barn will be converted into two apartments with an entrance in the rear. The barn door will be replaced by siding and a window. With the new floor plan, the adjacent door becomes redundant—the space would be better served by a window.

• Repair and repaint the existing wooden clapboard siding.

• Replace the porch railings and posts with a slightly more modern system. Not only do the existing railings not meet today’s building code (they must be 36 inches tall, not 26 inches), but the porch is missing entire sections that would need to be cobbled together with something of lesser quality and workmanship than exists today (without breaking the bank, that is).

I have received quite a bit of well-intentioned feedback on the replacement of the porch railing system. Both from the PC and others that I have circulated plans to. And after some convincing conversations and exploration into alternative methods, I’ve been able to find a solution that retains much of the original millwork rather than replacing it.

Personally, I tend to gravitate towards minimalist or modern designs. I’m not opposed to ornate and traditionally decorative trim, it’s just not my first choice when developing the vision for a place that I’m renovating.

Despite my personal ranking of design styles, that’s not to say I don’t think old buildings are attractive. Because they absolutely can be. And I’ve come to realize that I’m often quick to discount the aesthetic value of existing architectural details—details that contribute significantly to the character and charm of the building and neighborhood.

I’ll admit I was quick to overlook this as I initially put together a scope of work for the project. It’s easy to fall into the rip-and-replace mindset when something doesn’t align with your initial vision. But, with a large renovation project such as this, I’m learning that the best product is often tailored around what exists today. In some cases, that may even be the most cost-effective approach.

Not to mention the hypocritical nature of striving for energy efficiency while also scrapping perfectly salvageable materials. Sure, embodied emissions only contribute a third of the greenhouse gases that operational emissions do, but still. The optics aren’t great and the adversity towards restoration only continues to feed the American consumer machine.

As a result, I’ve proactively reached out to the PC to retract my request to replace the existing rail and post system. Regardless, I have a hunch the request would have been denied anyhow.

The remainder of the proposed exterior changes I still stand behind—replacement windows, addition of new window rough-ins, and removal of the two doors. Those are absolutely critical to enabling well-functioning apartments. But I feel good about letting go of the request to replace the porch railings. It’s always important to gather community input to help shape the final product, and I recognize the value that the PC brings to the table towards ensuring new development happens within the context of the surrounding neighborhood.

November 4th, 2021

I’ve spent several days now at 61 N Pleasant with a chainsaw pretending to be a logger while cutting down trees and overgrowth around the building. It’s amazing what 15 years of neglect can do to a property—I’ve already hauled 22.5 cubic yards of brush off site and I’m not even halfway through taming the jungle.

But, after weeks of sitting behind a laptop building financial models, writing grants, and discussing plans, it’s been great to be able to get outside and actually do some real work.

While I was there, I took some pictures of the interior. I uploaded them to G-Drive but here are a few teasers:

2nd story of barn. Ideal for a 600 SF apartment.

Anyone want a free piano?

If you can see past the cosmetic issues, it’s actually got the bones to be something great.

TLC absolutely required. And a lot of it, at that.

As a part of the renovation process, I submitted an application to the planning board to convert the existing 3-family building into seven apartments. Here are the proposed floor plans:

The smallest apartment (Apartment 1) is 300 SF and actually exists in that configuration today. I know there are critics out there (likely some folks reading this) that think 300 SF is an abomination of an apartment—too small and not rentable. But I’m just not sold.

Apartment 1 is currently rented (it was at the time of purchase) and it apparently has actually been the easiest unit to fill since it was created years ago. And that’s despite its mediocre condition. Sure, the smaller size is not everyone’s cup of tea but where else are you going to find a $600 apartment? With construction costs where they are today, the predominate path to providing (non-subsidized) affordable housing is always going to be via units with smaller dimensions.

Not that I’m justifying the mediocre conditions of the unit. It blows my mind that the previous owner rented the building out in its current state. I’m more so pointing out that the demand for small units is there regardless of the quality of the unit. And, if the quality of the unit is improved, then you’d expect the demand to only increase.

Quick side note that the existing tenant won’t be displaced. We’ll work with them based on their needs and renovate when possible, perhaps even relocating them into one of the same-sized units on the second floor if approved by the planning board. Also, the photos above and in the link are of vacant units.

I’ve lived in several 300 SF apartments now and have nothing but good things to say about the experience. There are plenty of creative ways to make them work (taller ceilings, built-in shelving, supplemental storage, etc.). Again, not everyone’s preference. But if it’s a way to house people more affordably, then it’s absolutely worth a shot in my opinion.

If you’re not convinced that it can be successful and pulled off in an elegant manner, then you’ll want to check out Never Too Small’s YouTube channel.

October 24th, 2021

Friday was closing day. After three grueling months of lender and appraisal delays, we finally got it.

It’s funny—people always congratulate you after buying a property. But really, buying is the easy step in the process. The hard work doesn’t actually start until after closing.

Between getting town approvals, raising the money to tackle renovations, executing on the business plan, and then leasing the apartments up, I’m likely looking at solid 12 months of hustle. And, therefore, 12 months from deserving any sort of congratulations.

Several weeks ago, I wrote about repositioning the building as a co-living space. But, while I still believe there’s a place for co-living somewhere in town, it’s an extremely time-intensive business to run from an operational standpoint.

To do co-living right—with all the branding and event coordination—would require a sizable dedication of time. Time that—for me—would be better allocated building Village Ventures, the small-scale real estate development company I’ve been working on for the past year.

Instead, I’ve developed a proposal I submitted to the town Planning Commission that involves turning the unfinished barn and storage area into usable apartments. All in all, the project would yield four new long-term rental units in addition to bringing the existing three up to livable standards. We just got our hearing date set for mid-November.

Currently, the property—inside and out—is a mess. A hole in the roof, massive tree overgrowth around the building, lack of insulation, prior tenants’ belongings everywhere (including a baby grand piano!), and the list goes on. Stay tuned for some pics worthy of an America’s Worst Homes episode. At the end of the day, though, I suppose that’s what made the $150,000 price tag possible.

September 2nd, 2021

I’ve been running a mini thought experiment on co-living that I want to share.

I’m under contract to purchase a triplex in Bradford, VT. I don’t own it yet and there’s a lot that can happen between now and closing. But hell, sharing is the name of the game when you’re building in public, right?

If you can look past the overgrown trees, hole in the roof, chipping paint, and general mess on the porch and inside—the building is actually a gem. Especially within the context of Missing Middle housing and its proximity to Main Street.

The property is directly below the drone in this photo and overlooks Main Street and the golf course.

The plan that I underwrote originally involved a full renovation and the addition of a fourth apartment in the 1,300 sf barn on the left. Aside from me taking one of the apartments as my primary residence, the project is pretty cut and dry.

Except, when you do the math on acquisition and construction costs, there’s little chance that any of the studio/1-BR apartments would rent for <$1,000 / mo (excluding utilities). And that’s just not affordable for half the single-person households in town.

Ok, so what might a co-living space look like instead?

Well, I drew out a quick concept based on existing building dimensions:

• 10 private bedrooms around 150 sf each

• Some private bathrooms, some shared. Minimum requirement of 1 bathroom per 2 bedrooms (7 bathrooms total)

• 500 sf communal kitchen with bar seating looking out over Main Street and golf course

• 700 sf rec room with dining table, couches, and foosball/pingpong

• Laundry in basement with perhaps a small gym or creative/maker space

• Rents around $750 / mo per furnished bedroom and all inclusive (utilities, WiFi, trash pickup, cleaning)

• Assume a renovation budget of $400k (a lot of plumbing and electrical are already in place)

1st floor.

2nd floor.

Operationalizing would be a whole other story. Careful thought and curation would need to go into programming and branding to prevent it from collapsing into just another chaotic rooming house.

Before anyone says it—yes, parking is a hurdle. However, there is ample space behind the building that could be made into parking with a bit of site work.

And perhaps 10 beds is too many. I could see 6 being more manageable and optimal for fostering a small community.

But it’s certainly worth exploring. Just around the corner, there are co-working spaces, a bustling Main Street, restaurants, and a few vacant storefronts waiting for the right entrepreneur to open up a business.

A small co-living space filled with creatives and entrepreneurs might just be what the doctor ordered.