The requirements of this subpart apply to any request by a mortgagor, as provided by § 245.10, for HUD approval of one or more of the following covered actions:
(a) Conversion of a project from project-paid utilities to tenant-paid utilities, or a reduction in tenant utility allowances.
(b) Conversion of residential units in a multifamily housing project to a nonresidential use or to condominiums, or the transfer of the project to a cooperative housing mortgagor corporation or association. Conversion of a project to a cooperative or of a portion of a project to nonresidential use does not constitute a change of use requiring mortgagee approval.
(c) A partial release of mortgage security. The requirements of this subpart, however, do not apply to any release of property from a mortgage lien with respect to a utility easement or a public taking of such property by condemnation or eminent domain.
(d) Making major capital additions to the project. For the purposes of this subpart, the term “major capital additions” includes only those capital improvements that represent a substantial addition to the project. Upgrading or replacing existing capital components of the project does not constitute a major capital addition to the project.
Notes of Decisions
City of Joliet, Ill. v. New West, LP, 562 F.3d 830 (7th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 2× “See 24 C.F.R. §§ 245.405 , 248.101. For its part, the Fair Housing Act forbids discrimination in housing programs without providing that any given housing development has a right to continued existence.”
New West, L.P. v. City of Joliet, 491 F.3d 717 (7th Cir. 2007).
“See 24 C.F.R. §§ 245.405 , 248.101. For its part, the Fan-Housing Act forbids discrimination in housing programs without providing that any given housing development has a right to continued existence.”
Newbury v. United States Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev. (D.R.I. 2024).
· cites it 2× “24 C.F.R. §§ 245.405 (c), 245.410. They further contend that HUD’s failure to prevent implementation of the Ground Lease provisions that permit common area/parking lot intermingling of the WH II residents who will be 55 and older, with the WH I residents, who are 7 At the…”
City of Joliet v. New West (7th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 2× “See 24 C.F.R. §§ 245.405 , 248.101. For its part, the Fair Housing Act forbids discrimination in housing programs without providing that any given housing development has a right to contin- ued existence.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.