Select Board, Housing Trust, Pledge Collaboration On Housing Projects – But Predict Conflict If Density Isn’t Right

CHATHAM – Who has the final say when it comes to two new housing developments: the select board or the affordable housing trust? Both groups are pledging to work collaboratively, unless they can’t reach agreement on how many units should be built. Then, a political scrap could be in the offing.

In a discussion that dominated a five-hour board meeting on Feb. 20, the select board discussed the road ahead for the development of affordable, workforce or attainable housing on the town-owned Buckley and Meetinghouse Road properties. At issue is the density of housing units proposed for the two parcels, with the majority of housing trust members seeking a higher number, and some select board members and many neighbors preferring something more modest.

Specific numbers of units won’t be known until the town receives responses to its request for proposals from potential developers, but a consultant for the town proposed a concept for as many as 60 units on the Buckley land and 40 units at Meetinghouse Road.

“We were all a little taken aback by that,” said select board member Shareen Davis, who is also a housing trustee. She said both groups need to collaborate and set “realistic expectations” for the development of the sites. Davis acknowledged that some people want to maximize the number of units on the land to create more housing, and others prefer minimizing the number to reduce impact on the neighborhood.

An opinion by town counsel indicated that the select board and the housing trust have “concurrent jurisdiction” over the projects. Davis stressed the importance of continuing to work together.

“Recognizing that there isn’t a jurisdictional issue between the select board and the affordable housing trust is crucial,” she said. “It underscores the unified efforts [behind] the common goal, rather than the bureaucratic hurdles that could exist.”

“The select board, the trust, we’re all shooting for the same goal,” board Chair Cory Metters said.

Board member Dean Nicastro said he would prefer that the Buckley property contain about 40 units, just over the 36-unit standard the planning board favors for developments of that size.

“That strikes me as suitable. I’d like to see parking as close to the units as possible,” he added.

Nicastro said he believes the select board should eventually delegate control of the projects to the trust, but not until the town receives responses to its request for proposals.

“I want to emphasize, I am not interested in having the select board function as a micromanager of the development, or tying the hands of the trust,” he said. “But I am interested in relying on the select board’s legal authority to ensure, on behalf of Chatham’s taxpayers, that the property is put to good and responsible purpose, sensitive to the location and consistent with the wishes of town meeting voters.”

Saying he seeks to “lower the temperature a little bit,” board member Michael Schell, the other affordable housing trustee on the select board, said the success of the developments requires a joint effort of the trust and the select board. While lower-density plans are possible, any proposal must be financially feasible for developers, who rely on certain minimum numbers of units. The trust opted against including a maximum number of units in the RFP, lest it discourage some developers from submitting proposals. Schell said it’s prudent to see what proposals come back to the town before discussing or debating density.

“The bottom line is that housing that people can afford in this town is an existential issue,” Schell said. The town also needs to begin to reverse its demographic trend of aging and seasonal residency, he added. “Chatham has built nine units of affordable housing in the past 12 years. We have to do better, much better,” he said.

Select board member Jeffrey Dykens agreed, saying any debate over density should wait until the town actually receives proposals.

“Density is not a bad word. And we have problems to solve here,” he said.

Metters predicted that the density discussion could pose a “political hurdle” that would threaten to slow down the development process. The Buckley and Meetinghouse Road lands are “two significant parcels,” he noted. “We haven’t had a chance like this in a long, long time.”

Resident Gloria Freeman argued that the select board should have the final say on the projects, which should contain “safe and respectable housing, in keeping with surrounding neighborhoods,” and not be overcrowded. It is natural that the affordable housing trust seeks to maximize the number of affordable units, she said. Vesting the final decision in the elected select board “would provide a better balance,” she said.

Trust member David Oppenheim said the debate is academic for now. “We have to get a developer that’s actually interested,” he said. If the proposals come in with an unacceptably high number of units, the town can negotiate to try and lower the number. “That’s the way it works. It’s a math problem,” he said. The members of the trust have a wide range of relevant expertise in housing matters, Oppenheim noted. “So we’re not going to get snowed under.”

“We do not expect this board to abdicate all powers to a seven-member volunteer board who has already spent millions to purchase land and now wish to act without further public, town meeting or select board votes or involvement,” resident Anne Timpson said.

Rick Leavitt, a trust member who lives next to the Buckley property, urged the town to pause the development process to provide more time for planning the best density and the best mix of affordable and attainable units.

“Chatham’s housing program should strengthen our historic neighborhoods, not detract from them,” he said.

“Well, I can count,” Nicastro said. “If there were a vote tonight to endorse the RFPs, it would probably pass 3-2,” he said. For that reason, he said he would not make such a motion. But if the proposal responses come back “and you come up with something that is beyond the acceptability of the town, as perceived by members of this board, you’ll have some trouble,” he said.

“You can count, and I can read a room,” Schell countered. The trust will review all proposals it receives based on how they meet all of the town’s requirements, not just density, he said.

Proposals from developers for both properties are due April 25.