[0:10] Call this meeting to order. Let me call
the role. The role. Uh Shannon
[0:17] » here.
Ben
[0:19] » here.
>> Joe
[0:22] » here.
>> Yeah, me. I'm here, I think. Uh Karen's
[0:28] not here yet. She may be. Diane can't
make it. So Dan, Diane and presently
[0:35] Corine
are not here, but they may join us
[0:39] later.
>> Britney, we're still missing two.
[0:42] » Britney's not coming. She just sent an
email.
[0:45] » Okay.
>> She may log in at 8. She's stuck in on
[0:49] the on her commute home.
>> All right, Britney is not here either,
[0:54] but still we have a forum and we need
seven. There's seven members I think.
[0:59] » Yep.
>> And four and the rules really read a
[1:03] majority of members and four is the
quorum. Four is that. So we are we have
[1:10] a quorum.
Okay. Let me start the meeting. Could
[1:14] you go to the first U slide?
Excuse me, M. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
[1:20] Just a just [clears throat] a notation.
Meeting opened at 7:08 p.m.
[1:27] All right.
Okay, let's start the meeting. Um, this
[1:34] is uh just a list of of deadlines
uh for the warrant. I'm not sure that we
[1:41] want to submit anything, but they asked
me to distribute and there it is. Um we
[1:48] do have items that will end up going on
a town meeting of course the um the
[1:57] rental assistance program
and I think uh but I think that's
[2:02] probably for the ne the spring usual
spring uh town meeting. So we'll defer
[2:07] that to then. And I think too uh when it
comes time we should for for the spring
[2:14] meeting consider whether we need to have
a regular budget. In the past we have
[2:20] not had a budget. We relied on the fact
that um we can draw funds from the
[2:26] affordable housing trust but the funds
in the affordable housing trust are
[2:31] getting down there and we have other
uses for it. So it might be worth
[2:37] considering but not and how we feel we
need to do it now for the ball meeting.
[2:43] Um so unless any questions we'll move on
to the next topic.
[2:48] Okay here's the minute. Uh there's the
agenda
[2:51] and the minutes. Here's Channing has
prepared the minutes. Has everybody had
[2:57] a chance to review the minutes which I
said
[3:00] » my name's My name's spelled wrong.
There's an S on the end of it. My name
[3:05] is also spelled wrong at the top. Vermin
is V R M I N. Okay,
[3:12] » let me let me
>> but it's spelled correctly later in the
[3:17] notes. So I don't know
>> cuz I didn't catch well. That's why
[3:21] that's why I didn't catch it.
>> Is it close?
[3:26] » Did I come close?
>> No, it's a guy. I don't know.
[3:31] » Okay.
>> The A is same to an I. What else? Wendy,
[3:36] » say say it again.
>> Your name is misspelled somewhere. You
[3:41] said
>> Yeah, there invitees present. There's an
[3:44] S at the end of Trinks.
[3:49] » Oh,
yeah. Yeah, I got that changed. Okay.
[3:54] Verable. I will entertain a motion to uh
accept the minutes as modified.
[4:00] So moved.
>> Do I hear a second?
[4:02] » A second.
>> All in favor? We'll have to do a roll
[4:06] call vote. Uh Channing. Channing in
favor. Ben.
[4:12] » Me. I
[4:17] » Okay, the minutes are approved.
Thank you very much.
[4:22] Okay, what do we got next here?
Do
[4:26] » you want me to go up to the
>> Yeah. Now the next item is under old
[4:31] business is just to keep track is has
there any been anything new any response
[4:38] about the estate planning letter that we
submitted some time ago? Ian, you're
[4:42] probably the person who knows best about
that.
[4:47] » Uh as of now, no. I'd be happy to
continue to explore other options, but
[4:53] I've reached out to I think two other
folks at the EO EOHLC now and I did call
[5:00] the general line twice and left an email
on the general housing help
[5:09] email that they have there and I haven't
gotten anything. Mind you, that was last
[5:15] week, but
um yeah, I have not gotten anything
[5:20] there. I'm still happy to to continue
trying any
[5:25] new solutions if if uh some members
should have any, but it's
[5:31] » I don't know the politics of of
HO ELC that well, but um does anybody
[5:41] have any suggestions for anything else
to try? It is an important issue. Maybe
[5:46] they're just trying to not deal with it.
I don't know. Any
[5:52] It sounds like trying all the things I
can think of. Ian.
[6:00] » Well, okay. I'll
>> If anybody can find a phone number, I'd
[6:04] be happy to call them. The only thing is
I was calling the a couple of the like
[6:10] the EOHLC numbers including the one for
questions and I left uh several a couple
[6:18] voice messages. So if you can find a
voice message for someone, I'd be happy
[6:24] to call them.
[6:29] » Well,
okay.
[6:33] Do we have I mean I don't I haven't
dealt with the the group for a while.
[6:38] I'll look through the uh directory and
see if there's anybody in there yet
[6:42] still that I know. Uh is there anybody
that is in town government that's likely
[6:48] to know of a a name to call? Um I think
it's would it's a good suggestion, but
[6:54] it'd be good to find out who would be a
a person who might return your call.
[7:01] Oh
>> yeah, I can I I should I'll ask Alec if
[7:05] he has anyone. Really? I don't know. I
mean, unless Wendy has someone, but
[7:15] » um
>> I can also go up the ladder and maybe
[7:17] try Stephanie and Amanda.
>> Stephanie might be a good source of
[7:24] information. She presumably deals with
those folks more than we do. Although I
[7:29] wouldn't be surprised if they just send
me they probably one person they would
[7:34] send me to is is Whitney who I had been
emailing five six times over now.
[7:42] » Well, you never know. There might be
somebody else. You might get some other
[7:45] guidance. Um
>> yeah, it's a good it's it's really one
[7:51] of the only options I can think of right
now. So,
[7:55] » well, good luck.
>> Thank you. Thank you very much for your
[7:58] » certainly could use it. Yeah, no
problem.
[8:01] » Um, okay.
>> I think I'm up with the presentation.
[8:07] » Yes. Now, this is a separate.
>> Yes. Yep. Um, sorry for not getting this
[8:13] sooner. I was out for a few days,
but
[8:17] » So, can you can you
>> Yeah. Can you can you take down your
[8:22] » Oh, I did. Okay. Give me one second and
I should be able to.
[8:28] » But you have the share feature.
>> Yep. And then I just need to Oh my. Come
[8:34] on.
[8:39] All right. I should be able to do so
now.
[8:44] How does this look, guys?
[8:48] » Great. Yeah, I should say this is one
this is one thing we decided on at the
[8:53] last meeting that it seemed zoning was a
important factor however mysterious. So
[8:59] this is an educ educational effort on
the part of Ian to
[9:04] » help us navigate this difficult topic.
>> Thank you. And this is this is uh this
[9:10] is off just a couple days of of
research, but also kind of lot of
[9:15] conversations that like I've had with
Finn as as she's come by the office. Um
[9:21] Channing and Al have kind of picked my
brain about and we have these several
[9:26] options that we've talked about. Um, but
it's good to kind of see them put on the
[9:31] table into one presentation like this
where I'd say Joe's presentation is uh
[9:37] kind of big idea options of like sell
versus keep and uh keep and develop
[9:44] versus this is more just focused on
reszoning and trying to answer the
[9:50] technical questions um that the board
may have as well as give these options
[9:55] in regards to reszoning this lot because
we've been kind of asking ourselves or
[10:01] at least some folks have been asking me
about them. So, I have six options that
[10:05] we're going to kind of go through. Um, I
kind of ordered them in most realistic,
[10:10] maybe most feasible um to ones that have
maybe more challenges, but we'll get
[10:15] through them and I'm happy to answer as
many questions as I'm possibly able to
[10:20] to uh get through on on each of these.
So, it's really just six slides after
[10:26] this, but let me begin. So, option one
is kind of a broad one that it captures
[10:33] a couple of these different further
options, but uh we'll just call it
[10:38] sightsp specific overlay zoning. Um, so
there's no real picture of how to
[10:45] demonstrate what a overlay zone may look
like. There's overlay zones in Boston
[10:49] just as there are overlay zones out in
the B birkars. uh it can really take any
[10:54] any shape or form. And then the state
also has their own overlay districts
[11:00] which are some of the options that we'll
see later. That's why I I was talking
[11:04] about that. So um the AR agricultural
residential district will stay this
[11:09] middle layer, this zoning layer. Um, and
then we will kind of create from scratch
[11:16] our own overlay district to then put
over this um this 72 road property. And
[11:25] and you know, if if we want future if we
want the potential for uh future growth
[11:32] and there's spots nearby, then it may
also be worthwhile to uh explore kind of
[11:38] beyond just that single um parcel. But
for the time being, it would definitely
[11:43] be over that single parcel. Um, and we
would need to very similar path to the
[11:49] MBTA communities district. The only
thing is with the MBTA communities
[11:53] district, we obviously had a lot of help
and support from um the EOHLC to shape
[12:00] up that language and to ensure that it
would meet those state requirements with
[12:06] a sightspecific lo local overlay
district. you could call it something
[12:10] like 72 Stow Road or Stow Road overlay
district um town center housing
[12:17] district. Um we would be shaping those
own requirements um as we see fit. So it
[12:23] can be as broad or as tight as we deem
necessary um giving us kind of the
[12:28] maximum control over this um over this
new zone we'll call it. This would be a
[12:35] new zone. really only one of these
options is is to change it, but we'll
[12:40] get to that. Um, so we'll talk about the
trade-offs. Obviously, they're kind of
[12:46] simply put here. Requires a planning
board hearing and a town meeting
[12:49] approval. Um,
>> yeah, this this needs to be we there are
[12:57] laws in place to make sure that we're
not just kind of making these crazy
[13:01] districts um that we would need to
follow. So again, there would be some
[13:06] support from EOHLC, but we would have to
go out and seek that. Um, and we would
[13:12] be carrying most of this burden really
between Alec and I um looking for a lot
[13:19] of help from the housing board and the
planning board along the way to make
[13:23] sure this captures really what we're
trying to go for. And a lot of the other
[13:28] options, some of the state um routes, uh
they offer a lot of support and even
[13:34] financial incentive to kind of choose
their um overlay growth district
[13:41] options. But um yeah, happy to answer
any questions before we move on to the
[13:46] next one.
>> Yeah. Ian, would
[13:50] this is an MBTA
district be part of the possibilities
[13:55] here? Yes. Yep. That's actually so I
wouldn't really call that an option one.
[14:02] Option one is also explored in several
of these other options. I have MBTA
[14:07] communities district as another option
that we can explore as well as two
[14:13] additional like chapter 40R chapter 40Z.
So yes, you're right. Um, but the idea
[14:19] of this and kind of trying to separate
it into a different category than MBTA
[14:24] communities, smart growth, and starter
homes, um, would be kind of our own
[14:29] overlay district, um, with the
definitions and requirements that we
[14:34] would see fit.
[14:38] » What about party wise zoning? Um, is
that one of the the possibilities here?
[14:43] I mean, that's kind of an
>> It is. Do you want me to I can I'd be
[14:47] happy to hop around to them. It is
option three. Option two is MBTA
[14:51] overlay.
>> Go straight through.
[14:53] » All right. I don't want to mess with
your presentation.
[14:56] » Hold your horses. All right. Um so the
next one is um option two is the
[15:02] » NBTA communities overlay district. And
um
[15:07] [clears throat]
>> yeah,
[15:09] » could you go back to the first option,
please?
[15:11] » Absolutely.
>> Yeah. I I'm I'm trying not
[15:17] [clears throat] just in this case but I
guess the whole thing to get some sort
[15:20] of baseline from which I can move
forward step by step
[15:26] on the overlay that you have there
something property does that have
[15:30] certain aspects to it is that just
ownership or is that town control or is
[15:35] the town control come in on the zoning
part of it and then the overlay comes in
[15:40] on some flexibility as to the zoning
characteristics.
[15:45] » So, I'd say the town the town ownership
would actually come in at the property
[15:49] level because that changes just as
property changes. Um the zoning itself
[15:55] is then enacted by the town and if um it
wouldn't impact necessarily our base
[16:02] zone just as the MBTA communities um is
kind of a layer on top of that base zone
[16:10] up on the um whatever hill uh those hill
apartments are are made for. So to
[16:17] answer your question, I think I think
that answers some of it is the the
[16:21] ownership is on the property itself. The
zoning is then enacted by the town and
[16:26] the overlay zone is essentially another
blanket of zoning that can further
[16:32] restrict or open up um kind of uses and
allowances um within a zoning district
[16:41] which is is also shown really we
understand that a lot more because we
[16:47] saw it happen with the MBTA overlay
district. Does that make sense?
[16:51] » Why don't you keep going? Okay, happy
to. Um, so this is uh the MBTA overlay
[16:58] district. There's less to talk about
here because we know this and we've done
[17:02] it. And I will add that um we the the
planning board is bringing a very minor
[17:09] amendment to the current existing MBTA
communities overlay district that you
[17:15] see on this slide um to their fall town
meeting to make to get that final
[17:22] compliance. Um there was a slight kind
of error in um the materials in the
[17:28] calculations that the state um made. So,
we're working to edit and adjust those,
[17:34] but they're very, very minor
adjustments. Um, anyway, focusing on STO
[17:39] Road. Um, with this second option of
continuing to expand the box borrows
[17:47] MBTA community overlay district, we
would be able to essentially either make
[17:53] a new MBTA communities overlay district.
So very similar to how um we have a
[18:00] business and a business one district, we
could explore the option of making a
[18:05] second MBTA communities overlay district
that is different than this first one we
[18:11] have up on Hill Road or we could follow
um we could follow the current standards
[18:18] to a T which would mean like 30 foot
setback or I believe it's two stories
[18:24] maximum of 30 ft height. on the
building, 1.5 parking space per unit,
[18:29] 10% affordability, were all of these
options that we um essentially codified
[18:34] into our bylaw at that zoning district
on the north side of town. And it would
[18:40] be if we do decide to explore this
option, one of the first things we would
[18:43] need to do is checking whether or not
the current restrictions and standards
[18:50] on that overlay district would be
valuable to bring to the Stow Road site
[18:57] or if we would need to open up a new
kind of MBTA communities um district and
[19:03] the center of town. Obviously, we know
it was it was uh an option from the
[19:09] start to have this. Um but if we
>> yeah, it's we we have kind of two
[19:16] options with this option, but it's
something that would come with more
[19:20] support from the EOHLC. Of course, it
won't affect our standing compliance um
[19:27] as we continue to kind of expand this
overlay district um in one way or
[19:32] another. And um let me see anything big
I'm missing. Not really. Yeah, that's
[19:38] important to know. Um currently we have
it at about 13 units per acre as it
[19:43] stands. We're trying to adjust that very
very minorly. But it's it you know if we
[19:49] were to explore this and want to move
forward with this then we would need to
[19:53] um really study as to whether or not the
current um
[20:00] the current standards of the Hill Road
MBTA communities overlay district would
[20:05] be worth bringing to Stow Road or if we
would need to um edit and uh kind of
[20:11] change around the language so that we
can kind of see what we want built at
[20:16] Stro Road and um see what kind of fits
the site.
[20:23] » That's all I have for that. Happy to
answer questions.
[20:26] » So my understanding uh if I understand
this correctly, the option one doing a
[20:32] separate local overlay is kind of like a
build your own zoning overlay.
[20:40] » Correct.
>> Okay. So we can kind of customize it.
[20:42] That's the like customize overlay
option. Okay. There's there's obviously
[20:47] some like standards and um you know we
can't just make a Disneyland overlay
[20:54] district or something like it has to
come with there has to be reason to it
[20:58] and um I forget what the exact language
is but it's something like economically
[21:03] feasible and developmentally
um viable but um yeah it would I'm
[21:12] almost positive that you know what we
are looking to do with Stow Road. Um we
[21:18] can have a lot of flexibility at least
with that first option, but the
[21:22] trade-off is obviously um you know doing
an MBTA communities district or I
[21:27] believe the next two that we're going
through um come with EOHLC support um
[21:32] and definitely with the first one we
will get less and we will have to seek
[21:36] that out. Um [clears throat] but yeah,
so if there's no further questions, I
[21:42] will continue with chapter 40, which was
one of the options that uh came up. It's
[21:47] uh it's very new um and I believe that
it was originally introduced in the 2022
[21:56] economic development package that was
passed um I believe by the Healey
[22:01] administration. Um,
and it's a starter home district,
[22:05] smaller price limited home ownership.
Um, and
[22:10] I dug into this quite a bit last week
and today. I I'm not certain that it's
[22:16] up and running yet. I'd be interested,
Joe, if if you uh can contradict me on
[22:21] that. But, uh, from what I read, they
are still getting paperwork and permits
[22:27] and applications finished because a lot
of those deadlines were saying like June
[22:33] 2025 and July 2026, this this stuff will
become available. So, it's a very very
[22:39] new program, but it might be it might be
a really great fit. But, um, I'm not
[22:45] seeing your hand up, Joe. So, I'll take
that as a a knower and I don't know, but
[22:50] um [snorts]
>> yeah. So,
[22:52] » excuse me.
>> Jim over here had a question.
[22:55] » Oh, yeah.
>> What does EOHLC help me? Is that money?
[23:00] Is that assistance permitting? What What
does that mean to the town?
[23:04] » Yeah, that's a great question. So, um
the MBTA communities, uh like overlay
[23:10] district, the one we were just looking
at, came with a lot of support from the
[23:13] EOHLC. um we got and unlocked grants
that essentially gave uh I don't know
[23:21] the exact amount of hours but like x
amount of hours of work and it was
[23:25] definitely in the in the over 100red
possibly in the several hundreds hours
[23:31] of work that folks from our regional
planning commission was helping us make
[23:37] these calculations and do the outreach
and um ensure that we were eventually
[23:43] going to be compliant. So, they were
actually doing a lot of the heavy
[23:46] lifting along with I can't really claim
any claim I had any part in MBTA
[23:52] community since I only came on a year
ago, but um with Alec, the director of
[23:57] land use and planning, he had um Aaron
Cruz, he's a housing planner from the
[24:03] the state regional planning commission,
and they unlocked those funds through uh
[24:09] the EOHLC. They essentially gave them
funds. They said you get up to this many
[24:16] hours of support, direct support of this
gentleman, Aaron Cruz from MAPC working
[24:21] directly on whatever we needed to ensure
that um this became this came into
[24:28] fruition. Um
as well as like if we were to do this
[24:32] again, we would have that option to
continue to get support um be it through
[24:37] grants. But um EOHLC
has administrators of the MBTA
[24:43] Communities Act. They have an
administrator just on this chapter 40Y
[24:48] as well as just on this chapter 40R that
we'll get to next. So, it's essentially
[24:53] just a person I can pick up the phone
and call or email anytime and and
[25:00] they're expert at this and I can ask any
any this that or the other question to
[25:05] have it answered on either starter homes
on MBTA communities district or on the
[25:10] smart growth for 40R district. On top of
that, there are requirements that the
[25:16] EOHLC
um needs Boxboro to hit to get approval
[25:21] on these districts. And with that,
that's why they'll have some incentive
[25:26] to continue to work with us and and kind
of foster a relationship to make sure
[25:30] either this option, this option, or this
option go through, but less so on this
[25:36] kind of custom option. We called it the
custom local option. But um good, that's
[25:40] a great question. EOHLC support comes in
many forms and um and it it especially
[25:48] comes through on these three middle
options that are directly supported and
[25:54] um and kind of pushed by EOHLC.
>> Thank you.
[26:00] » Um so,
>> uh I have another question for the 40y.
[26:04] Were you able to find out more
information about the um
[26:08] » sewage and water? But yeah, the sewage
and water requirements.
[26:12] » Yes, I did find language that said there
was nothing that restricted it.
[26:17] » Okay. So, it can be a private well and
that's fine.
[26:20] » Yes, that's that that is what I found in
the general language of the law that was
[26:26] passed. Um
I I will send that to you, but
[26:30] essentially right after I I was looking
that up. It sounds confusing at first
[26:36] and I read it a couple times over and it
said um that it's not restricted by uh
[26:43] those those infrastructure needs.
>> Yeah. Like I feel like this and like the
[26:49] more I've heard about it, the more I'm
just like this really feels like a good
[26:52] fit because that seems to be what and
we'll get to that information later, but
[26:55] that seems to be what people in Boxboro
are asking more for is starter homes and
[26:59] this is a great way to make that happen.
>> Yeah. I absolutely agree and it the the
[27:06] one of the one of the trade-offs maybe
one of the cons is though we haven't
[27:10] seen this come to fruition because it's
so new and um and we'd kind of be kind
[27:19] of treading our our own new steps. But
it's it certainly seems like a really
[27:24] great program and from what I could find
a lot of communities have been starting
[27:31] to do it. There's just no like I wanted
to show a picture of where a 40y
[27:36] district was and what it looked like
like I did on this next one. This is a
[27:40] 40R home, but I I simply couldn't
because none of them have fully become
[27:46] built yet. And um it seems like within
the next year or two, this is going to
[27:51] be a more
accessible option and the in the state
[27:55] should kind of finally flush out the the
final details of it. But as I said, this
[28:00] is very new. Um, and another, you know,
as you can, I don't need to read this
[28:05] here, but it's ownership focused. Um,
there are some bedroom requirements. Um,
[28:10] and they are also a cap at the the house
got the house size. Um, but 1,800 fair
[28:20] 1,800
square ft is probably not kind of uh
[28:25] going to restrict us too much if we're
talking about starter homes, especially
[28:29] the amount that we might be wanting to
see on this 11 acre parcel.
[28:35] » But the fact that it's new is actually
could be thought of as an advantage. It
[28:39] gives us a chance to mold it our way.
>> Absolutely.
[28:44] that is there a density requirement of
any kind associated with this?
[28:48] » Yes. So you're per can do buy right four
homes per acre which fits really well I
[28:54] think with the property and the ideas
that we had for it already because we
[28:58] were thinking already with what's been
you know with the work that's been done
[29:01] on the property that you we're probably
capped at about 10 or 12 units
[29:06] » right
>> so that would be great then you can get
[29:08] I think
>> I think I think there is there is a
[29:13] couple of drawbacks and one of them is
that and you think you're prohibited
[29:18] from putting all your affordables in one
district with 40 wide
[29:22] » and we would have to put all affordables
on still road.
[29:27] » So I think there are some hookers.
Is that true? I haven't
[29:31] » Well, I I
>> I'm sorry I missed that.
[29:34] » I read the after your email, I took the
time to read the 13 pages of the
[29:39] document and I think there are some
problems with it.
[29:43] » I'm not you're not the first by whom the
new is tried, right? But anyway, I don't
[29:47] mean to hold you up. I just I personally
have reservations about 40.
[29:51] » I remember seeing something in the
regulations about the affordable units
[29:56] have to be integrated with all the other
units, but nothing about them being
[30:02] happen to be aligned along Stow Road.
>> I don't I don't know if I
[30:05] » I don't remember that.
>> Yeah, Channing, sorry. I just I want to
[30:09] write it down so I can I can look it up
and hopefully respond tomorrow. What was
[30:13] your concern is is what with this
exactly? They're all
[30:19] » Yeah. I don't know if I can find it
right off the bat. I may have to send it
[30:22] to you, Ian, but
>> No. Yeah, please do. I'd be Yeah, I'd be
[30:25] happy to look into it. This is the one
that kind of This is the one that's
[30:28] newest to me. I didn't learn about it in
school. I had to do my research over the
[30:33] past week or so and and learn as much as
possible. And there's still plenty that
[30:38] I don't know.
[30:41] » Yeah. Joe, did you have a question on
this? I know. I saw your hand up. It
[30:45] went down.
>> I'm good, Ian. Thanks.
[30:49] » All right. All right. Let's keep going
through this. So, 40R
[30:56] » 40R is a pretty wellestablished um
reasonzoning overlay option. It's the
[31:03] smart growth district. Um the state has
had this in place for oh, I want to say
[31:09] well over 20 years now. It's been uh you
know, very successful in most areas. I'm
[31:14] sure there's probably been some uh
pretty difficult areas to make it work
[31:18] within. Um but it is exactly what you
would think of a multif family zoning in
[31:24] a smart growth area. Um usually it does
prioritize uh ease of ease of access to
[31:31] like transportation. With that we might
be able to swing the um you know the
[31:36] mart bus over there. I'm sure if we're
if we're looking to make this a smart
[31:40] growth district, then um it certainly
can stop over there just as it does some
[31:44] of our other housing housing um
complexes in town. But that's not
[31:49] obviously not the only thing. Um there's
a lot here with um with 40R and um just
[31:56] as with 40R and I should probably go
back because it's very important to add
[32:01] with 40 Y there are financial
incentives. I believe it's $3,000
[32:06] per unit. That comes back to us. Um, and
I obviously need to learn more on that.
[32:14] It's not a crazy amount of money, but
it's something it's at least something
[32:19] to look at. And I believe it's the exact
same amount for a 40R district. Um
[32:24] there's also the 40s which is a program
where we can kind of do this math to
[32:30] calculate how how much it burdens our
school with new students and then we can
[32:36] get further tax um tax incentives or
money back to our school system.
[32:43] Um but yeah, this is uh in going through
our 40R districts uh in the state on the
[32:50] EOHLC's website, a lot of them are much
higher density than what we would be
[32:57] looking at for Stow Road. Um which is
kind of why I've put it down here. I'm
[33:02] not throwing it off the table. It's you
guys's decision. Um there is a lot of
[33:07] red tape that comes with a 40R district
um that we would have to figure out with
[33:15] the EOHLC to see if this is even a
viable option for us. For example, um
[33:23] they always put, you know, must be close
to public transit. After more review,
[33:28] you can find out that okay, maybe we
don't need to be super close to public
[33:33] transit, but um with that, you know,
we'll need to do XYZ and then ABC twice
[33:40] over or something. There's a lot that
comes with this. Um and yeah, as you can
[33:45] see, plenty of state review. Um and
let me think of what else. Yeah, so like
[33:52] I said, most of them are much larger
scale. Think of like driving through
[33:57] Cambridge and you see a lot of five over
ones. Um those are often associated with
[34:03] uh smart growth districts, very dense.
Um and so oftent times a lot of the
[34:09] acreage was way above 11 acres like what
we'll be working with. But it certainly
[34:15] does not rule this out. And certainly
also not saying that we're going to have
[34:19] a 5 over1 um here in here in Boxboro.
It's it's obviously what we do with it.
[34:25] It's how we take this um and mold the
density requirements to meet the um 40R
[34:32] requirements within this district. Um I
see hands up so I'm happy to answer
[34:37] them.
>> What are the what are the difficulties
[34:41] associated with the first item under
trade?
[34:47] » Yes, and that's a great question. And I
think it's one of those I think it's
[34:52] exactly that it's a tradeoff where um
this one the 40 wy they were not
[34:59] concerned about the waste water uh and
the sewage being private. This one the
[35:05] smart growth um it's something that
they're going to look into and they're
[35:10] probably going to not be very attracted
by it. I know that doesn't directly
[35:15] answer your question, but um there are
stricter requirements just across the
[35:20] board. Um with this having been put in
place over 20 years ago, um most of
[35:26] these developments are in kind of larger
cities um and even the smaller ones
[35:33] don't. So, let me um let me see if I
have it in my notes here.
[35:55] Um
just off the quick search alone, it just
[35:59] says that we will need to certify
that like our existing
[36:06] infrastructure be it installed or f it
will be installed in the future. can
[36:11] adequately handle the load um required
for whatever we plan on building. So,
[36:18] it's going to present us with a pretty
similar option that we're already
[36:22] exploring where we're like constricted
by nitrogen loading or uh the well um
[36:29] how much the well is able to produce um
the size of our septic. These the these
[36:35] are things that we're going to have to
go through with whatever we develop. So
[36:40] going through them and and exploring
those options through 40R doesn't seem
[36:45] like it's going to be a terribly
challenging option. It seems like we'll
[36:49] need to do that anyway. Um but you know,
this is something we would obviously
[36:53] explore before we get to the stage of
like putting together draft language to
[36:59] make this 40R district. um we would have
those meetings with EOHLC to make sure
[37:04] that um that the whatever we're
proposing will work for all of their
[37:10] requirements um before anything is is
kind of put together. But it looks like
[37:16] we're not restricted by private
wastewater um and water conditions um
[37:22] the well in the in the septic. It just
seems like they're going to need to
[37:26] check that um a lot more than they have
for MBTA communities and it seems like
[37:32] more than they'll do for the starter
homes district.
[37:41] » I feel like with our with the property
we're dealing with 20 units being able
[37:46] to do 20 units per acre is just not
going to be feasible for it at all.
[37:55] Yeah, it is it is it is definitely a bit
high and higher certainly higher than
[38:00] the starter homes and our current MBTA
communities uh overlay.
[38:13] There's a good chance that if you were
to put these on a spectrum
[38:18] that this would be furthest to the the
denser side of the spectrum.
[38:24] » Yeah, I think
>> but obviously a lot of these provide
[38:27] flexibility and we could put them really
anywhere on that spectrum. But judging
[38:33] by, you know, not to look into a crystal
ball, but I wouldn't imagine that um
[38:41] that a lot of folks would want to see
higher than 20 units per developable
[38:46] acre.
>> I I rather think people wouldn't want to
[38:51] see anything like [clears throat] that
anywhere near it.
[38:54] » Yeah.
Um Okay. So
[38:59] » one just one question and and yeah just
>> historically you guys looked at the
[39:03] wells and the septic and you had 12 to
was it 14 to 20 units or was what unit
[39:09] something like that
>> that's when you say units that's like
[39:12] beds right
>> that's the whole thing
[39:13] » that's the whole thing
>> that's the whole units it's it's a mixed
[39:17] I think that number was for a mix of two
and threebedroom condos I forgot what
[39:23] the
>> so that was that was units or bedrooms
[39:25] » units units
Okay.
[39:29] » Right. Right. So something something
like that is going to be like you're
[39:32] going to use 2 acres of the property and
all the rest of the property is septic.
[39:37] Well, right.
>> Yeah. Well, something else something
[39:40] else that might be an option is if we
have extra land besides the building is
[39:44] having something like a community center
of some sort, which would be something
[39:49] that you would want for a model if you
were going for like a co-ousing
[39:52] community. And I feel like the starter
the the 40 Y overlay district works
[39:57] really well for that sort of for for a
really small co-housing community like
[40:02] that.
>> What's number five?
[40:09] » Okay, friendly 40B. Great. Um so this is
uh an option I'd say we're probably all
[40:15] a lot more familiar with. Um what 40B is
um it's similar to 40R, similar to 40 Y.
[40:24] 40B is specifically about um affordable
housing and every town in the state
[40:30] needs to meet their requirement
threshold of having um 10 or more% of
[40:37] their units uh of housing in town over
uh uh to be affordable. Sorry. And um
[40:45] what a friendly 40b is and sorry if it's
below that 10% um a lot of uh affordable
[40:51] housing developers will often come in
with plans um to build uh you know x
[40:57] amount of affordable houses even if it's
just one or whatever um to come in with
[41:01] these plans to develop affordable
housing. And the town is very, if you
[41:06] are below that 10%. The town is very
limited in their ability to um restrict
[41:13] a 40B development um based on, you know,
whatever they're asking for. Usually,
[41:21] it's a comprehensive permit through the
ZBA that really handles the majority of
[41:26] it. A friendly 40B is often um brought
to towns with over this 10% threshold.
[41:32] um like Boxboro, we are over that 10%
threshold and um it's called the local
[41:38] initiative program and we would either
seek out developers developers um
[41:43] through an RFP process and then these
developers would come over and give us
[41:48] their their um you know their plan to
develop a site and say we are going to
[41:55] go through the exact same process that
uh we would go through with 40B if um
[42:01] you guys or below 10%. Um but it's a
collaborative effort where the usually
[42:07] the select board signs some um something
into uh like policy first where they
[42:14] allow this uh exploration and um process
to happen um in collaboration with one
[42:21] another so that um it's not kind of a
one-handed and one-sided approach that
[42:27] favors the developer but the town of
Bossboro will also be able to have a lot
[42:32] of say and how this site's built out and
developed. Um, rather than just a
[42:37] developer kind of coming in and saying,
"This is what we would like to develop.
[42:42] We see you're under the 10% threshold.
There's little you can do to stop or
[42:47] curb um what we're suggesting." a
friendly 40B um invites affordable um
[42:54] developers to come build affordable
units in Boxboro collaboratively between
[42:59] the ZBA um mostly the ZBA but obviously
in this case with it being kind of the
[43:05] housing board's land it would be through
the housing board as well um and then uh
[43:10] the zoning or the planning board as well
as needed um and I'm sure that we would
[43:15] seek out their opinions and um advice as
as we would go through a process like
[43:21] this. This is a very this is probably of
all of these the most common practice,
[43:27] the most commonly done practice. Um I do
not have historical knowledge on how
[43:34] many times this has been done in
Boxboro. I don't believe it will be the
[43:37] first time, but this is done all across
the state um every, you know, every day
[43:43] or several times a year. Um, it's it's
one of our safer or safest options, I
[43:52] would say.
[43:57] » I have a question,
>> please.
[44:00] » So, these are a bunch of different
overlay districts. Is it is it would it
[44:05] make sense or is it a thing to combine
overlay districts or would that be more
[44:11] of a kind of the build the zoning So,
yeah, I will point out that this 40B is
[44:19] is technically not an overlay district.
Um, it is it is a comprehensive permit
[44:26] from the ZBA that essentially waves the
existing zoning there and permits um
[44:33] this comprehensive
project to take place um you know,
[44:39] wherever wherever it is. But um sorry I
got caught up on the overlay part. You
[44:46] said would it be worthwhile to explore
combining some of these options?
[44:51] » Mhm. Yeah.
>> Yeah. I mean I can't speak to that too
[44:55] much. I'm not certain that uh it's
really been done anywhere. Um, these the
[45:04] MBTA overlay and the 40R overlay are
really the only ones that have been
[45:10] practiced and completed. Um, with, of
course, as we know, the MBTA overlay is
[45:16] just a few years old. Um, I I'm sure
that there are some overlap districts.
[45:22] Actually, I I know for a fact that in
Middlear they um they put their MBTA
[45:28] overlay district and their 40R district
um kind of on top of each other
[45:33] overlapping. Um so there are instances.
However, it seems like uh I I'm just not
[45:41] sure how it would work for Boxboro. Um
it I'm guessing it would probably be
[45:46] more work to combine some of these. Um
and not going to kind of say that we
[45:54] can't do it. I just know that, you know,
between Alec and myself. Um it would be
[46:00] probably a lot more to try to piece meal
some of these together than to kind of
[46:05] just go for one and uh and focus on one
alone. But it's certainly, you know,
[46:13] another option on the table that we can
further explore if we like this part of
[46:18] that and this part of the other. But it
also might be worthwhile if we like this
[46:22] p part of one and this part of the other
to explore this custom local zoning
[46:27] overlay um that we would be able to kind
of shape up ourselves. But
[46:33] » okay, I got one more. Yeah, Channing, I
heard you.
[46:37] » Yeah. Uh I I I can wait or give this to
you now, but I have the section of uh
[46:43] what is it? Uh 76069,
whatever it is.
[46:48] » Yeah, it's MGL you're saying. It's in
the text.
[46:51] » Oh, 760 CMR. It's the 40 Y.
>> Gotcha.
[46:55] » Okay.
>> 760 CMR. I just want to be able to
[46:59] reference this later.
>> CMR 69.03.
[47:06] » Thanks.
That's the section that'll work.
[47:12] » Okay. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to
interrupt you.
[47:13] » No worries. I appreciate it. And then
this will be the last one. Um this is
[47:19] this would let me let me be frank. This
would be uh these are all possible.
[47:26] They're not none of them are impossible.
Um this one would definitely kind of be
[47:31] the
the odd ball out. I'd say this is a
[47:35] zoning change. So if we go back and look
at technically all of these are zoning
[47:40] changes. They change our zoning bylaw
one way or another. But see this purple
[47:45] layer in the middle. This last option is
the option to change our zoning, our
[47:51] base zoning. So we'll go back here. It's
done in every town. You know, every town
[47:57] and city changes their zoning here and
there every couple years. There was uh
[48:02] just this past Falltown meeting, there
was a proposal to um to bring some of uh
[48:08] it was the business some of the
industrial commercial district into the
[48:13] business or business one district. It
didn't move forward, but um it it was on
[48:18] the table to begin with. Um I I'll be
frank, I don't think that this is a very
[48:24] viable option for us to explore. um we
don't have another district uh in our
[48:30] base zoning that is what we want to see
at 72 Stow Road. So it could also mean
[48:38] making a new zoning district of which is
not completely worth uh not worthwhile
[48:43] I'll say but it's um it it's
it's just a bit we have other options
[48:52] that can bring us financial incentives.
um or be a bit easier to accomplish. It
[48:58] seems like this would probably be one of
the harder ones to accomplish. Um and we
[49:04] do have some
legal I mean with all of them we have to
[49:10] follow the law but you know with this
being one parcel um it can't be spot
[49:16] zoning of which there could certainly be
plenty of appeals um to call this spot
[49:24] zoning which could of course take us to
land court and um nobody none of us want
[49:29] that but uh yeah so we have the option
to bring in Stow Road into another
[49:36] district already in our zoning map or
create a new residential district, one
[49:40] in the shape that we want to see. Um,
but I do believe that if we wanted to do
[49:44] the latter of those two options to
create a new district, it would probably
[49:48] be easier to do so through an overlay
district. Um, but I'd be happy to talk
[49:53] about that more with you. I'd be happy
to talk about any of these options. I've
[49:57] been talking for almost 30, 40 minutes
now. So, I am going to um let you guys
[50:02] continue to ask questions and uh yeah,
that's pretty much it.
[50:09] » Thank you very much, Ian. That you know,
you've done a lot.
[50:12] » No problem. I I hope that was
comprehensive enough. I I do wish I had
[50:16] a little more time to to delve into them
and um and learn as much as I could
[50:22] about them, but uh that that's kind of
more or less highlevel knowledge about
[50:27] those. Um, it'd be good to kind of see
which ones peique our interest and if
[50:31] there are any that we can outright say
no to, we're not interested in. Um, that
[50:36] would that would be uh that'd probably
be pretty worthwhile in the short term,
[50:41] but I will not speak for the board
anymore. I'll let you guys discuss.
[50:47] » Oh, thank you. It was very good.
>> Well, Channing has some uh charts that
[50:52] we could have discussion later in the
meeting, I think.
[50:56] » Sure. Yeah. So we can talk talk about
which of those things we'd like. So uh
[51:02] unless there's further questions about
the presentation, we can move on to the
[51:08] um rest of the meeting.
>> I had one question further question
[51:12] about 40y. Um I think one of the things
that I don't necessarily like about it
[51:17] is that it's
>> entirely focused on ownership. I know a
[51:21] lot of people aren't asking for rentals,
but the reality is that people who are
[51:26] low income and and require and and in
need of affordable housing often can't
[51:32] meet the requirements for that and need
to rent for a while before they can
[51:36] actually get that um like move toward,
you know, ownership. So, they have to
[51:43] rent for a while anyway. Um, I don't
necessarily want to see super dense
[51:48] rentals, but making a starter homes
district where there are a few options
[51:54] for rentals or rental is an option for
the affordable units. Um, I think would
[52:00] be really great. I just don't know if
that's really included in the 40 because
[52:04] the main focus is on
>> Yeah. Which again, people who need an
[52:10] affordable unit, like if you if you want
to get into a 40b and you have a bunch
[52:17] of student, you know, a student loan
debt, you might not be able to get
[52:21] approved for a mortgage, which is one of
the like first things you have to do to
[52:25] be able to get in that.
>> I I can afford factor a little bit to
[52:28] affordability, Ian, later on, and you're
going to add to it if you wish. You and
[52:34] I talked about that earlier today.
>> Yeah. Yep.
[52:38] No, but um yeah, Channing had a I mean
it does relate to that, but um I I
[52:45] certainly understand it's a frustration
and it's a drawback of going that route.
[52:50] What could be a very attractive
um option to take the state
[52:56] zoning route. Um that's definitely a
restriction that I see. Um
[53:03] yeah, Joe, I see you have your hand up.
[53:08] I may
>> Yeah, real quick. I just want to see um
[53:13] I don't know if you have time to do
this, Ian, or if you're able to do this,
[53:16] but it'd be cool to see these in kind of
a chart, maybe like on a landscape p so
[53:23] we can see density for each option,
>> what's involved in each. I don't know if
[53:27] you could do that quick. Um I don't even
know if I can even ask you to do that.
[53:30] It's just something that would be
helpful for us to process, I think.
[53:33] » Yeah. Yeah, like I just wanted to
>> I got of like densest to least dense
[53:38] versus like
>> Yeah, just like a homeownership versus
[53:41] most renter. Yeah, I I like that. I
should I I'll add that in advance of our
[53:47] next meeting and I'll send it around.
>> Yeah. And then one thing I just wanted
[53:51] to clarify. I heard the question earlier
like what is EOHLC? Um I want to just
[53:56] people make sure it's um it's not the
state housing finance agency but it's
[54:00] it's the state housing administrator. So
it used to be department of housing and
[54:05] community development. It runs a number
of programs home CDBG. Um it runs the
[54:11] local 40B housing what now they just
changed the name to executive office of
[54:17] housing and livable communities. uh
which just is another difficult acronym
[54:24] » in our line of work.
[54:35] » Okay.
>> Thanks again.
[54:37] » No problem.
>> We can move on with the rest of the
[54:41] meeting. So Wendy, could you put Yes,
sir. and go down to after the
[54:46] presentation.
[54:50] Keep going.
[54:54] Keep going.
[55:01] Oh, that's it.
I don't know. We need we need to go
[55:05] through this in detail, but there is
another issue that we need to resolve.
[55:10] probably it's not a problem but in fact
there are constraints associated with
[55:15] the land and with the account really
that the money that we would use is it
[55:24] the affordable housing trust
and the restrictions are that it'd be
[55:29] affordable to low and moderate income
housing
[55:33] no numbers just that
uh it's non-specific [clears throat]
[55:40] Well, early on, you know, a long time
ago, we had that discussion in the
[55:47] SRCDC. What does this actually mean?
What what does it allow us to do? So, we
[55:55] uh asked K&P for guidance and their
letter is included in a packet that I
[56:02] sent you. Their answer was that it's
okay. All the units don't have to be
[56:09] affordable, which you you might suppose
it can be a friendly 40b,
[56:16] which is what I we ended up proposing.
one thing and but but I think one thing
[56:24] that we need to worry about and perhaps
seek another opinion about is exactly
[56:30] what does constitute
uh conforming to all these requirements.
[56:37] Would a 40 wide development
uh with 10% home of the homes affordable
[56:46] comply? that question as far as I know
has not been answered uh at least to us
[56:52] by K&P. So I just wanted to include that
as one of the things that we have to
[56:57] worry about is that you know we have to
make sure that what we do is legal and
[57:04] legally complies with the constraints of
the affordable housing trust and and the
[57:10] land itself.
And the stuff I sent out to you goes
[57:14] into a lot more detail than that. So
that's all I wanted to say about that
[57:18] unless there are questions. Yeah, I have
a question. Al the the letter from KMP
[57:24] from Jean and so forth is
[clears throat] now 13 years old.
[57:29] You think that's at some point worth
worth uh checking with them to see if
[57:35] it's still viable?
>> It might be, but I think I think we're
[57:40] going to have to check with them to see
if if we go the 40 40 Y route. I think
[57:46] we'll have to check with them to see if
that's legal.
[57:49] » Yeah,
>> cuz that's different than a friendly
[57:51] 40B.
>> Well, and 40.
[57:57] » Sorry. Since the friendly 40B isn't an
overlay district,
[58:01] » conceivably it could be a friendly 40B
with the 40 Y as an overlay district.
[58:07] » Correct, Ian?
Potentially this would all be questions
[58:12] for EOHLC, but I also would question is,
you know, does one not restrict the
[58:20] other by uh what it requires? But yeah,
I'd be I'm not sure. Well, I don't think
[58:26] 40 Y is limited to 10% affordable units.
You can have more than 10%. So,
[58:33] » we could have 25%
>> 100% if we could figure out how to do
[58:37] it.
>> But the more affordable units are, the
[58:40] less attractive it becomes to
developers. I mean, these are tradeoffs
[58:44] you would have to think about.
>> Just that's why that's why I'm like,
[58:47] just talk to the people who want the
housing, [laughter]
[58:50] » right?
But all I'm saying that this is an issue
[58:54] that we're going to have to worry about.
[clears throat] Great.
[58:59] » Is it any other questions?
>> Just real quick, Al. Um,
[59:05] » yeah. to the point that the letter's a
little dated. If we do ask for an
[59:09] update, um, could we ask
the attorneys to analyze
[59:18] their update against the options that
Ian presented and that would help us uh,
[59:24] not so much with the nuanced questions
um, in terms of could we do a hybrid
[59:29] overlay and whatnot, but could we just
ask the attorneys, hey, we want to make
[59:33] sure we're going to meet
um the agreement and the and the
[59:38] affordability um clause in the contract
uh the local contracts, you know, could
[59:44] you update your memo uh for our
purposes? And oh, by the way, could you
[59:49] look at these options that we're
considering 40 Y 40R friendly 40B?
[59:56] » Exactly. That's what I think we're going
to have to do. Well, like I my opinion
[1:00:00] is that before we do that, we need to
clarify our thinking as best we can
[1:00:05] about exactly how we'd like to implement
these various options cuz the more my
[1:00:12] experience with all lawyers, probably K&
K&P in particular, is the more precisely
[1:00:18] and you can ask the question, the better
guidance you'll get. So, I think I think
[1:00:24] it's that's exactly what we should do.
Joe, I agree.
[1:00:30] When the time comes, you know, when the
time comes, but I think we need to, if
[1:00:33] we can, I think we need to clarify our
thinking on exactly what we would want
[1:00:39] under those various options uh before we
seek that guidance. But I think we
[1:00:44] should.
Yeah, I agree.
[1:00:49] Thank you.
Okay. What do we got here?
[1:00:54] Okay.
Uh, moving on to the housing production
[1:00:59] plan.
How are we doing there? Um, Ian,
[1:01:04] » good. We um I'll I'll you know, really a
few updates, but it'll be good to kind
[1:01:11] of talk about what we what we want to do
for this next month. Um,
[1:01:17] we haven't yet heard back from
the Oh goodness, I don't even know which
[1:01:23] department it is. And it might be
several, but in March, we applied for a
[1:01:28] grant through the Eco1top. Um, which is
different than the kind of grant portal
[1:01:33] that we applied for this housing
production plan grant with, but we did
[1:01:38] that in June. So, for the the open space
plan, we applied to that in March. Like
[1:01:43] I said, we still have yet to hear back.
And they they say that they're going to
[1:01:49] um let us know in June, which um is very
on on par with how they normally roll
[1:01:57] out these these grants and their
announcements. So, we do look forward to
[1:02:01] hearing back from them on the open space
one very soon. But this would probably
[1:02:07] push the announcement of whether or not
we received this state grant for the
[1:02:13] housing production plan. Um I believe
the original month that they said was
[1:02:18] September following the June
application. So I wouldn't expect it
[1:02:22] until at least November is probably more
realistic by how they're moving, but who
[1:02:28] knows? So that's the update on kind of
where the grand state the the the grant
[1:02:33] is. Um, regardless, I think the plan has
been and has always been to continue
[1:02:39] moving forward with this, anticipating
that we receive that and um and only
[1:02:44] readjusting once we receive um the
hopefully good news um on that later
[1:02:50] this year. Uh we do have a housing
production forum planned for our next
[1:02:56] August meeting. I would like to spend a
little time just openly talking about
[1:03:00] that. Al, I'd hope uh you and maybe if
any of the additional board members
[1:03:07] would like to put some time and energy
towards that in the next month, um then
[1:03:12] I think that's definitely worthwhile. Uh
I do want to kind of emphasize that the
[1:03:19] way I see this next month's meeting
going is about housing production. And I
[1:03:25] think Stow Road should have a part in
that. But I want to make sure that we um
[1:03:32] that we don't focus entirely on Strow
Road. Um or if we would like we can have
[1:03:38] an additional meeting sometime in
September or August um where we do focus
[1:03:43] on Strow Road. Um but for right now, I
believe the current plan we have was to
[1:03:49] um make up an agenda on some topics and
items that we wanted to discuss. um a
[1:03:56] lot of which surrounding the visioning
exercise that we did at um Feifers Day
[1:04:01] and uh at one of the town hall town
meeting events. Um talk broadly about
[1:04:07] those. um try to invite some potentially
invite some committee representatives
[1:04:13] from the EDC, the planning board, the
select board, the zoning board of appe
[1:04:18] appeals um and such as well as of course
the open public and try to receive as
[1:04:24] much feedback as possible um from folks.
But that's a pretty high level
[1:04:30] look at it. I'd be happy to answer any
questions or openly discuss this. Um,
[1:04:40] » well, right now it sounds like what we
need to do is convene a small group to
[1:04:46] uh put together what we need to do at
the the hearing, the meeting.
[1:04:50] » Yeah.
>> Anybody interested?
[1:04:55] » When's the meeting?
>> Or
[1:04:57] » August 25th, I believe. Is that our next
scheduled meeting normally?
[1:05:02] » Oh, right, right, right. That's what
we're doing. I remember now.
[1:05:10] » Yeah.
[1:05:14] » Any other any other Oh, Channon. Oh my
goodness. Shannon raised his hand. Hey,
[1:05:20] I'm in all the way on this.
>> Okay,
[1:05:24] » thank you. I I don't hear anyone else,
so I'll assume it's you two folks for
[1:05:30] now. But um with that, I don't I'm not
sure we'll need to post anything or
[1:05:35] create a working group or anything. We
can we should be able to meet
[1:05:38] informally. Um and I'll double check the
the requirements for that, but we should
[1:05:43] be good on that. Um great. Okay. So, we
can begin putting some stuff together um
[1:05:49] on that. And uh
yeah uh we'll also invite invite um
[1:05:56] individual members of the board if they
have any opinions or ideas of things
[1:06:01] that we should be doing um then they can
reach out to me not the board as I would
[1:06:08] be discussing in violating open meeting
law. But um if you do have any ideas
[1:06:13] that you'd like us to bring and set up
for uh next month's housing forum then
[1:06:18] please let me know. um and I will bring
them to Al and Channing as we work on
[1:06:23] this. But I think it should be a good
opportunity um to focus on,
[1:06:29] you know, the needs broader of the uh
the the town. Hopefully get some some
[1:06:35] input.
I think what you just said is
[1:06:40] uh you would you would like and it's
really good idea for any housing board
[1:06:44] member even if you're not on this plan
group to send u suggestions of what
[1:06:51] should be included and how to go about
it
[1:06:54] » to you and Channing and we can talk
about it when we get together and
[1:07:00] that right
>> it could also be a great time to show
[1:07:02] off our
dreamhouse quilt that fit in and Britney
[1:07:07] did so good. Um did a great job at
putting together or getting getting
[1:07:14] folks to buy into that.
[1:07:18] » Okay.
>> Okay.
[1:07:22] » So, we'll be informed
Al, you
[1:07:27] and myself will be informed as to what
our next step is.
[1:07:33] » Yeah. Let's let's uh let me just look at
my calendar. Probably next week would
[1:07:38] probably Yep. very very open next week.
So um yeah, maybe sometime next week um
[1:07:47] to meet and discuss some of the options
um to uh to present and and talk about
[1:07:55] and discuss there.
But also within that time, within that
[1:08:01] time, I'll try to put together some
promotional material as well that we can
[1:08:06] get to Wendy to send out, that we can
get to the board to send out, and that
[1:08:10] I'll get to um town administrator, town
clerk, and make sure that it's um as as
[1:08:17] publicly available as possible, get as
many voices as possible. It will be
[1:08:22] hybrid. I will be in person this time
for that. Um,
[1:08:27] but yeah, we should I' I'd hope that we
have several folks attend. And while
[1:08:33] we're still on it, um, and I mentioned
it briefly, but I didn't get any
[1:08:37] confirmation earlier, maybe last month
or the month before, we talked about,
[1:08:44] um,
we talked about inviting committees. Did
[1:08:49] we want
is it good if I start reaching out to
[1:08:54] said committees and inviting a
representative for them to to join and
[1:08:57] be a part of this discussion or is that
something that we'd like to push further
[1:09:02] out focus on just residents for this
next one and um have a future meeting to
[1:09:09] discuss um with with board and community
representatives.
[1:09:15] I think residence is what we want to
focus on at this stage.
[1:09:20] » I think that's right too. I mean I mean
one thing that might happen if we get a
[1:09:26] whole bunch of committee people we have
all these committee people and maybe one
[1:09:29] or two residents I think they might
>> that's
[1:09:36] no that's a great point.
[clears throat]
[1:09:40] » Yeah I think is up first.
Yeah. My fear is that we don't get
[1:09:48] enough residents and then we're but we
don't have to
[1:09:54] we'll be hopeful and we'll do our
outreach.
[1:09:58] » We should have goodies or refreshments
or something.
[1:10:01] » Yeah. Offer some refreshments.
>> I'll look into that. Yeah, we can
[1:10:04] definitely get some refreshments.
>> We can do that.
[1:10:09] » All right.
Very good.
[1:10:12] and the whole program. I'm not sure
there's anything going there. Uh
[1:10:17] anything,
Wendy?
[1:10:20] » The only thing there hasn't been any new
applications, but I got the last um
[1:10:27] just today. I got the last invoice of
number four application. So, we've given
[1:10:34] out, you know, almost the $8,000.
This was for um gutters to prevent ice
[1:10:41] dams.
So,
[1:10:43] » yeah.
>> Okay.
[1:10:44] » So, I have not received any new
applications since probably April.
[1:10:50] » When did we originally send out the
information about the program?
[1:10:54] » I think it was the very end of December,
>> right?
[1:10:58] » And I got, you know, I got two or three
right away, then another one, then then
[1:11:02] that one.
>> Yeah. I think it would be a good thing
[1:11:05] to do during the summertime to, you
know, do a blast and remind people of
[1:11:10] the program. And that's
>> that's not my that's not my
[1:11:14] » that's not my position. Yeah,
>> that's that's not something that I do.
[1:11:18] That's a housing board thing.
>> Oh, okay. So we should do that again
[1:11:23] then is put that notice out that you
know hey this is on a rotating basis if
[1:11:28] you need anything because then if
anybody needs to do any kind of
[1:11:32] maintenance work in preparation for the
upcoming seasons
[1:11:37] » maybe we should uh give oursel maybe we
should discuss that next
[1:11:42] um meeting
>> it probably depends on what there's a
[1:11:46] budgetary question too I mean you know
how much money should we allocate things
[1:11:51] like that.
>> So like let's put that on the agenda for
[1:11:55] the next meeting whenever.
>> So Al, you're saying a a budgetary
[1:11:59] thing, but I mean all the 20 people are
or whatever are allocated the 2K. So
[1:12:08] um I mean there's still there wasn't a
time limit to it, was there? I mean
[1:12:16] » Yeah, you're right.
>> Yeah. there's money that's still
[1:12:21] available. It might be worth it to
remind people of the program since it's
[1:12:25] like more than six months later,
>> right?
[1:12:27] » Um
>> I think I think
[1:12:30] » springing and stuff, they might be newly
aware of things that they weren't aware
[1:12:33] of, you know, in December when they
first got notified.
[1:12:37] » Well, let's put it on the agenda for
next
[1:12:40] » next week.
All right. And the rental assistance
[1:12:45] program. Yeah, there was something I
wanted to ask and now I can't remember.
[1:12:51] Um, but it's still we still have a
waiting list. Um, we're still,
[1:12:58] you know, vetting people that are in the
program.
[1:13:03] Uh, I think there's 15 people right now.
So, we keep on plugging away. And I
[1:13:10] can't believe I forgot. It's been very,
very, very, very busy this summer. And
[1:13:15] so I can't remember exactly what that
question was.
[1:13:22] » Okay. Well,
>> if you think of it later.
[1:13:25] » Yeah, I will.
>> Come back. We'll come back around to it.
[1:13:27] » Okay.
>> Okay. Well, the next part of the
[1:13:31] meeting, I think I will let Channing
have before. Channing, if you could go
[1:13:35] down the the stack, there's a couple of
visuals Channing might want to use uh in
[1:13:44] his talk.
>> Is it this?
[1:13:48] » Well, I I don't see anything a little
pardon.
[1:13:53] » What?
>> I just don't know what you want me to
[1:13:57] show. Do you want me to show something?
>> Go back to the Go back to the deck.
[1:14:01] Original deck. go back to El's El's
email
[1:14:06] » the deck you were showing the the the
the
[1:14:09] collection of slides that you were
showing.
[1:14:12] » Okay. So, not the packet.
>> Go back to the packet.
[1:14:16] » Oh, I was just in the packet. Hold on.
>> I believe it's the last pages on the
[1:14:21] packet.
>> The last pages on the packet.
[1:14:26] Oh, okay. I just have to share it again.
Is that what happened? I stopped
[1:14:30] sharing. All right, hold on.
>> I got it.
[1:14:39] » Okay,
>> do you want the other one too, Channing?
[1:14:44] » I think it's probably more before the
one right after.
[1:14:48] » I got it.
This one?
[1:14:51] » Yeah, that's fine. Thank you.
>> Okay,
[1:14:55] yeah, Ian, do you want to make any
comments at all about that as we spoke
[1:15:00] earlier? Yeah, I'll I'll give the
highlevel uh detail on it. So, we had
[1:15:05] this we had this um
this poster at two town events. The
[1:15:12] first one was a town meeting info
session. Um and I don't believe it was
[1:15:17] for annual town meeting. I believe it
was for a special town meeting. So, that
[1:15:21] would have been in March. Um, and with
that, I did not remove the suggestions
[1:15:27] or the dots, but I brought them back to
Feifer's Day. And, uh,
[1:15:32] in my short count, I believe we had
about 19 or so at the first event that
[1:15:41] we did. And then at the end of Fifer's
Day, we had a total of 89 entries. Um,
[1:15:48] so that would make about what is that 60
or 70 people um who came by at Fifer's
[1:15:56] Day to give their opinions on this. Um,
there are some sticky notes that were
[1:16:02] put on there of priorities and options
for housing that were not originally put
[1:16:07] on there. Um and what you one of the
struggles you know you get with this as
[1:16:15] a statistician looking at that is well
okay this option in the sticky note was
[1:16:20] not presented to everybody at the same
exact time. It wasn't there at the
[1:16:25] beginning but rather somebody put that
in halfway through or towards the tail
[1:16:29] end. And so, um, yeah, that's, uh,
that's pretty much the high level and
[1:16:34] the technical of it, but, um, I was very
happy when Channing asked for that data.
[1:16:39] Um, and, uh, was able to kind of make
this this thing we see next. Um but
[1:16:45] essentially you you obviously see them
ranked here um from starter homes to
[1:16:51] affordable housing to middle income all
being really really high priorities for
[1:16:55] the residents of Boxboro who responded
to this visioning poster. Um so yeah
[1:17:01] that's all I'll say. I'll pass it back
to Channy.
[1:17:05] One question. Is it at all legitimate to
combine the starter homes and middle
[1:17:11] income housing homes categories?
[1:17:16] » It's not in my opinion, I don't think
that's uh unheard of. I do think that I
[1:17:23] think it could go either way. I think
you could staunchly defend that starter
[1:17:27] homes are separate than middle inome
housing um and should be treated as
[1:17:32] such. But um I also definitely
understand that there are a lot of
[1:17:36] similarities between starter homes and
middle-income housing. As we've seen the
[1:17:40] housing market kind of change,
especially over the past 10 years, those
[1:17:43] two things kind of blend together where
now a lot of younger middle inome people
[1:17:49] per se um yep have a very hard time of
attaining um any regular house and then
[1:17:57] would hence need starter homes. So um it
could go either way. I
[1:18:02] » that's my that's my look at it. But
>> I I forget that board, but was the
[1:18:06] nature of it such that a a a cert a
given person could vote for both starter
[1:18:13] homes and middle and income housing.
>> Mhm.
[1:18:17] » Um they were told to put they were told
to put one on. Um I'm not sure how it
[1:18:23] went at Fifer's Day, but Finn was there.
So, Finn, I'm not sure if if it if you
[1:18:29] had people putting a couple on. We
weren't super strict about it. Um, we
[1:18:33] weren't going to peel stickers off, but
>> I think uh um I wasn't paying too close
[1:18:41] of attention. I think uh Britney might
have been more alert to that.
[1:18:46] » She's not
the the question is what is your number
[1:18:51] one housing priority? So, I would hope
that would
[1:18:56] sway folks to just vote for one as well.
But
[1:18:58] » I do I do remember the wheelchair
accessibility one was actually from a
[1:19:03] family that had, you know, the child
with them that was, you know, in a
[1:19:09] wheelchair at the event. Um, and they
said they were in uh a unit in um
[1:19:18] uh Beaver Beaver Brook. Is that the one
that I'm thinking of? The one that's a
[1:19:23] portable or something?
I I I [clears throat] can't remember
[1:19:28] exactly.
>> Otman Hill or Swanson River?
[1:19:32] » No, no, not Cotman Hill. No,
>> Brook Village. Brook Village or Bridge.
[1:19:36] » Yeah. Yeah. Thanks.
I I tried to account for by by including
[1:19:44] what would have been obvious multiple
selections uh on that list. In other
[1:19:50] words, uh climate appropriate materials.
Well, let's say that would be across the
[1:19:57] board. Okay? I mean, what else would it
be? You know, you're not going to
[1:20:01] separate those out. Work wheelchair
accessible. That's going to apply to
[1:20:05] everything and so forth. So I tried to
account for that through an adjustment
[1:20:09] and the list came out pretty much the
way it is anyway. Uh which I then
[1:20:14] extracted onto this grid here which
maybe I can talk through now but there
[1:20:20] are more questions go ahead but for
explanatory
[1:20:24] note to that.
[1:20:29] Okay.
Okay.
[1:20:34] Does everybody have a copy of it? you.
I've got one here if you need one.
[1:20:42] » I I didn't send one to you.
>> Other words, I' I'd like to Okay, we'll
[1:20:47] leave it there. Leave leave that then. I
Let me make a couple of preface uh um
[1:20:53] let me preface this when the preface is
probably going to be longer than the
[1:20:58] comments. Okay guys, um
in an effort to deal [clears throat]
[1:21:04] with the results of the survey
and also to remove some of the
[1:21:12] kaleidoscopic elements of this
whole puzzle that we're faced with. I
[1:21:19] took the most frequent
uh frequently mentioned categories and
[1:21:24] tried to apply some decision criteria to
them.
[1:21:30] Um before I get to the decision
criteria,
[1:21:34] let me say as to the categories and
starting from the top
[1:21:40] uh starter homes. Okay, that was the at
19 that was the largest and most
[1:21:45] frequently mentioned category.
affordable,
[1:21:49] then middle inome housing, then more
rental, but rental is is a move issue
[1:21:56] now because Actton Housing Authority has
told me they're not interested in
[1:22:00] building anything now. And we are not
equipped to manage any rental properties
[1:22:06] on that or any other land. So, I'm
afraid of rentals unless somebody knows
[1:22:11] more than I do out the window.
and housing for seniors uh is number
[1:22:17] eight and co-op and commun community uh
res residential property is number five.
[1:22:25] So um that's kind of at the tag end of
it. So uh that's how I rank them and
[1:22:32] then I try to apply these decision
criteria but the I also put 40 Y in here
[1:22:38] but I I am not predisposed to 40 Y. So
you'll have to override my my decision
[1:22:44] on that one.
>> Okay. But what I would like to talk to
[1:22:48] primarily at this point is starter homes
and that is where the lowincome people
[1:22:58] are also the neediest people and that is
where Boxboro has its share of them even
[1:23:04] though we have to put this up for
lottery.
[1:23:07] But I do I think have a thought to
introduce here and that is instead of
[1:23:15] giving up the land on Stow Road either
giving it up to Habitat for example or
[1:23:22] selling it to a developer.
We don't do either. We create a land
[1:23:28] lease
and we keep the land.
[1:23:33] Now the advantages of that as I see it
are that the value of the land comes out
[1:23:40] of the selling price of the residents.
So the only thing that's being purchased
[1:23:46] is the structure. Now this is something
that's quite prevalent in Maryland. It's
[1:23:51] not a new thing. And the advantage to
the purchaser is they don't have to pay
[1:23:58] for the land and they don't have to pay
a tax on the land.
[1:24:03] Okay. [clears throat] And we don't pay a
tax on the land because the housing is
[1:24:07] not a buy. So we're going to pay taxes.
>> Yeah.
[1:24:11] » So the town just misses out on the
revenue of those builders.
[1:24:14] » Well, the town isn't going to be
spending an awful lot of money on it
[1:24:18] anyway. I don't
>> Well, but but years from now, they're
[1:24:21] going to miss their
revenue pion.
[1:24:26] So
>> Okay. So that's that would lower the
[1:24:29] price uh by $160,000
an acre. Okay.
[1:24:35] So if you put one house on that acre,
the price comes down by $160,000 bucks.
[1:24:41] If you put two houses on that acre comes
down by $80,000 and so on and so forth
[1:24:47] depending on how many units put on the
acre, which is why zoning comes into the
[1:24:52] issue, I think. But the advantage is you
really lower the price of a starter home
[1:25:00] down to where people who really don't
have a lot of money presumably can
[1:25:04] afford it. Now, pricing price points,
price points for middle inome people,
[1:25:10] all of that has to be worked through,
but I think the concept is sound. And
[1:25:16] I've taken the liberty of talking to
Stephanie Peterson at Metro West to see
[1:25:21] if she has any insight. She's
researching it. I spoke to Ian this
[1:25:26] afternoon. Ian's thinking about it, too.
I don't believe there's any prohibition
[1:25:31] in Massachusetts about doing something
like that. Although, if we chose to
[1:25:36] pursue it, we would have to have a legal
opinion on it. But I think it does lower
[1:25:41] the price of an affordable unit to a
really manageable level for somebody
[1:25:47] somewhere on the AMI spectrum or
continuum household of two. Now I would
[1:25:54] be would not be overly mortgage burdened
uh at $170,000 house. Maybe you might
[1:26:01] even be able to do better with reframe
housing, modular housing on there
[1:26:06] somehow or some other technique. I I
don't know. But uh that's where my
[1:26:11] starting point is. And I think I'm just
sort of taking the liberty
[1:26:16] and taking the liberty of advocating for
it now or jumping the dot maybe. I don't
[1:26:20] know. But that's where I'm coming from.
>> Who would we lease it to?
[1:26:25] » We're going to lease it to anybody.
It's it's they they just get the right
[1:26:30] to to have the house on it.
>> Yeah. So the homeowners would own the
[1:26:35] houses but the town would maintain
ownership of the land is my
[1:26:39] understanding there.
>> Now depending on what the economics of
[1:26:44] the whole thing turn out to be we could
say that yeah there will be a lease
[1:26:50] amount of some a lease of some amount.
What that amount might be could be zero
[1:26:56] or it could be some very small amount
that would help pay for preservation
[1:27:01] syncing fund. We know what those are
about. Or it could be something that
[1:27:05] would help fund BAP. So my question
about the land lease is if we went that
[1:27:12] route and we put you know a a septic and
you know a well on the property does
[1:27:20] that then mean that the town of Boxboro
is responsible for maintaining those?
[1:27:25] » That's a very good point. Maybe
>> yeah so there would have I feel like
[1:27:29] there would have to be some amount paid
>> to the lease to make sure that that m
[1:27:34] that we're able to continue funding the
maintenance. It probably would have to
[1:27:37] be something. Yeah,
>> but I think the thrust of it is to get
[1:27:41] the price of the house the housing down.
>> Yeah, I I think and I think I've also I
[1:27:47] think I've also heard about this. I
think that was one of the one of the
[1:27:51] groups in the housing leadership academy
out in Western Mass was doing something
[1:27:56] something similar as a as a you know
>> community housing trust. And we we have
[1:28:02] the affordable housing trust. I don't
know if that's somehow different than
[1:28:06] that, but I think I think the land lease
is is kind of part of what they were
[1:28:12] talking about. I don't know much about
it though.
[1:28:13] » This is Did I understand you say that
somebody's actually doing this?
[1:28:18] » I if I remember correctly, I think so. I
I'm getting a ton of information at this
[1:28:22] housing leadership academy and I'm only
absorbing a percentage of it. [laughter]
[1:28:27] » That would be very useful. you want to
track down who if somebody's doing it to
[1:28:31] see how
>> it's doable as a it's a community land
[1:28:35] trust a CLT and um housing trusts are
able to do that just exactly how
[1:28:42] Channing described
>> Yeah. Yeah. My my main question would be
[1:28:46] would the town be responsible for the
the septic and the well maintenance and
[1:28:52] if so you know what would that cost be
to the town and then
[1:28:57] » that could go into the price of the
house too actually the lease hold
[1:29:02] some way to look at it
>> so that's a good that's a good point
[1:29:06] question
>> yeah sure
[1:29:07] » I I kind of assume in this that the town
would kind of donate the land at cost
[1:29:14] or at no cost. So if that was the case
when they're building there is no and
[1:29:19] and the the homeowner is assuming the
mortgage he is paying the mortgage for
[1:29:24] the value of the property that gets
built.
[1:29:26] » The structure is only the
>> only the structure,
[1:29:29] » right? But then I guess again my my
problem is is I think you can go to town
[1:29:34] and say we're going to build 12 houses
on this set are great but we're not
[1:29:40] going to get any tax to support the
schools or anything out of that. I just
[1:29:45] think you're dead town me I don't see
how how that could ever pass the town
[1:29:49] need
>> to [clears throat] be honest
[1:29:52] » if it's all affordable units though. So
I it doesn't I guess the point I'm
[1:29:57] making is yeah I mean it's affordable or
not the town's going to I mean those
[1:30:02] people who move in those units are going
to have kids that are in schools. How
[1:30:06] are they not how is the town
how come they don't have to pay taxes to
[1:30:11] send their kids to school when when I
do.
[1:30:14] » Why would they not have to pay they'd
have to pay taxes on property tax?
[1:30:18] » They pay taxes on the structure.
>> They would that's right. They would pay
[1:30:20] the property.
>> So they're going to be paying some tax.
[1:30:23] » Yeah. They're going to pay property tax.
Right. They're going to own the land.
[1:30:25] They're going to pay property. The
answer the answer to that one is those
[1:30:29] kids are marginal. They're going to pay
it anyway. They write out on the margin.
[1:30:33] You know, you got fixed costs there.
These are just variables are making
[1:30:36] difference. Don't worry.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Right.
[1:30:40] » Okay. You you can apply that.
>> You can try it with that. Well, anyway,
[1:30:44] you're thinking outside the box here.
So, that's that's my story. I'm going to
[1:30:47] stick to it. The other part of it is
that at least you try to find we try to
[1:30:52] find out what the what the decision
criteria are and see what approach is
[1:30:58] going to work with them or won't work
with them and so forth. So this was an
[1:31:02] attempt to try to at least get on paper
what what for these various choices that
[1:31:08] were or pre preferences that were
selected you know what are the various
[1:31:14] elements that they have to satisfy in
order to fly and [clears throat] that's
[1:31:18] that's really what I was trying to do uh
whether I succeeded I guess up to the
[1:31:24] board's deliberation but if these
criteria don't work I'm sure there are
[1:31:28] others that would would be useful
instead stead. But my main selling point
[1:31:34] here is to get a reasonable number of
lowcost affordable houses on Stow Road
[1:31:41] that Stow Road lot and a ground lease
would be one way to at least get a good
[1:31:48] step on it, I think. And it doesn't mean
we couldn't charge them something. I
[1:31:51] think
>> it just would be unus as an assessor of
[1:31:57] one of the board of assessors
there. Yeah. So unless the town owns the
[1:32:02] land somehow, I mean, they're going to
just look at the land say this is the
[1:32:05] value. The taxes are based on the value
of the property land. If they own the
[1:32:09] land, they don't own the land, then
that's Yeah, that's true.
[1:32:12] » Well, you know, they don't get any tax
on the land. That's again, I think
[1:32:15] that'll just be a child since the
accounts,
[1:32:20] you know, the accounting department.
>> I I I will say I do like this. I mean,
[1:32:27] to me, it's it seems like to me that not
being on the planning board is that
[1:32:34] planning board needs to kind of come up
with a vision for what they want that
[1:32:39] property to look like. And I mean, I
think what Jan's describing is that if
[1:32:43] it's a property that has eight or 10 or
12 individual homes
[1:32:51] that some are starter homes, they're
they're all affordable. Some of them are
[1:32:57] have access are built with accessibility
for seniors. I think that's a that's a
[1:33:02] nice vision that seems that would work
work well for the town and I think you
[1:33:08] could you it would sell at the town.
>> Well, you know, there's a question too
[1:33:12] of availability
not as well as affordability. I mean the
[1:33:19] plain fact is that starter homes are not
very available in box.
[1:33:24] So even having a starter home that would
not be designed to be affordable, I
[1:33:32] think would be a benefit to Boxboro
because we don't have many of them. It's
[1:33:37] fairly impossible to find one.
>> Mhm.
[1:33:40] » They've got to be affordable now.
>> No. Uh I think some fraction of them
[1:33:45] have to be affordable.
there is I think a bet like kind of a
[1:33:50] social benefit to this to the property
having mixed income. Um because
[1:33:59] I like if you if it's all like 100% you
know low income or affordable um that
[1:34:11] like keeps you more socially isolated
when you have a more when you have like
[1:34:15] mixed income and you have people of
different income levels all interacting
[1:34:19] in you know in in a community. I think
you get the most benefit out of that.
[1:34:25] Well, you could you could have
affordable homes that would could cost
[1:34:29] $600,000, you know, if you want to twist
it, right?
[1:34:32] » But I'm I'm not going to be willing to
stand up in front of the town meeting
[1:34:36] and try to sell it.
>> Try to tell tell me a starter home for
[1:34:39] $600,000.
>> Yeah. Well, there's an affordable house
[1:34:40] here for $600,000. Folks, you all buy
it, right? Sure. We do. I think an argu
[1:34:46] argument could be made, but this is
something that the spectrum of how
[1:34:50] there's a a real weakness in the
spectrum of housing. It's available in
[1:34:55] Boxboro and we're trying to, you know,
fix that
[1:35:00] » and and by going
two per per acre something like that,
[1:35:06] that
>> pains the equation, right? Because we're
[1:35:08] all on acre minimum lots, too.
>> Yeah. Right. That's why I really like 40
[1:35:13] Y.
>> Yeah. The party is attractive to me
[1:35:16] because I mean that's what the survey
said and I think personally war I tell
[1:35:24] anecdotally
that is something that box badly needs
[1:35:30] is dual income starter homes whatever
you call them
[1:35:34] » the the I think I think and you know 40
y is new and I was I missed the part
[1:35:40] about the municipal war and so forth But
I really tried to pin the presenter down
[1:35:47] when we were up at evidence and I
thought I got the right answers. But
[1:35:51] » I think some careful reading of um
statute I just read
[1:35:58] » is that the minimum density for 40y
is four units per acre.
[1:36:04] » Yeah.
>> Which sounds sounds pretty feasible for
[1:36:08] that property honestly.
>> So we've got eight acres. So you've got
[1:36:11] 8 * 32
>> and you're going to have 8 * 32 * 2 kids
[1:36:18] in your school.
>> So
[1:36:21] » you're being careful with those numbers
because there's constraints
[1:36:25] » on
>> radius and wellhead and ledge and all
[1:36:29] that. So we can't fit
>> eight times four.
[1:36:33] » Yeah. Yeah. But I don't think
>> so. Anyway, we could sit, you know,
[1:36:40] » I'm I'm saying for that for that for the
acreage that we have, there's about you
[1:36:45] could at that rate about use about 3
acres of it for housing and then the
[1:36:52] rest of it for other amenities.
>> I bet you that you won't find it.
[1:36:59] » That will work.
>> But 8 acres now that are developable for
[1:37:04] housing. I think it's eight.
>> I think it that's what we figured. We
[1:37:08] haven't done an analysis. There might be
ledge and everything else.
[1:37:10] » Well, 20 Yeah, 20 that would be 24 units
and that's way beyond the capacity of
[1:37:15] the land.
>> Right. What we could do is to say we can
[1:37:18] only build on this portion of the land.
Okay. For geographical reasons
[1:37:23] » and donate the rest of it to the town
for municipal purposes,
[1:37:26] » right? Yeah. which makes sense to me
because we can't build
[1:37:30] » and and I'm saying like if if if you use
like a co-ousing model and you had a a
[1:37:35] cert
center that had multiple purposes, you
[1:37:40] could collaborate with the town on that.
The town could use it for different
[1:37:43] things. like most of the co-housing
communities in the area also like host
[1:37:49] other groups and events and stuff in
their common house because it's it's a
[1:37:55] great resource
>> and also we need some of the other quite
[1:37:59] quite a bit of the other land
>> for wells and septic system too. It's
[1:38:05] not I mean we can't I don't know quite
how much that is probably around five or
[1:38:09] six acres
>> that we need for that.
[1:38:12] » Yeah. So, uh, I mean, we with the
housing, we might have room for a
[1:38:18] community center, we might not, but I
think we could comfortably use all the
[1:38:22] land that we have.
>> Mhm.
[1:38:25] » Well, I think I think the town would the
town, you know, the economic committee,
[1:38:30] the conservation committee, etc., etc.,
all have some ideas as to how that
[1:38:36] extra, so to speak, land could be used.
What trails or whatever.
[1:38:40] » Yeah. Well,
of things like a town center and stuff.
[1:38:46] » So if you use three acres of it for 40 Y
housing, you have the rest of the
[1:38:51] acreage per
whatever else.
[1:38:54] » Well, you're going to use plus
>> whatever it takes for septic as well.
[1:38:59] That's
>> Oh, yeah, that's it.
[1:39:01] » So that's going to be community center.
got to have some septic system in
[1:39:06] » the requirements for a community center
for that are not as stressful as those
[1:39:12] for uh dwelling.
>> Mhm.
[1:39:14] » So probably that's not going to add too
much load.
[1:39:17] » Yeah.
>> I mean um
[1:39:20] but
a lot of things to think about,
[1:39:25] » you know, maybe maybe what you're saying
is right. I I don't know. I I don't
[1:39:30] think we need to have a commercial
development in order to get get on there
[1:39:33] what we want to have done, but I may be
wrong. I don't we'd have to work through
[1:39:38] some pricing and some alternatives and
say, well, what is the market really
[1:39:42] able to sustain?
And you know, you're going to come in
[1:39:46] and someone's going to say, well, it's
going to be affordable and you know, for
[1:39:50] a four family or for a six person
household,
[1:39:54] » you know, your your annual income could
be, I don't know, call it $100,000.
[1:39:59] And if [clears throat] you can afford
that amount of money, you can afford a
[1:40:02] $500 to $400,000 home. And you know, you
got to convince everybody that's what we
[1:40:07] want to do. And you know, and they're
going to want to say, "Sure, I'm glad
[1:40:11] they have it."
>> I can tell you that I have kids and
[1:40:16] $500,000 hole over $600,000. It's a
bargain right now.
[1:40:20] » You know, you got the money.
>> It is.
[1:40:23] » Yeah. Apparently I that still like makes
my eyes bug out thinking about those
[1:40:29] numbers because I'm just like
>> well I think Massachusetts Massachusetts
[1:40:36] says gee we got to we got to have
affordable housing for to keep technical
[1:40:40] people here but I've never met a company
yet that wouldn't pay up for the
[1:40:43] technical people that they wanted. So I
don't
[1:40:46] » well if you work in tech sure it's fine.
[1:40:51] » People throw around the term affordable
but there's a lack of precision about
[1:40:56] what they mean.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Cuz cuz affordable
[1:41:01] here by and large when we say what our
affordable units are in Boxboro most of
[1:41:06] it's 40B like a large chunk of it 40B.
But if you're offering a home that would
[1:41:12] market at 800,000 and selling it for
600,000,
[1:41:18] could you call that affordable?
>> I don't know.
[1:41:21] » Well, it seems reasonable.
>> I mean, if that is that 80% AMI,
[1:41:28] » you know,
>> 110% of AMI for a six person household,
[1:41:32] eight person household.
>> What? But this 80% AMI is not in any of
[1:41:37] the
it's not we people don't get that
[1:41:41] numeric you talk about it.
>> So that's unclear
[1:41:47] affordable means less than the market
price to most people.
[1:41:51] » Yeah.
[1:41:54] » Well there you have it.
[1:41:58] Well, some still out there.
[1:42:04] » You're still there?
[1:42:08] » I am.
[1:42:12] » I my my take on it is we should look
into 40 Y. I I think 40 to me 40 Y is a
[1:42:20] good fit. Now maybe there are some
problems with it that you know I haven't
[1:42:24] caught or we don't know about but I
think digging a bit deep into 40 Y
[1:42:31] uh to see what really is possible or
whether it is you know the fit it seems
[1:42:37] to be would make sense for us that's
what I my opinion is
[1:42:43] » I agree
>> now we just have to analyze it and see
[1:42:48] » I say I like option Would
>> would the board like me would it would
[1:42:54] the board like me to set up a meeting
sometime over the next few weeks to
[1:42:59] discuss this with whoever the 40y
coordinator at EOHLC is
[1:43:05] » and I can get a hold of them and and
schedule some time.
[1:43:08] » Yeah, I mean it looks good to me but
maybe when we like Chan says maybe when
[1:43:12] we look into it more detail we find you
know it's not that good. And I'll bet
[1:43:17] that that person might be able to
actually look at what we have and be
[1:43:20] able to tell us if it's very feasible or
not. You know,
[1:43:29] cuz what everybody complains about and
what the data shows, matter of fact, is
[1:43:34] that we need starter homes in Boxboro.
And what's wrong with that? I mean,
[1:43:39] those are homes for families, for young
people, and everything else for all a
[1:43:44] bunch of old aers. I mean, you know, it
would be good for box play in my
[1:43:48] opinion.
>> I mean, I think it would be great to
[1:43:50] have it half and h like half and half
like geared towards starter homes for
[1:43:55] young families and the other half of it
more towards seniors who are sizing
[1:43:59] down, right? Like that seems to be kind
of the needs of the town because I'm
[1:44:04] hear I I hear both sides.
>> Yeah.
[1:44:06] » Yeah. How do how do we answer the
question? I guess that's the question.
[1:44:12] Have I talk to somebody and sort through
a little bit?
[1:44:16] » I you know
Yeah, that's what I think. I think we
[1:44:21] ought to I think you ought to do that
myself. I think let's look into 40 wide.
[1:44:26] » Mhm. you you can be part of the group
that looks into 40 wide to see if
[1:44:30] there's
>> and then if we find that there's some
[1:44:34] aspect of it that doesn't really quite
work for our town specifically maybe
[1:44:38] then we could go with option one and do
kind of a modified 40y
[1:44:43] of some sort
we just so long as the process keeps
[1:44:49] moving along so that we can either
discard what we really just can't handle
[1:44:54] because it's either too complicated or
too lengthy or whatever as long as we
[1:45:00] can and keep focusing on what we can do.
>> Another possibility and one advantage of
[1:45:06] talking to a person about it is as Ian
points out 40 is kind of new and in the
[1:45:14] process of formation. I mean we might
actually be able to influence
[1:45:19] » Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. The the way the
program is structured by telling them
[1:45:23] our situation and what
>> I think it's a good opportunity.
[1:45:26] » Yeah. So we could take advantage of the
fact that things are
[1:45:31] » quite not quite worked out in 40 land
>> have some plasticity.
[1:45:38] » So do we do we all
>> Well, it's it's got to you guys. Um
[1:45:43] » I'm telling you what I think. What is it
what does everybody else think?
[1:45:48] Well, I'm I'm glad to take another look
at what at at the U DMR whatever it is
[1:45:54] 69
uh highlight what I think of the
[1:45:58] problems
and then if someone thinks that they can
[1:46:01] solve the problems that's
an action item [clears throat] for them
[1:46:06] I guess because
I don't I don't I really don't want to
[1:46:10] fool around with 4. It's new. You know,
I don't want to be the one that gets
[1:46:15] tangled in the spaghetti trying to sort
through it and the density bothers me.
[1:46:21] Um, but you know, just was just my I
wonder if the the four houses breakers
[1:46:26] includes septic. Well,
well, there is a wastewater issue thing,
[1:46:32] although it isn't the municipal thing,
>> but I but I, you know, I'm just one
[1:46:37] voice in this.
Um, Jim, you mentioned that you liked
[1:46:41] option five. I could see that since
since uh option five isn't actually an
[1:46:48] overlay that it could conceivably be
combined with 4. I don't see why I don't
[1:46:52] really see why not.
>> I mean, I I just think that I guess for
[1:46:56] me, my view, and I'm a longtime
resident, so I'm not I'm not looking for
[1:47:00] affordable housing, but it seems like to
me, you've got a nice parcel,
[1:47:06] you have space. Why are you trying to
jam everything together? Like you could
[1:47:12] take the houses, maybe spread them out a
little bit, maybe do two per acre or
[1:47:16] something like that, and then yeah,
you've got to do the well and stuff. It
[1:47:19] just seems like to me you're trying to
jam it all on an acre. Jam it all on an
[1:47:23] acre and then yeah, it just doesn't seem
it doesn't seem consistent with the town
[1:47:28] rural character that we like to claim.
And I know that there's a lot of
[1:47:33] developments that are much tighter than
that, you know, but you know, we're
[1:47:38] we're limited in how many units we can
put up by well septic. So why are we
[1:47:43] trying to like jam them all on three
acres of it or two acres of it, right?
[1:47:49] That's that's kind of my feeling.
>> And if that's the case, then you could
[1:47:53] do what do they call it? I'll make sure
I call it the right option five, which
[1:47:58] was the friendly chapter B.
>> Yes.
[1:48:01] Well, that's what the uh committee ages
ago decided on. That's what that's what
[1:48:06] we decided. But I really think I like
Ian's idea of tracking down somebody who
[1:48:13] could talk to us about wide and we could
just have a informal discussion with
[1:48:18] them about what we are thinking and find
out what they're thinking.
[1:48:24] » So shall we go forward with that?
>> I think so. And that doesn't exclude the
[1:48:28] possibility of still doing um you know
the friendly 40b or doing it in coll in
[1:48:34] combination with it.
>> No indeed it might actually do in the
[1:48:37] whole 40 wide thing. If we find
something we don't like that's untenable
[1:48:42] then we'll stop talking about it.
>> Mhm.
[1:48:45] » Yeah.
>> I guess that's your action item being
[1:48:51] » I'm on it. I'll reach out to him
tomorrow. I I'm certain that the 40y
[1:48:56] page does have a contact at the bottom.
So, I'll start that ASAP
[1:49:01] because we know how long it can take to
hear back from them.
[1:49:06] » Britney has better note from the last um
ARHC
[1:49:11] meeting and has the and has the contact
jotted down for
[1:49:16] » Oh, perfect. I didn't know that they
they did something at the
[1:49:19] » Yeah, they did they did a presentation.
>> Oh, awesome. That's where that's where I
[1:49:23] first learned about it. And then in the
housing leadership academy thing um one
[1:49:27] of the um locations out in oh for it's a
town that begins with R out in um
[1:49:34] Northshore. Um but they were working on
trying to apply that in their town.
[1:49:39] » Nice.
[1:49:43] » Okay. Great. Thank you. Is that all J?
Yeah. Okay. Uh the final item is the is
[1:49:51] the letter to sent to the tenants
out of here or what is the status on
[1:49:57] that? I know we looked at the letter
last week. Uh
[1:50:00] » yeah, I don't think I don't think we
ended up sending it out. I might have
[1:50:05] dropped the ball on that. Um unless
Wendy did was I supposed to have sent
[1:50:10] that to you
and then maybe I didn't.
[1:50:15] » I think so. Ian and I briefly touched
base on it like a week or two ago,
[1:50:23] but I think we were supposed to get some
>> Yeah, I had finished it. Um I had
[1:50:29] finished editing it, but I'm not sure if
I
[1:50:35] I'm not sure where its final draft is.
Um I'll put that on my agenda. uh uh
[1:50:43] find or at least
find what I can for tomorrow morning.
[1:50:49] » Well, my memory is we were pretty happy
with the
[1:50:53] » we're talking about the letter that we
had at the um at Viper Day at the table,
[1:50:59] right? Yeah.
>> So, uh Okay. So, you two are going to
[1:51:04] work on getting it out of here.
>> Yeah. And this also this also has on it
[1:51:09] that we invited we're inviting people to
the housing board meeting on the fourth
[1:51:13] Tuesday of each month and specifically
the one um on the 25th.
[1:51:24] » Okay. That's sort of a then I that's if
I got it straight that's kind of a dual
[1:51:29] action item between Wendy and you Wendy
and Ian.
[1:51:33] » Yeah I believe so.
Yep.
[1:51:38] » Okay. Well, let's see if we can get this
out of here. Um, let's see. Huh.
[1:51:45] It would be actually good to get more
people in at the uh August meeting.
[1:51:51] Um,
does the does the board feel that we can
[1:51:56] just,
you know, make editorial changes and get
[1:52:01] it out of here without further approval
by the board?
[1:52:05] I think so.
I'm going to go ahead and send this as a
[1:52:10] link to Ian
>> if that's okay. I think that's what we
[1:52:13] should do. Otherwise, we won't get it
out in a timely way for the
[1:52:22] » So, unless I enter your objections,
we'll we'll figure out how to get it out
[1:52:27] of here, make the corrections, and then
send it out.
[1:52:31] » Yeah, I think that's fine.
>> Sounds good.
[1:52:34] Yeah.
>> Well, I think that's all we have.
[1:52:42] Certainly been an interesting meeting.
Um, we learned a lot.
[1:52:48] As always, facts produce more questions
than answers, but that's the way it is.
[1:52:57] Excuse me. I'm sorry. Excuse me. When's
the next meeting?
[1:53:00] » August 25th.
So, I do just want to confirm that we
[1:53:04] are not planning to have a second
meeting in the month of August, but
[1:53:08] instead we're just opting for the one
housing production forum to finish off
[1:53:13] the summer.
>> Wait, is that on August 25th? So, that's
[1:53:18] » August 25th.
>> There's going to be a house, what is it?
[1:53:21] A housing
>> housing production forum
[1:53:24] » production. Al, I'll reach out to you in
Channing over the next week. We can set
[1:53:29] up a time to meet. Um, in the meantime,
I'll get some promotion promotional
[1:53:33] materials in the hands of those um who
need it.
[1:53:39] » Okay. So, do I keep that on the calendar
and is there going to be an agenda cuz
[1:53:43] there's
>> there will be Yes. Yeah. For the time
[1:53:48] being, just assume it's a regular
meeting. Um,
[1:53:51] » that's a regular time, right? The
fourth.
[1:53:53] » Yeah. Are you talking about the the town
calendar?
[1:53:56] » Yeah, the town calendar. If you have it
up there, it wouldn't wouldn't hurt just
[1:54:00] to say box uh box housing board
meeting/housing production form.
[1:54:06] » Okay, I can just change the name. It's
probably already up there because I set
[1:54:09] it for every fourth Tuesday.
>> Perfect.
[1:54:12] » So say housing
production form.
[1:54:18] » Yep.
[1:54:22] And if if I think if items accumulate
that we need to deal with in a timely
[1:54:27] fashion,
uh we might have a meeting there in
[1:54:30] August, but let's not plan it now. Let's
see how many items accumulate and only
[1:54:35] meet.
[1:54:39] » So with that being said, do I hear a
motion to adjourn?
[1:54:44] » So move.
>> Second.
[1:54:47] » All right.
Uh, Channing in favor. I
[1:54:51] » I
>> I
[1:54:53] uh Joel Joe
>> I
[1:54:56] » Okay, there.