MINUTES OF THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING
OCTOBER 10, 2012
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Marc Frieden, Chris Olson, Karen Paré, Vincent Vignaly
MEMBERS ABSENT: Patrick McKeon
OTHERS PRESENT: Patricia Halpin, Michael Kittredge, Anita Sullivan, Bob Barrell
All documents referenced in these Minutes are stored and available for public inspection in the Planning Board office, 127 Hartwell Street
HOUSING PRODUCTION PLAN: DISCUSSION OF DRAFT
Mr. Vignaly prepared and presented to the meeting a draft “Housing Production Plan” (“the Plan”). Members of other boards and departments in town were invited to the meeting for their input and ideas. Mr. Vignaly outlined the Plan and led the discussion with a “Summary” handout (the “Summary”). Ms. Halpin noted the small number of municipalities whose Plans have been certified by the state (seven). The state seems to look for reasons to deny the Plan submittals. Ms. Paré stated that the priority is for the Plan to be accepted by the state and then to become a “certified community”. The town must meet the goals of the Plan and produce subsidized housing for one year in order to be certified. Our goal in the Plan is to produce 10% subsidized
housing by increments of ½% per year.
Ms. Paré noted that the state will fight you if you say you have reached the 1-1/2% level of available land providing subsidized housing. Ms. Halpin queried whether the Open Space Implementation Committee could launch a campaign to reach out to townspeople in order to seek conservation restrictions on their land to reach the 1-1/2% goal. The amount of land available for development is minimal, Ms. Paré noted, and maps are a good resource to illustrate this point. On the first page of the Summary, she stated that the Purpose of the Plan should not (under item 3) mention preventing appeals to decisions of the ZBA. The state does not want to encourage this. A Priority of the Plan should then also not be to work towards meeting the “statutory minimum of 1.5% of available land”. A housing
priority should not be the town’s desire to circumvent unfriendly 40B developments. Mr. Vignaly noted that the 1.5% figure is part of state law. This document does not say
Minutes of the Planning Board Meeting 2.
October 10, 2012
we won’t provide housing, but that we want autonomy for our ZBA. Ms.Paré stated that constraints should be listed in the section under “limitations of development” (page 23 of the Plan). It should be noted that the town does not have a large tax base and there is limited potential for commercial development. Any development that does take place should be commercial in nature. Ms. Halpin noted that small parcels throughout the town have the potential for LIP projects, but that is a costly way for the town to achieve its subsidized housing goals.
Mr. Vignaly noted that there has not been a steady growth in town (as shown on the chart on page 3 of the Summary). The population has only increased 2.5% in 40 years. The information contained in the chart could be displayed most clearly in the form of a graph, Ms. Paré noted. Mr. Kittredge stated that the construction of Route 290 caused an influx of citizens from Worcester into West Boylston. Table 15 on page 2 of the Summary shows that, if prison and health facilities are excluded, then there has been little population change over the years. On page 9 of the Plan, mention should be made of the over-55 population, whose increase has been caused by the addition of many over-55 age restricted housing units. On page 3 of the Summary, Table 4 shows that Precinct 2 has about 1/3 the number of persons
per square mile as Precinct 1. This data could be more clearly depicted in a map. There is a question of how much of the area in Precinct 2 is owned by the DCR and how much is unbuildable. A narrative concerning the density of the population would also be helpful here.
There are no 2010 census numbers available for the chart on “Disability Population” on page 4 of the Summary. Ms. Sullivan discussed and suggested that all future housing for the elderly should be adaptive. Ten percent of the family housing should be designed as accessible. Table 8 on the same page shows that West Boylston has the lowest median household income in the region, outside of Worcester. Ms. Paré noted that the town has many “affordable” homes, but they are not considered “subsidized” by the state, so the town is not being given credit for them. It would be good to show the number of units valued below the state’s median value. On page 6 of the Summary, the chart showing the “Total Number of Family Units Below Poverty Level” as 21.4% was
created based upon information from the American Community Survey. Ms. Paré noted that this figure is not” fixed” and it would be better to state in the text that it is “about 20%”.
Table 20 in the Summary showing “Subsidized Housing Inventory” was created from town data contained in a report dated February 8, 2012. Mr. Gaumond questions the accuracy of the figure shown in the chart on Page 8 of the Summary for the “Land Area” for Afra Terrace. Ms. Paré will check on this and try to determine the number of affordable units at Afra Terrace.
The section on “Proposed Housing Needs” in the Summary, on page 9, should emphasize that housing for the population over age 60 should all be adaptive. In the future, there will be a greater demand for 1- and 2-bedroom units (not 3-bedroom as stated at the end of paragraph 2). In the discussion of housing “character” in paragraph 6, Ms. Paré noted that there is a need for more data. Ms. Sullivan stated that the greatest demand is for two-
Minutes of the Planning Board Meeting 3.
October 10, 2012
bedroom units at Orchard Knolls, as opposed to 3- or 4- bedroom units. On page 10 of the Summary, the third item listed under “Production Plan Goals” should be deleted . No mention should be made of “working toward the statutory minimum of 1.5% of available land providing subsidized housing”. Table 23, showing “Subsidized Housing Goals” indicates “Total Housing units” as 2,746, a figure taken from the US Census. Ms. Paré stated that the DHCD shows a figure of 2,729. The “Long Term Subsidized Housing Targets” shown in Table 24 on page 10 of the Summary, are “flexible targets”, Mr. Vignaly stated. Ms. Sullivan emphasized that it has been her experience that seniors do not want to be in housing with close proximity to families.
Mr. Vignaly will re-work the data in Table 25 into tables showing the number of bedrooms. Mr. Barrell stated that although there are more seniors eligible for publicly-owned subsidized housing, the need is greater for families. The name for the “Mixter Building” property should be changed to the “120 Prescott Street property” at the request of Mr. Gaumond. Ms. Sullivan questioned the data contained in Table 26 for potential subsidized housing for 87 Maple Street. Mr. Vignaly stated that the figure of 45 units was calculated on a quick layout of the land, based on what has already been constructed. Under “Long Term” potential, the Shrewsbury Street site will be removed because a solar field will be constructed there. There is the potential to work with the town of Boylston to construct some housing on county property on Tivnan Drive, Mr. Vignaly stated.
Table 27, “West Boylston HPP” shows “Strategies by Year”. These strategies should commence in the year 2014, not 2013. The completion of the units at Angell Brook is up in the air and the completion of remaining SHI units at Afra Terrace should be “4”, not “6”. The Reservoir Motor Court property is now in court and references should be removed. The second year (2015) lists the property at the corner of Evans and Prospect Street. Ms. Paré queried whether there is the possibility for the town to do a LIP project there in partnership with Habitat for Humanity. Looking at this chart, the question remains, “how does the town get 14 SHI units in a year?” The state could accept the HPP, but not “certify” it if the town doesn’t reach its
goal. The “Housing Plan Action Items” on page 13 of the Summary list the ways in which the town can build its SHI capacity.
In the Plan, on page 19, the number for the interest rate paid by the average mortgage applicant should be changed to 4%, instead of 6%. Ms. Sullivan stated that there are five, not three, local under-60 disabled residents on the waiting list for the 36 first floor apartments. The waiting list for the first-floor apartments is always changing, but always has a large number of the general elderly population waiting. The “asset limit” went away as a qualification for acceptance but there is a maximum income of $45,000. There may be a “moderate” income tier of people in the population who are seeking to get out of their houses. Ms. Sullivan also pointed out that there are many people claiming to have disabilities who do not need adaptive housing. Mr. Vignaly noted that there has long been a
need for rental units in town. Ms. Halpin stated that there is greater support in town for senior housing than there is for general subsidized housing. Seniors in town need affordable places into which they can downsize. Developing these types of units, Ms. Paré stated, would attract people from the surrounding area. A “mixed age” population is
Minutes of the Planning Board Meeting 4.
October 10, 2012
needed or the “average” age of the population in town will increase even further. Ms. Halpin stated that hostility towards the concept of “affordable housing” in town needs to be
changed. In conclusion, Mr. Vignaly stated that all age-restricted units should be adaptive and 10% of the other subsidized units should be adaptive. Mr. Barrell stated that the 40B developer will tell the town what he/she wants to build, and then the town needs to have a discussion with him/her about it. Ms. Paré asked Ms. Sullivan to have a continuing discussion with the members of the Housing Authority about how they wish to see the land in the back of 87 Maple Street developed. Ms. Sullivan stated that there have been discussions of possible projects, such as senior housing or a senior center. Mr. Vignaly suggested that the project could be fashioned such that the elderly housing could be located in the back with the families in the front, closer to Maple Street. He asked Ms. Sullivan to compose a
narrative for inclusion in the HPP, describing what the Housing Authority is thinking. Mr. Vignaly stated that he will make changes to the Plan based upon comments made tonight and those submitted by Mr. Gaumond. The Board of Selectmen will have to approve the Plan after the Planning Board has voted to approve.
HPP: Discusssion of CMRPC Review of Draft
Mr. Vignaly stated that he thought it would be a good idea to have CMRPC review the amended draft Plan especially to ensure that it complies with state law. Mr. Frieden will inform Mr. Gaumond that Mr. Vignaly will submit the Plan to CMRPC after the changes have been made.
REVIEW OF WARRANT FOR OCTOBER 15, 2012 TOWN MEETING
The members of the Planning Board reviewed the Town Warrant. The Article proposing that $11,000 be appropriated from the Community Preservation Fund for a Community Housing Specialist was of special interest.
OLD BUSINESS
242 Woodland Street: The project at 242 Woodland Street received a Temporary Occupancy Permit on June 20th for 90 days. In conjunction with the issues connected to the approval of 242 Woodland Street, Ms. Paré discussed zoning enforcement with the Town Administrator. He suggested that a small group meet with him and the Building Inspector. For the next meeting of the Planning Board, members will come prepared to discuss zoning enforcement issues in town.
Sign Bylaw: Discussion of the proposed changes to the Sign Bylaw was postponed to the next meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
Discussion of Town Goals: Mr. Gaumond requested that members of boards in town discuss proposed town goals. Mr. Vignaly suggested that one goal be to seek better
Minutes of the Planning Board Meeting 5.
October 10, 2012
coordination and communication between town boards. Another would be to seek better zoning bylaw enforcement. Mr. Frieden will transmit these goals to Mr. Gaumond.
REPORTS FROM OTHER BOARDS
Town-wide Planning Committee: Ms. Paré brought the Housing Production Plan to the meeting for purposes of discussion among its members.
Open Space Implementation Committee: Mr. Vignaly stated that the committee met and set five goals for the coming year. Another goal will be considered at the next meeting following Ms. Halpin’s suggestion for outreach to townspeople to consider putting conservation restrictions on their land.
Affordable Housing Trust: There was a discussion of the proposed Article for Town Meeting seeking $11,000 from the Community Preservation Fund to engage the services of a Community Housing Specialist.
Mr. Vignaly stated that he wishes to continue as a member of the Transportation Committee and Mr. Olson will replace him as a member of the Earth Removal Board.
PAYMENT OF INVOICES/REVIEW OF DRAFT MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2012
An invoice for payment to VHB for engineering review services was approved for payment. Upon motion of Mr. Vignaly and second of Mr. Olson, it was unanimously voted to approve as written the Minutes of the September 26, 2012 Meeting of the Planning Board.
Upon motion of Mr. Olson and second of Mr. Vignaly, at 10:15, it was unanimously voted to adjourn.
Date Accepted:______________ By:_______________________________
Patrick McKeon, Clerk
Submitted By:_______________________
Susan Abramson
| 
