Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Muc Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mattiquis Utilization Committee: education option held pending school building authority timeline; housing, recreation and open space remain under study
Summary
Planning Board received updates on the Mattiquis Utilization Committee (MUC). The School Building Authority’s timeline means any school feasibility work may not start until 2026; the MUC is continuing to evaluate housing, recreation, municipal services and open‑space options for the 70‑acre site.
Planning Board members reported progress and constraints on the Mattiquis Utilization Committee (MUC), including the school district’s timeline and committee votes on preferred uses.
Kathy and board volunteers said the school superintendent has indicated the district will not begin a feasibility study until January 2026 and has asked the MUC to block off 6–8 acres for a possible future school site. That timing means the MUC must consider educational use as one option but cannot complete formal school feasibility work until the School Building Authority’s schedule advances.
Nut graf: The MUC is developing a short list of preferred uses that could include mixed housing types, senior and veterans housing, recreation (including keeping gym/auditorium space), adaptive reuse and open space; the town is coordinating across multiple committees to preserve open space while studying active reuse options for the site.
The board heard that the housing subgroup favored mixed housing types and smaller single‑family units with ADUs; participants discussed partnerships with Habitat for Humanity, the housing authority and the Affordable Housing Trust. Recreation committee members noted the gym and auditorium are important town assets and raised the possibility of dormitory or short‑term lodging uses tied to tournaments or regional events; the open space committee emphasized preserving habitat and sensitive areas.
The MUC has several subcommittees meeting on staggered schedules; the Recreation Committee planned a second meeting and the Community Housing Committee was scheduled to meet March 17. Kathy said the housing subgroup used a ranked scoring matrix and at least initially found mixed housing types to be the highest‑scoring option.
Ending: The Planning Board will continue to track MUC subcommittee results; staff and volunteers will refine recommended uses and report back at future meetings so decisions about site design and any potential town meeting articles can be prepared.
