Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Inclusionary Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues inclusionary-housing debate to March 3 after lengthy discussion and differing views
Summary
After an extended discussion about a proposed inclusionary zoning section (15% affordable units for projects of 10+ units, split targets at 60% and 80% AMI), the commission voted unanimously to postpone further action and resume the matter at its March 3 meeting to allow additional information and coordination with other town efforts.
Discussion of a proposed inclusionary-housing text amendment dominated late portions of the Feb. 3 meeting but produced no final vote on the substance. The draft would have required 15% of units in projects of 10 or more be affordable (half at 60% AMI and half at 80% AMI), with no buyout option and deed restrictions and an affordability-monitoring plan. Staff also presented alternatives, including lower percentages, only applying the requirement to multifamily projects and other permutations.
Commissioners and guests raised a range of objections and concerns: several said 15% is too high without strong incentives and noted financing and market constraints that make high on-site affordable-unit percentages difficult for developers. Others stressed the social importance of increasing below-market housing supply and urged incremental steps. Tucker noted state- and regional-level work on incentive programs and asked the commission to coordinate with those efforts. Several commissioners urged more study, more input from the board of selectmen and housing advisory bodies, and the development of incentives before adopting a high percentage requirement.
After discussion, the commission voted unanimously to continue the inclusionary zoning discussion to the commission’s March 3 regular meeting and to request additional information, including any forthcoming recommendations from the town’s affordable-housing advisory group and potential incentive options. Commissioners emphasized that they did not expect to lock in a permanent decision that night and that the item will return to the agenda for further deliberation.
