Committee weighs whether to engage on Surfside Crossing appeal and affordable housing

Members of the Advisory Committee discussed Surfside Crossing, a contested affordable-housing project, and whether the committee should weigh in on the town's apparent appeal of a state permit.

Peter Halley described the history and legal context, saying state affordable-housing rules under "40B" allow developers to bypass local zoning when a town lacks a specified share of affordable housing (members cited 10 percent as the statutory threshold). He reported that the state had re-approved the project after litigation and that the town had indicated it planned to appeal the state's decision to permit Surfside Crossing.

Discussion focused on whether Surfside Crossing is a matter of concern to non-voting taxpayers. Some members argued the project could benefit non-voting taxpayers by increasing local workers' housing ("people who can mow our lawns and who can clean our houses and ... be waiters or kitchen help"), while others questioned whether the committee should intervene in a litigation-driven matter the town government was already pursuing.

Members noted the project's long history, claims about road, density and environmental impacts raised by neighbors and the town in prior rounds of debate, and that two entities (neighbors and the town) had indicated legal challenges. The committee concluded it would monitor the appeal and bring the matter up again if new information suggested a direct interest for non-voting taxpayers.

The committee did not take any formal vote or issue a statement at the meeting.