Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Inventory topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dennis Affordable Housing Trust begins audit of older 4.9 affordable units, prioritizes post‑2008 rental projects
Summary
The trust reported a townwide review of units approved under section 4.9, identifying roughly 140 units for investigation and asking Barrett Planning Group to prioritize more recent rental projects with regulatory agreements; staff plan a slideshow for the planning board and will examine the 'ready renter' list.
The Dennis Affordable Housing Trust on April 28 said it has begun a multi-year review of properties approved under section 4.9 of the town bylaws to verify whether deed restrictions and regulatory agreements still preserve affordable units.
Housing coordinator Maggie told the trust the project, done in partnership with Barrett Planning Group, focuses first on more recent rental projects that are likelier to meet current state Office of Housing and Livable Communities standards. “I think in total, there are about a 140 units identified that that were that used section 4.9,” Maggie said, summarizing the inventory compiled to date.
Why it matters: some older approvals lack the regulatory agreements, affirmative marketing plans, or state-level registration that protect affordable units. The trust wants to know which properties can realistically be returned to the town’s affordable‑unit list and which are unlikely to meet today’s standards.
Maggie said the team has been assembling special permits, regulatory agreements and other back‑up documents and will prepare a slideshow—photographs, parcel maps and status notes—to present to the planning board and, if needed, the select board. The goal is to identify current owners, confirm which units remain under deed restrictions and recommend follow‑up steps for preservation or remediation.
Board members pressed Barrett Planning Group to use its contracted hours efficiently and to look at the town’s “ready renter” list to identify operational bottlenecks that delay placing households into vacant affordable units. One member said the shared regional services contract has a 30‑hour allocation and asked how many hours remain; Maggie said the consultants had used only a small portion of their time but the transcript indicates the precise remaining hours were unclear.
The trust also discussed forming a short‑term subcommittee to draft general guidelines and an application template so the body is prepared if Community Preservation Act/CPC funding becomes available. Members volunteered to review examples from neighboring towns and to serve on a website/content subcommittee to help publicize inventory findings when the site launches.
The trust did not take formal action on individual properties at the meeting; Maggie said more outreach and research are needed before the trust can recommend specific preservation steps.
