Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Strategy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge mix of small affordable projects and site-based negotiations rather than only large luxury 40B deals
Summary
Forum participants debated whether Manchester should prioritize small "missing middle" infill, use zoning perks or friendly 40B/LIP agreements to secure deeper affordability on large sites such as the Gordon College ("Jefferson") proposal, and pursue regional assistance to overcome administrative barriers to qualifying small units for the SHI.
Manchester-by-the-Sea ' During a public forum on the Housing Production Plan update, residents and housing advocates debated competing approaches to increasing affordable housing in town: small-scale "missing middle" infill and deed restrictions, or engaging with large-site developers through zoning concessions or friendly 40B (Local Initiative Program/40D) agreements.
Multiple participants urged the plan to prioritize feasible, implementable steps rather than aspirational goals. One recurring point: current state rules and administrative requirements make it difficult for owners of a handful of units to place them on the Subsidized Housing Inventory because of marketing, monitoring and documentation costs. Participants noted the Affordable Housing Trust holds funds (participants mentioned roughly $1.7 million) but observed that the cost and paperwork of qualifying very small projects has deterred owners from applying.
The forum also focused on a large property repeatedly referenced as a potential development site (participants referred to a Gordon College sale / "Jefferson" project). Attendees discussed strategies to make a large developer proposal yield more affordable units: the town could offer density or zoning concessions in exchange for a package of units across multiple income tiers, or the town could lower land cost via buy-downs or subsidies to enable a developer or mission-driven nonprofit to produce deeper affordability.
Karen and other participants described the Local Initiative Program (friendly 40B) and layered state financing as routes to produce developments with multiple income tiers (for example, some projects use state financing to make 100 percent of units affordable across income bands). Forum participants recommended the plan identify potential town sites, consider regional cooperative models ("circuit rider" staff to help multiple towns with marketing and SHI qualification), and document specific incentives the town would be willing to offer developers to secure mixed-income outcomes.
The meeting closed with a direction to complete the plan's draft strategies and return for another public meeting; the consultant will then present the plan for Planning Board and Select Board review before state submission.
Provenance: topic conversation spans SEG 1198 to SEG 1976 in the transcript.
