Wakefield housing trust reviews fee‑in‑lieu bylaw draft, eyes town meeting for vote

The Wakefield Housing Trust on a meeting that began at 5:01 p.m. reviewed a preliminary draft of a fee‑in‑lieu provision tied to the town’s inclusionary‑zoning requirement and discussed next steps for placing the bylaw on the town meeting warrant.

The draft (presented by Marissa) keeps an 18% affordable‑unit requirement for developments but revisits how fractional units are handled. Councilor Doug Butler suggested removing the parenthetical instruction to round to the nearest whole unit; under the suggested change any fractional result would either require the developer to round up or trigger the fee‑in‑lieu, expanding the circumstances in which payment to the Wakefield Housing Trust would be accepted instead of designating an extra affordable unit.

Marissa said she has circulated the draft to town attorney Tom Mullen and to Erin, the town’s director of community and economic development, and will incorporate their comments. She demonstrated an affordability‑gap calculator used to compute the fee: the tool follows EOHLC guidelines (assumptions include standard mortgage rate and a 5% down payment) to produce an "affordable sales price" and then calculates the difference between construction cost and that price as the fee. Using the example discussed in the meeting, a one‑bedroom with a cited construction cost around $500,000 and an affordable sales price the presenters described at roughly $230,000–$250,000 would produce an affordability gap on the order of the difference between those figures that a developer could be asked to pay instead of building an additional affordable unit.

Stacy Costas said councilors reacted positively to the presentation overall but raised questions about where the money would come from, including concern that taxpayers could be seen as bearing the cost; Marissa responded that the trust would explain funding and that the bylaw is intended not to affect taxpayer dollars directly. Gail Siebert and other members framed the change as "planting a seed" with the council so officials will be prepared at town meeting.

The trust also discussed developer outreach. Gail reported the board had sent a letter to Lincoln Properties encouraging the company to increase the number of affordable units in a three‑building project; trust members were told Lincoln (via a representative named Dante) focuses on office properties and may be unlikely to convert an entire building to fully affordable units but could be asked to add units beyond the required minimum.

On timing, members were told the warrant will open in mid‑August; if the trust submits the bylaw to the town administrator then, town council can refer it to the planning board in September. The planning board is expected to hold a public hearing in October (a statutorily required hearing to solicit feedback and—if the board chooses—endorse the measure), with the trust aiming for placement on the November town meeting warrant (tentatively Nov. 16).

The draft will be redone to reflect feedback from council comments and attorney review; members were asked to send written comments to Marissa before the next meeting so the group can concentrate on a vote at a future session. The trust agreed it may choose to finalize language in August or delay to September if needed.

Marissa and other members repeatedly emphasized that the draft is a preliminary working document; attorney and planning‑board review and public hearings will shape the final warrant language.

The meeting adjourned after routine business; the trust set a next meeting date (Aug. 20) to continue work on the bylaw and other items.