August 13, 2025 – Housing Partnership – Video & Transcript
August 13, 2025 - Housing Partnership
Mary Antes: Well, I will call
the meeting to order at 7:07pm
one may watch or may participate remotely in the meeting. Links that can be found on the Tom's public body meeting information page, pursuant to chapter two of the acts of 2025 this meeting will be conducted via remote means in accordance with the applicable law. This meeting may be recorded which will be made available to the public on WayCAM As soon as after the meeting, as is practicable those in attendance include Jackie EspirituSanto-Vega, Kathy, Boundy, Katherine Provost, Janot Suarez and Jim Grumbach. And I'm Mary Antes. And Jackie has agreed to take the minutes of the meeting tonight. So the first thing on the agenda is to review and vote to approve the minutes. Jim sent one correction, and the second item the third line down meeting to begin a dialog about possible ways and ways to is one word so asking that it be divided into two. Are there any other corrections or additions? Unknown: No, but I just got an email from Jean Milburn. Okay, she's here. She has been sworn in, and she's listening so at least she can hear us.
Mary Antes: Oh, well has she tried to talk? Unknown: Yeah, I think that's not going to work. Kathleen Boundy: Okay, at least. Can she participate by chat? Unknown: Can she I don't know if she can. Jean, if you can hear us, feel free to use the chat, but I don't know. Janot Mendler de Suarez: Doubt we'll see that. Jim Grumbach: You're not a panel. Katherine Provost: She was able to raise her hand, so the chat might work, so we'll see. Jim Grumbach: Okay, good,
Katherine Provost: but I'm not sure I opened it and it says host and panelist. It doesn't say attendees, so maybe not.
Mary Antes: Now, can we have a motion to accept the minutes as Katherine Provost: Uh, I'll motion to approve the minutes as corrected? Okay?
corrected. Mary Antes: Okay, Kas, Katherine and a second. Janot Mendler de Suarez: I'll second. it's Janot. Mary Antes: and Janot. Okay, all in favor. Jackie, Jacqueline Espiritusanto-Vega: yes. Mary Antes: Kathy, Kathleen Boundy: Yes. Mary Antes: Katherine, Katherine Provost: Yes, Mary Antes: Janot Janot Mendler de Suarez: Yes, Mary Antes: and Jim Jim Grumbach: Yes.
Mary Antes: So the minutes have been accepted, though that takes us to the updates. The first is accessory dwelling units and Kathy, that's in your ballpark.
Kathleen Boundy: I mean, I guess this is just an update on where we were at the last meeting. We talked about, there was a we had presented about the meeting with the board of health regarding what our plan was to to promote accessible dwelling units, what strategies for doing so, and and we we talked about the meeting with the town manager and building Commissioner Board of Health. And the Board of Health invited us to a meeting. Rachel and I went to that meeting, and that was discussed at the last meeting. Then at the last meeting, we talked about also extending, reaching out to the planning board. We similarly were invited to do so by or let me put it this way, Anette Lewis responded to us and agreed to meet with us informally, and we met with her and basically raising the same questions that we raised with our committee and with the Board of Health, and talking about identifying areas of potential impediments to ADU, obviously not for focusing on septic with the Board of Health, but issues that might be of concern to the planning board, for example, set asides the issue about what would be required in terms of getting a permit with respect to additional units, what have you. We didn't really get into substance of discussion with, with Anette, other than the fact that Anette made it clear that what the Planning Board is interested in doing with us collaboratively is to identify strategies that promote affordable ADUs that, that is what they would like us to focus on and to work with them on that. And we are scheduled to meet with them. I believe it's on the 27th. Rachel and I were invited to come speak to them about that. Again, we don't have any answers here at the moment today, we can tonight, to the degree people have ideas, we can accept, identify some of those strategies, we can also, I assume, take them by email in the in the interim, anybody has ideas they want to share. Otherwise, we're going into this meeting pretty, you know, open to discussion with the planning board, just laying out the fact that we would like this forum that will focus on promoting strategies and that will include their issue as ours, identifying strategies for promoting affordable ad use. We did not indicate that we were limited to the forum would not be limited to focusing on only affordable ADU is but it would be about promoting ADU. Anette said that was a specific issue was on, was on the they were specifically focused on the affordability issue. So, yes, taking that from whence it comes. You know that meeting, as I said, is, I believe, the 27th of August that's scheduled.
Mary Antes: Katherine and I were at a bi monthly housing meeting that Robert Hummel chairs, and he said at that meeting that the Attorney General had identified a couple of issues that the planning board needs to correct before the AG accepts Kathleen Boundy: by-law changes, Mary Antes: by-law and and then they'll have to take those two modifications back to town meeting for approval. And so the
one possibility is, as long as there have to be changes in the bylaw, anyway that we can see if there are others in addition to the two that the Ag identified. Kathleen Boundy: So do we know what those are? Mary, Mary Antes: I do not. Did you get them Katherine? Katherine Provost: no, I agree. Mary, I don't think they specified right, Kathleen Boundy: because I saw in the Wayland Posts on the 25th issue, they posted the legal notice for what the attorney general had approved from the town warrant, but it did not include Article 19 the ADU at that time, so I was been monitoring this or waiting to see what the status was of the article. But this is interesting, that so it hasn't been approved, but we don't know quite why, so we need to obviously find out what the reasons are, whether it might be something very simple and technical, or whether it's beyond that, because, if you remember, one motion was relating to they could pass it by majority for compliance purposes, complying with the state law. The other one was when they were doing something beyond that was changed that would, in fact, change the zoning laws, and it had to be done by two thirds vote in the town, I think, made an effort to do that, and it passed overwhelmingly both ways. However, I don't know what the what the hold up is, what the basis is.
Mary Antes: So are there strategies that you can suggest to Kathy, so that she has a little something to go on at the meeting, and the rest of us might very well attend as well. Unknown: I think Jean Milburn had a number of strategies dealing with the specific forms and the building department in order to help to educate people, and I don't remember them all, Jean is probably sitting at home screaming them out, unable to tell us about them. But I think. So Jean, please forward your comments to Kathy. I think you've already sent them to us, but it would reiterate them. Kathleen Boundy: But, and this is I mean, their interest was on the was promoting the affordable units, is what they said. I understand that, but, and I don't know Jean with Unknown: Yeah, she has her own view of the world, and unfortunately, I often don't agree with it. And I think we as a group have had an interest in ADU since before the Planning Board did, and we have comments which relate both to affordable ADU and non affordable ones. And I don't think we should allow her to shut us up. Kathleen Boundy: No. And I think we can be broader as well. I agree with you Jim in terms of keeping it a more broad approach to, what are we commenting on? By right? I mean, I can, let me give you an idea. One of the issues would be streamlining the permitting process, what you know, and I think that's what one of the things gene was getting at in terms of, like the Building Commissioner, you know, forms and things like that, right? Another one would be also creating, go ahead. Unknown: We also had prior conversations with Robert Hummel along those lines, where he expressed support for developing you know checklist or guidelines or ways to to simplify and also make the you know the process more straightforward, Kathleen Boundy: right? And least ostensibly, both the Board of Health and Anette, on behalf of, I'm not sure she's speaking for the Planning Board, but in any case, she took the view that the planning board was very much in support of the same perspective. but another one that in terms of the affordable rentals. I mean, arguably, we could be talking about incentives for affordable rents. You know, for rentals, we could be talking about property tax exemptions, reduce permit fees. I mean, I'm just going through what I have just called from the last, you know, week, where I was just looking at different towns. Unknown: Can I comment on property tax? That the point that we might want to make is that, you know, one of the so called benefits of ADU is is enabling both younger and aging populations to, you know, stay in the community, but a tax exemption is also a way to incentivize and alleviate burden. You know, I mean, if you build an ADU, or you create an ADU, and it increases your taxes, that's a disincentive, especially for older people who are on a fixed income.
Kathleen Boundy: Good point. Mary Antes: Another one maybe that came from Jean, was to have sample floor plans or sample designs so that, you know, people didn't have to start from scratch. Jim Grumbach: Yep, good point, right? Kathleen Boundy: And that would, I think, subsume things like pre approved building plans, things that have been approved in that conceptually at least, Unknown: or it could even be pre approved, you know, a set of elements. It doesn't have to be exactly the layout or the dimensions, but it includes this set of criteria. It meets these criteria. Yeah. Kathleen Boundy: Okay, I do. I haven't looked yet, but I understand the Town of Salem has done something with the tax exemption, so that will be worth looking at. I just heard that, so I'm not positive, and I don't know about the incentivizing rental, affordable rentals, but perhaps also model, different models, with terms of the spectrum of opportunities, what, you know, under 900 square feet. What are we talking about? The we know? What one of the things, the samples we're going to talk about, the cost. What about tiny homes? Where do they fit into this? Tiny homes are allowable under in Middlesex County and in Wayland. So there's another anyway this. These were so, somebody needs to explain to me, in terms of the Open Meeting Law, if we put this list together, can we talk about this outside the meeting Janot Mendler de Suarez: no less than a quorum? Mary Antes: No, not really. I would. I would suggest that Kathy and Rachel, if, if things work out, put together this list that we. Just come up with, which has, like, I think, seven things, and it sounds like there's some good suggestions there, and if you have any others, and particularly Jean, send an email to Kathy with with that information, and she can put it together if we want to discuss it, we could have a meeting before the planning board meeting that night and talk about them, if there's a feeling of the need To do that, Kathleen Boundy: like and Mary in terms of, okay, Jean, everybody just sends them to me. Can I send back a list to you without discussion? Mary Antes: Yes, is that that's legitimate? Janot Mendler de Suarez: Yeah, yep, Unknown: okay, and just remind people in the email don't reply. All. Kathy, Oh, okay. There. Might be something I'll look at my notes Mary from that meeting with Robert Hummel, but I thought Liz Rust also mentioned a neighboring town that had done something on town owned land, or is considering doing that? Mary Antes: The notes that I have, oh, uh, apply to using housing authority property. Lexington and Concord are doing that. Unknown: Yep, okay, that's what it was, yeah, and I know Brian has looked at that, we're not able to add public housing units, but I just don't know if there might be anything else that that we could do creatively, or certainly benchmark with those other towns before the forum create Janot Mendler de Suarez: ADUs at Launcher your way.
Unknown: Yes, exactly. Kathleen Boundy: What about though, Katherine, in terms of that, with it, we have single unique homes throughout the town. We do under the Housing Authority. Could they not like be treated like any other single family unit with a by right, having a right to an ADU? Janot Mendler de Suarez: I Think so. Mary Antes: I would think so. Unknown: I would think so too, yeah, Mary Antes: and I think that Liz was suggesting that that could be done. So, yeah, Katherine Provost: yes. And some of the properties there, what, 26 Mary, 26 scattered site public housing units and and some of them are on enough land where you could consider that. I mean, I can't speak for the housing authority, but it would just be interesting to see what Lexington and Concord are doing.
Mary Antes: Okay, so moving on to two to 12, Cochituate is on the committee and and is, so is Jean. So can you give us an update on that? Sure, Katherine Provost: and I would, and Jean, if you can hear us and have more to add, please, please send an email. But we've had two meetings. I think, I think that the town manager and the Select Board have put together a really good committee of people representing different interests and having different bringing different backgrounds to the table. Not surprisingly, a lot of people, I mean, almost everyone has has also a personal interest in seeing this happen because you have a relative or or a family friend, and you know, we all know people who could really benefit from this type of development in town. The first meeting was introductory. We all went around and talked a little bit about our backgrounds, and Tom Fay is chairing the meeting. He and Bill Whitney are there from the Select Board and and then we just had our second meeting, which I was really pleased with, because Tom had brought in two guest speakers, one who's a service provider, which is Mainstay, I believe they're based in Newton, and the other one is, I think is, I think it's the, I want to say, Center for Independent Living, but it might be the committee for independent living or something. They're based out of Connecticut, but they've done developments in Massachusetts as well, and they're a developer of these types of housing, which, again, we're kind of, I don't want to say all over the board, but we're in the exploratory phase where we're really trying to learn about different types. Whether you do full blown group home that would probably be smaller in size, and have 24/7 care, which is like shifts, people coming in on eight hour shifts. For that type of development, or would it be individuals who might be a little more sufficient, and then you could have a little larger size and have overnight care with also people helping with, you know, medications and meals and social activities and getting people off to different types of employment and that type of thing. So it's, I'm pleased with the progress. I think that the goal is to get to be able to send out requests for proposals in the spring. You know, of course, I'd like to see it faster, but I think that realistically, it makes sense to be really thoughtful about this approach, and I think it's I'm I'm excited about it. I'm really excited to I do think it will happen. And right now it's hard to say, you know, what structure it will take and how many units will be there, but, but I'm very optimistic about having something in town to support people who need more services than what is offered in public housing and and also to I'm not sure we can have a Wayland preference, per se. That's a little bit up in the air. We might be able to have that in the initial lease up through a lottery process, but, but still, the service providers feel pretty strongly that you're pulling people whose families are within about an hour. And so it's going to it's going to serve a very, very significant demand, and hopefully it will teach us all a lot so that we can have additional types of developments like this going forward. Yeah, Mary Antes: that's That's great. It sounds like it's a very good committee, and should result in a good, good plan. Yeah, Katherine Provost: I think so too. I think so too.
Mary Antes: So the next is Good Shepherd development, and again, at this meeting with Robert Hummel, Liz. Does everybody know who Liz is when we're talking about her, she is the current head of RHSO, so which is the region, Regional Housing Services Organization, and she will be retiring next year, and but she came to the meeting with the person who will be taking her place, and she does not know yet whether the tax relief funds have been released, but she talked about the HOME funds, because the HOME fund will will add to the amount of money that This project has, and those funds have not been committed yet, and that that will require an environmental review, and so that is moving Ahead, at least paperwork wise, while they're waiting for this money to be allocated, and the Housing Trust is also making a financial contribution, and we've not heard anything from them requesting those funds yet, so it still is in the process, but but not moving ahead as quickly as we would like.
So I uh, next, I'm not sure, the next is the community exchange. No, I'm looking at the wrong agenda. I'm looking at the agenda from our meeting. No wonder I was confused. So also at the Robert Hummel meeting, they gave a very brief update on Cascade and the School Street development and the Cascade is still in line to have 60 ownership units. The School Street is. Is seven units, but there is still the conservation issue there. So again, it doesn't sound like there's a whole lot of progress being made there. Again, do you have anything to add? Katherine, Unknown: just emphasizing what you what you mentioned, Mary, which is I was so surprised to hear that Cascade they're talking about, According to Robert, all 60 units being affordable home ownership, which seems like a whole lot of home ownership units to me, I always like to see Jim Grumbach: that's incredible. I know Katherine Provost: I was just surprised by it. I maybe I don't know enough about the demand, Unknown: but I'm shocked. Do they still plan to build a a treatment plan, a sewage system, a sewage treatment system? Okay, I'm amazed. Katherine Provost: Me, me too. It's still, it's still, apparently, right? Mary, the developer, is still really moving forward. So it'll be interesting to see. I mean, as Rachel said at our last meeting, it would be nice to have something done on that site. It'll just be interesting to see how it it continues to change,
Mary Antes: so that that concludes the updates. The next item is considering dates and an agenda for a fall ADU forum. And that was, I think, something Kathy suggested that we get started on. So what? Can you suggest some dates and in the beginning of an agenda? Jim Grumbach: I'm sorry, what month Mary?
Mary Antes: Suggest a date for the Fall ADU forum, Jim Grumbach: right? What month Did you say? Mary Antes: I didn't say I didn't say any month. I'm sorry, right? Kathleen Boundy: I mean, I don't have a real basis for suggesting a date either, other than it does seem to me that, like even the meeting next this the 27th it's, I mean, I don't know how long Rachel's out of town here unavailable before this meeting, so I don't know how much time we're going to have to prepare for that with the planning board. I'm not sure the planning board's position was that a lot of the issues that we raised in our concern letter really went beyond their control. Nothing that they could do about it was their view, which to some extent, is true. I think a lot of it is personally. I think it's issues around what we need to understand better things about set asides and what the ramifications are those set asides are, and who they're going to hurt, and how many, what the impact is going to be, but so I feel like we have a lot of data to collect, still is what I guess my point is. I don't like going into things unprepared, and other than having good forms and a simple process, I don't think it means much if we don't have any answers to give people. And I'd rather say that we're knowledgeable and feel pretty confident what a position is. So I would rather say, Forget September and think in terms of October and even November, possibly, but certainly not go into September and really give ourselves some time to get grounded on this. So, you know, we know what we're selling. And we also, quite frankly, we need to understand where the AGs office is, what their concern is. It may be something, and I don't know if this is I would assume it was simple, the issue about the special permits allowing the additional In other words, we voted, I might be wrong. I don't know okay, because I don't know what the legal position was. A legal counsel's position. I never heard one put forth by the town. But on our motions before the Tom meeting, we voted on by right, and it included, though special permit of additional beyond one unit for per property. And perhaps that should have been in by majority and the two thirds vote, not by majority vote under the by right. I don't know, and I don't know if it's as simple as that, that it could go back to the town meeting, which assume, presumably, if it passed once, it's going to pass twice. So. Not going to be an issue. I just don't know what we're really talking about, where there's controversy, if there's none, or what the issues are, but stuff like that, it seems to me, we need to understand and know where there are issues and problems and and also, like this stuff about the tax exemption. I mean, people might get, you know, really wired up about it, or I definitely have a sense of there's a reaction to this one thing, and this, Jim has probably a better sense of this than I from the planning board. My sense was they're not wild about the idea of more than one per property, and that's why, I think the idea of doing it with us for for affordable units, was one way of I think the wording, and this may be unfair and it may be totally wrong, but it seemed to me that one of the arguments for doing it would be to minimize the number of ADU use by basically saying you could only have more than one by special permit for affordable, if they were affordable, and that would curtail people from doing it. You know, a lot of people wouldn't want to do that. Wouldn't want to restrict their property. I don't know. I might be totally out to lunch, but it just crossed my mind when, when that was saying it, she didn't explain the rationale. It just raised the point that there were some concerns about more than one per property, and it didn't it, you know, whatever. But then, I don't mean to be cynical, but I, you know, I am. Janot Mendler de Suarez: But regardless of what the planning board's intention was, I think the point that you've framed really well Kathleen, is that it essentially could serve as a disincentive to impose that requirement. And although their interest may their espoused interest may be in affordable, our interest is actually in housing, and we want both affordable that the town can count and more housing options period. Kathleen Boundy: so like this, but even if they can't be counted for the 10% exactly, and I think that's correct, Unknown: don't want to, we don't want to create any kind of barriers or impediments to either of those objectives, right? Mary Antes: Maybe the first thing is to to really decide what, what the purpose of this meeting is. A part of our our charge is to promote and so are we? Do we see this meeting as primarily to make the public aware of the bylaw and the possibilities, and rather than at this point, maybe the fine points, Unknown: Mary, do you are you saying the purpose of our meeting with the planning board or the purpose of the housing forum?
Well, I have a concern, and it's based on happened, what happened with the MBTA law and the planning board spent a lot of time and took it over wholy and really screwed it up, in my viewpoint, and they turned it into this thing that really satisfied the requirements, but it was not intended to work, and I don't think we want to allow that. So I think part of the forum, our job should be to promote housing. And, you know, I think we're an independent agency. I don't think we have to bow to the planning boards members whims, and I don't think they all speak with the same voice, but I think Anette has a very set viewpoint. And so I think that the point that Kathy and Janot raise and Mary as well, we should go in with an agenda to promote housing and, you know, and that includes ADU, you know, affordable and non affordable. And we should just say thanks, Anette, that may be your focus, but it's not ours. And the whole point of the housing forum is to educate people and promote it, and that's what we're there for, Kathleen Boundy: right, right? And we can, we can collaboratively work with them to welcome their support for the. Affordable, that's great, but we don't have to be limited in terms of our presentation. And ours can include the broader range, like, like, affordable rentals. They're not going to be included in the 10% but they or they could be, I suppose. But you know, there's an issue here in terms of how we present it, tiny homes, this whole issue of what, what are we talking about? Not, not limiting to 10 year restrictions, but again, making options available. So, no, I agree. Unknown: And the forum itself, you know, I mean, we do want to have control over the agenda, so that we can have a very broad and very interesting, you know, dialog with with the residents, with the public. We want it to, to be informative, but ideally we'd like to, you know, do the four, I mean, the human rights, diversity, equity, inclusion committees already. I think, you know, pretty much I can't tell you the truth. I can't remember if we voted, but very much in courses, having the conversation. And we would like the collaboration of the planning board. And at one point, we had talked about asking Robert, you know, if he would take on, you know, some of the logistical responsibilities to, you know, secure a location and maybe get it on WayCAM, or, you know, I don't know, whatever, but I think that should be part of our agenda, an invitation to fully collaborate with us, but making it clear that we will be putting together the agenda, right? Well, I mean, certainly Planning Board has a full time employee, Robert, who can help out and like to take advantage of that, but I don't think we have to let them limit what we say. That's good point, you know. Mary Antes: Okay, so it seems like there's general agreement that this is to promote and educate the public, yep. So then the next question is, what more information do we want to have? And then perhaps make assignments so that it doesn't all fall on Kathy and and Rachel so tiny homes is one things that has been mentioned a couple times. We this is not something that we've done much talking about those as somebody should be prepared to explain what what tiny homes are and what the options are and and as as one, one topic, are there other topics that we feel we need more. We need to know more in order to inform the public. Unknown: Well, I think one topic, based on what we've discussed, is having sort of the simplified plan at the planning department, where there are proposed layouts, there are questions and answers, and there are sort of an a way to walk through this thing without feeling that it's a terrible burden, and I think that that's something we could offer, because I think we're more interested in this than the planning board is. Janot Mendler de Suarez: Yeah, Mary Antes: I know that gene has has done a lot of looking at at ways to simplify it. So perhaps we can give her that, that responsibility to come up with more information. Are there other things that we need to know. Katherine Provost: I mean, I think back to what we were saying earlier, as much as we can describe the permitting process and ways that we hope that it's been simplified or can be simplified, just to kind of walk people through so everyone's not having to start from scratch as and also as as Jean had mentioned, maybe give some examples of Okay, so a tiny home is one example. But what other examples are there that have been done in other parts of the state or the country that have been successful? Janot Mendler de Suarez: I'd like to talk with maybe Ellen at the Energy and Climate Committee about air, you know, potential collaboration in the forum itself, but looking at the at the issue, not just of you know, the rental cost or the ownership cost, but the living costs and implementation of, you know. The stretch code, or the sustainable building guidelines that the Energy and Climate Committee has been advancing, and to link that to more affordable living. Great idea. Katherine Provost: Yep, great and I'm happy to talk to Concord and Lexington about what they're doing with their housing sites.
Unknown: We need, we definitely need, information about what the attorney general is concerned about. Yeah, we really can't move forward without knowing that, right, right? And Kathleen, somebody, somebody might research if you don't have a handle on it already. The, I can't remember what town you said. Was it Sterling or somewhere that Salem, Salem, yeah, that incentive scheme, any example of incentives that like,
Kathleen Boundy: I mean, I, I would be glad to share an outline that, I mean, I basically did it, and I will be honest, I use AI scary and but I haven't basically an outline that I started doing this in terms of just thinking through how to even approach this, or think about what the possibilities are. And it basically does cover much of what we're talking about by right. Then the permitting streamlining, permitting incentives for the affordable, you know, and then going through that list, and then looking at, you know, providing technical assistance, then streamlining the actual permitting process, which would get back into like the Building Commission already has a checklist, which, you know, he presented as sort of like complete, and I suspect others would say it's not. And then the whole issue was, Gene had put up the pre approved building plans. And all again, about also your sort of the local advocacy around, like the pre approved building plans, and raising awareness in terms of what kind of local organizing needs to happen, what kind of steps need to be done, whether it's Council, the aging and all that type of thing. And then local concerns which may or may not be raised by the Attorney General's issue may I suspect they are not, but I don't know. And then exploring non traditional housing options, and then implementation concerns, barriers. You know, I use the word barriers and impediments with Anette, and she basically took exception to that term because she didn't see them as barriers, because they see this as you know, town zoning and what have you. But to me, these are all. They are impediments, if they're interfering with people's ability to make decisions for themselves. And I don't mean to be a libertarian here, but it does seem to me like when we're talking about setbacks and all that, there may be a lot more wiggle room here than we think, but I don't know, yeah, but anyway, I will be glad to share my list, and whether that will trigger more thoughts for all of us and and then people can option opt into what areas that they would like to explore themselves. And then we can all come together and maybe an in person meeting sit down and really talk through some of this.
Unknown: I had one minor point. It's, you know, the idea of pre approved plans is one thing, but it could be, you know, very helpful just, you know, there's a plan that you can actually build, but to have a set of criteria Kathleen Boundy: that you said that earlier. Elements and Criteria, yes, Janot Mendler de Suarez: It's a different option, but it gives flexibility for your site. If you can meet this set of, I don't know, 10 or 12 criteria, you get your approval without having to, you know, hire more engineers and lawyers and have more meetings and rack up more expenses, Kathleen Boundy: right, right? And that was another thing that I think really does make sense to in terms of cost estimates that might be very helpful, just, just some reality base to all of this, yeah. Unknown: You know, another option to know is Win Mallett, who actually has thought this through from the standpoint of cluster zoning and small units with shared spaces, it might be appropriate to invite win to join us, because he might have some really good ideas that are affordable and little outside the box, and he's a very good advocate, and he doesn't get along with the planning board very well, but that's okay. Janot Mendler de Suarez: Well, yeah, but where he doesn't get along is, taking discretion away from the Planning Board to make every single little decision. Actually what I'm suggesting that we include this criteria, meeting criteria option is very much informed by all those conversations with Win, yeah, because that was essentially the part of the proposal for the solar compact that he yet taken forward.
Mary Antes: Okay, so we have quite a list here, and Kathy suggested getting together personally to figure out who's going to do what. So I'm wondering if we should set a meeting date, meet in public and and go through this list that would be like early September meeting, and then, then October, we can refine it, and November, then have it, have the event. How does that sound? Janot Mendler de Suarez: Sounds good? Unknown: Either good. I am going to be gone the first two weeks in September. Mary Antes: So that means we can give you everything
Unknown: else without me, but I I will not be back. Pardon me, I didn't hear you, Mary Mary Antes: So we can give you everything that nobody else wants. Is what I'm saying exactly. Unknown: Yeah, that's what I was afraid of. I am available starting the 15th. So if we could do it the week of the 15th, if that's not a problem for everybody else, the week of the 15th works for me. It Katherine Provost: works for me as well.
Kathleen Boundy: Yeah, I think I can do it too. Yeah, Unknown: I don't know if there's a particular night of the week that is best, whether it's Tuesday or Wednesday. I think those are the nights we've looked at in the past. Mary Antes: Um, first the 15th or the The Wednesday is the 17th. And does that seem to work for everybody? I can do that. Yeah. Okay, so we'll schedule the meeting for the 17th at seven, in person. Jim Grumbach: Okay, I'm sorry, did you say the 17th? Mary Antes: Yes, Wednesday, the 17th, Unknown: and you said in person, yes. Okay. And where do we meet? I don't think we've ever met in person. Have we Mary Antes: been a while? For sure, town building, okay. Well, that they may, may assign us a different place, but at least we'll start there. Okay, okay, and do you want to set an October date? Is that 7pm Yes, I
it the 15th is would be a month later that Monday is Columbus Day and Indigenous Peoples day, if that affects anybody's travel plans, yeah, Unknown: I'm going to be away the 15th to 17th, but you can go ahead without me. I'm going to be on trial that week, so that's probably not great for me. Unfortunately, Mary Antes: is the 14th better? Or Unknown: the trouble actually starts on the 14th, so the 13 might be better. Mary Antes: Well, that's Columbus Day. I'm not sure we could get a space. Jim Grumbach: I don't think we can do that. I
Janot Mendler de Suarez: What about the following week?
Unknown: I'm still on trial, but it's likely that the trial won't last that whole time, so we say Wednesday, the 22nd
22 i. Janot Mendler de Suarez: It works for me. Unknown: Jean and I have 212 working group that night, but it's scheduled as a three hour meeting from five to eight. Maybe we could, maybe we'd be available at seven, but it's hard to say. Mary Antes: Okay, wondering about the week before the eighth? Yes, because the later we have our October meeting, the later the November meeting, and that's Thanksgiving week. So I'm wondering about meeting on the eighth.
Janot Mendler de Suarez: Good idea. Unknown: So I'm sorry, you suggesting the week of October 6 to 10th? Yeah, Mary Antes: October 8, which is a Wednesday Jim Grumbach: that works for me. Oh, okay,
Janot Mendler de Suarez: so works for me. Mary Antes: I'm sorry. Go ahead. Jenna, oh Unknown: Jean and I also have so there's a three hour meeting that night too. ISIS, I know I'd be surprised if these go that long. Maybe we go ahead and tentatively schedule it for October 8, and I'll ask Tom if okay.
You know, there's also a community center that night that some people might want to attend with the Middlesex County. Da Ryan, Jim Grumbach: okay, Mary Antes: is that? Jenna, October, 8. So what about the seventh? Unknown: Yeah, why don't we try a Tuesday? I think that that's probably better. Janot Mendler de Suarez: Yeah, let's try Tuesday.
Unknown: I can do the seventh.
Janot Mendler de Suarez: I can do the seventh. Are we? Unknown: Are we starting to schedule all of these in person? Mary Antes: Not necessarily. Okay? Unknown: But we can always have people zooming as well as in person, right? Like, right, a hybrid, yeah, yeah, I think that's great. Be nice to see you all up close. Sure I'll recognize you
Mary Antes: the next two dates, the first one will meet in person. We'll make all these assignments and come up with a tentative agenda and a date, and then we can start advertising that meeting and the October meeting will go through everything and make sure we're in good shape, and then have have the forum in November. Unknown: Yeah, okay, that's good. And why don't we? If they want to know when we want to have the forum. Let's just tell them November before Thanksgiving. Yeah, Mary Antes: yeah, okay, yeah, good, okay, good. Now, did I understand getting to the status of the committee? Did I understand that gene has been appointed. Unknown: Yes, that's what she said. Yeah. All right. Mary Antes: And we did get an email saying that Jesse Newberry, who is the the new planning board member, was not able to come tonight, so it looks like we have a full committee. Great. Okay, good, okay, is there anything else that we need to discuss?
Jim Grumbach: I respectfully move to adjourn. Mary Antes: Okay, second, 801, is there a second to that motion? Kathleen Boundy: Yeah, I'll second it. Kathy seconded it, Mary Antes: okay, and a vote? Jackie, yes. Kathy, yes. Catherine, yes. Jan, yes, and Jim, yes, and Mary, yes. So we are adjourned at 801, and.
one may watch or may participate remotely in the meeting. Links that can be found on the Tom's public body meeting information page, pursuant to chapter two of the acts of 2025 this meeting will be conducted via remote means in accordance with the applicable law. This meeting may be recorded which will be made available to the public on WayCAM As soon as after the meeting, as is practicable those in attendance include Jackie EspirituSanto-Vega, Kathy, Boundy, Katherine Provost, Janot Suarez and Jim Grumbach. And I'm Mary Antes. And Jackie has agreed to take the minutes of the meeting tonight. So the first thing on the agenda is to review and vote to approve the minutes. Jim sent one correction, and the second item the third line down meeting to begin a dialog about possible ways and ways to is one word so asking that it be divided into two. Are there any other corrections or additions? Unknown: No, but I just got an email from Jean Milburn. Okay, she's here. She has been sworn in, and she's listening so at least she can hear us.
Mary Antes: Oh, well has she tried to talk? Unknown: Yeah, I think that's not going to work. Kathleen Boundy: Okay, at least. Can she participate by chat? Unknown: Can she I don't know if she can. Jean, if you can hear us, feel free to use the chat, but I don't know. Janot Mendler de Suarez: Doubt we'll see that. Jim Grumbach: You're not a panel. Katherine Provost: She was able to raise her hand, so the chat might work, so we'll see. Jim Grumbach: Okay, good,
Katherine Provost: but I'm not sure I opened it and it says host and panelist. It doesn't say attendees, so maybe not.
Mary Antes: Now, can we have a motion to accept the minutes as Katherine Provost: Uh, I'll motion to approve the minutes as corrected? Okay?
corrected. Mary Antes: Okay, Kas, Katherine and a second. Janot Mendler de Suarez: I'll second. it's Janot. Mary Antes: and Janot. Okay, all in favor. Jackie, Jacqueline Espiritusanto-Vega: yes. Mary Antes: Kathy, Kathleen Boundy: Yes. Mary Antes: Katherine, Katherine Provost: Yes, Mary Antes: Janot Janot Mendler de Suarez: Yes, Mary Antes: and Jim Jim Grumbach: Yes.
Mary Antes: So the minutes have been accepted, though that takes us to the updates. The first is accessory dwelling units and Kathy, that's in your ballpark.
Kathleen Boundy: I mean, I guess this is just an update on where we were at the last meeting. We talked about, there was a we had presented about the meeting with the board of health regarding what our plan was to to promote accessible dwelling units, what strategies for doing so, and and we we talked about the meeting with the town manager and building Commissioner Board of Health. And the Board of Health invited us to a meeting. Rachel and I went to that meeting, and that was discussed at the last meeting. Then at the last meeting, we talked about also extending, reaching out to the planning board. We similarly were invited to do so by or let me put it this way, Anette Lewis responded to us and agreed to meet with us informally, and we met with her and basically raising the same questions that we raised with our committee and with the Board of Health, and talking about identifying areas of potential impediments to ADU, obviously not for focusing on septic with the Board of Health, but issues that might be of concern to the planning board, for example, set asides the issue about what would be required in terms of getting a permit with respect to additional units, what have you. We didn't really get into substance of discussion with, with Anette, other than the fact that Anette made it clear that what the Planning Board is interested in doing with us collaboratively is to identify strategies that promote affordable ADUs that, that is what they would like us to focus on and to work with them on that. And we are scheduled to meet with them. I believe it's on the 27th. Rachel and I were invited to come speak to them about that. Again, we don't have any answers here at the moment today, we can tonight, to the degree people have ideas, we can accept, identify some of those strategies, we can also, I assume, take them by email in the in the interim, anybody has ideas they want to share. Otherwise, we're going into this meeting pretty, you know, open to discussion with the planning board, just laying out the fact that we would like this forum that will focus on promoting strategies and that will include their issue as ours, identifying strategies for promoting affordable ad use. We did not indicate that we were limited to the forum would not be limited to focusing on only affordable ADU is but it would be about promoting ADU. Anette said that was a specific issue was on, was on the they were specifically focused on the affordability issue. So, yes, taking that from whence it comes. You know that meeting, as I said, is, I believe, the 27th of August that's scheduled.
Mary Antes: Katherine and I were at a bi monthly housing meeting that Robert Hummel chairs, and he said at that meeting that the Attorney General had identified a couple of issues that the planning board needs to correct before the AG accepts Kathleen Boundy: by-law changes, Mary Antes: by-law and and then they'll have to take those two modifications back to town meeting for approval. And so the
one possibility is, as long as there have to be changes in the bylaw, anyway that we can see if there are others in addition to the two that the Ag identified. Kathleen Boundy: So do we know what those are? Mary, Mary Antes: I do not. Did you get them Katherine? Katherine Provost: no, I agree. Mary, I don't think they specified right, Kathleen Boundy: because I saw in the Wayland Posts on the 25th issue, they posted the legal notice for what the attorney general had approved from the town warrant, but it did not include Article 19 the ADU at that time, so I was been monitoring this or waiting to see what the status was of the article. But this is interesting, that so it hasn't been approved, but we don't know quite why, so we need to obviously find out what the reasons are, whether it might be something very simple and technical, or whether it's beyond that, because, if you remember, one motion was relating to they could pass it by majority for compliance purposes, complying with the state law. The other one was when they were doing something beyond that was changed that would, in fact, change the zoning laws, and it had to be done by two thirds vote in the town, I think, made an effort to do that, and it passed overwhelmingly both ways. However, I don't know what the what the hold up is, what the basis is.
Mary Antes: So are there strategies that you can suggest to Kathy, so that she has a little something to go on at the meeting, and the rest of us might very well attend as well. Unknown: I think Jean Milburn had a number of strategies dealing with the specific forms and the building department in order to help to educate people, and I don't remember them all, Jean is probably sitting at home screaming them out, unable to tell us about them. But I think. So Jean, please forward your comments to Kathy. I think you've already sent them to us, but it would reiterate them. Kathleen Boundy: But, and this is I mean, their interest was on the was promoting the affordable units, is what they said. I understand that, but, and I don't know Jean with Unknown: Yeah, she has her own view of the world, and unfortunately, I often don't agree with it. And I think we as a group have had an interest in ADU since before the Planning Board did, and we have comments which relate both to affordable ADU and non affordable ones. And I don't think we should allow her to shut us up. Kathleen Boundy: No. And I think we can be broader as well. I agree with you Jim in terms of keeping it a more broad approach to, what are we commenting on? By right? I mean, I can, let me give you an idea. One of the issues would be streamlining the permitting process, what you know, and I think that's what one of the things gene was getting at in terms of, like the Building Commissioner, you know, forms and things like that, right? Another one would be also creating, go ahead. Unknown: We also had prior conversations with Robert Hummel along those lines, where he expressed support for developing you know checklist or guidelines or ways to to simplify and also make the you know the process more straightforward, Kathleen Boundy: right? And least ostensibly, both the Board of Health and Anette, on behalf of, I'm not sure she's speaking for the Planning Board, but in any case, she took the view that the planning board was very much in support of the same perspective. but another one that in terms of the affordable rentals. I mean, arguably, we could be talking about incentives for affordable rents. You know, for rentals, we could be talking about property tax exemptions, reduce permit fees. I mean, I'm just going through what I have just called from the last, you know, week, where I was just looking at different towns. Unknown: Can I comment on property tax? That the point that we might want to make is that, you know, one of the so called benefits of ADU is is enabling both younger and aging populations to, you know, stay in the community, but a tax exemption is also a way to incentivize and alleviate burden. You know, I mean, if you build an ADU, or you create an ADU, and it increases your taxes, that's a disincentive, especially for older people who are on a fixed income.
Kathleen Boundy: Good point. Mary Antes: Another one maybe that came from Jean, was to have sample floor plans or sample designs so that, you know, people didn't have to start from scratch. Jim Grumbach: Yep, good point, right? Kathleen Boundy: And that would, I think, subsume things like pre approved building plans, things that have been approved in that conceptually at least, Unknown: or it could even be pre approved, you know, a set of elements. It doesn't have to be exactly the layout or the dimensions, but it includes this set of criteria. It meets these criteria. Yeah. Kathleen Boundy: Okay, I do. I haven't looked yet, but I understand the Town of Salem has done something with the tax exemption, so that will be worth looking at. I just heard that, so I'm not positive, and I don't know about the incentivizing rental, affordable rentals, but perhaps also model, different models, with terms of the spectrum of opportunities, what, you know, under 900 square feet. What are we talking about? The we know? What one of the things, the samples we're going to talk about, the cost. What about tiny homes? Where do they fit into this? Tiny homes are allowable under in Middlesex County and in Wayland. So there's another anyway this. These were so, somebody needs to explain to me, in terms of the Open Meeting Law, if we put this list together, can we talk about this outside the meeting Janot Mendler de Suarez: no less than a quorum? Mary Antes: No, not really. I would. I would suggest that Kathy and Rachel, if, if things work out, put together this list that we. Just come up with, which has, like, I think, seven things, and it sounds like there's some good suggestions there, and if you have any others, and particularly Jean, send an email to Kathy with with that information, and she can put it together if we want to discuss it, we could have a meeting before the planning board meeting that night and talk about them, if there's a feeling of the need To do that, Kathleen Boundy: like and Mary in terms of, okay, Jean, everybody just sends them to me. Can I send back a list to you without discussion? Mary Antes: Yes, is that that's legitimate? Janot Mendler de Suarez: Yeah, yep, Unknown: okay, and just remind people in the email don't reply. All. Kathy, Oh, okay. There. Might be something I'll look at my notes Mary from that meeting with Robert Hummel, but I thought Liz Rust also mentioned a neighboring town that had done something on town owned land, or is considering doing that? Mary Antes: The notes that I have, oh, uh, apply to using housing authority property. Lexington and Concord are doing that. Unknown: Yep, okay, that's what it was, yeah, and I know Brian has looked at that, we're not able to add public housing units, but I just don't know if there might be anything else that that we could do creatively, or certainly benchmark with those other towns before the forum create Janot Mendler de Suarez: ADUs at Launcher your way.
Unknown: Yes, exactly. Kathleen Boundy: What about though, Katherine, in terms of that, with it, we have single unique homes throughout the town. We do under the Housing Authority. Could they not like be treated like any other single family unit with a by right, having a right to an ADU? Janot Mendler de Suarez: I Think so. Mary Antes: I would think so. Unknown: I would think so too, yeah, Mary Antes: and I think that Liz was suggesting that that could be done. So, yeah, Katherine Provost: yes. And some of the properties there, what, 26 Mary, 26 scattered site public housing units and and some of them are on enough land where you could consider that. I mean, I can't speak for the housing authority, but it would just be interesting to see what Lexington and Concord are doing.
Mary Antes: Okay, so moving on to two to 12, Cochituate is on the committee and and is, so is Jean. So can you give us an update on that? Sure, Katherine Provost: and I would, and Jean, if you can hear us and have more to add, please, please send an email. But we've had two meetings. I think, I think that the town manager and the Select Board have put together a really good committee of people representing different interests and having different bringing different backgrounds to the table. Not surprisingly, a lot of people, I mean, almost everyone has has also a personal interest in seeing this happen because you have a relative or or a family friend, and you know, we all know people who could really benefit from this type of development in town. The first meeting was introductory. We all went around and talked a little bit about our backgrounds, and Tom Fay is chairing the meeting. He and Bill Whitney are there from the Select Board and and then we just had our second meeting, which I was really pleased with, because Tom had brought in two guest speakers, one who's a service provider, which is Mainstay, I believe they're based in Newton, and the other one is, I think is, I think it's the, I want to say, Center for Independent Living, but it might be the committee for independent living or something. They're based out of Connecticut, but they've done developments in Massachusetts as well, and they're a developer of these types of housing, which, again, we're kind of, I don't want to say all over the board, but we're in the exploratory phase where we're really trying to learn about different types. Whether you do full blown group home that would probably be smaller in size, and have 24/7 care, which is like shifts, people coming in on eight hour shifts. For that type of development, or would it be individuals who might be a little more sufficient, and then you could have a little larger size and have overnight care with also people helping with, you know, medications and meals and social activities and getting people off to different types of employment and that type of thing. So it's, I'm pleased with the progress. I think that the goal is to get to be able to send out requests for proposals in the spring. You know, of course, I'd like to see it faster, but I think that realistically, it makes sense to be really thoughtful about this approach, and I think it's I'm I'm excited about it. I'm really excited to I do think it will happen. And right now it's hard to say, you know, what structure it will take and how many units will be there, but, but I'm very optimistic about having something in town to support people who need more services than what is offered in public housing and and also to I'm not sure we can have a Wayland preference, per se. That's a little bit up in the air. We might be able to have that in the initial lease up through a lottery process, but, but still, the service providers feel pretty strongly that you're pulling people whose families are within about an hour. And so it's going to it's going to serve a very, very significant demand, and hopefully it will teach us all a lot so that we can have additional types of developments like this going forward. Yeah, Mary Antes: that's That's great. It sounds like it's a very good committee, and should result in a good, good plan. Yeah, Katherine Provost: I think so too. I think so too.
Mary Antes: So the next is Good Shepherd development, and again, at this meeting with Robert Hummel, Liz. Does everybody know who Liz is when we're talking about her, she is the current head of RHSO, so which is the region, Regional Housing Services Organization, and she will be retiring next year, and but she came to the meeting with the person who will be taking her place, and she does not know yet whether the tax relief funds have been released, but she talked about the HOME funds, because the HOME fund will will add to the amount of money that This project has, and those funds have not been committed yet, and that that will require an environmental review, and so that is moving Ahead, at least paperwork wise, while they're waiting for this money to be allocated, and the Housing Trust is also making a financial contribution, and we've not heard anything from them requesting those funds yet, so it still is in the process, but but not moving ahead as quickly as we would like.
So I uh, next, I'm not sure, the next is the community exchange. No, I'm looking at the wrong agenda. I'm looking at the agenda from our meeting. No wonder I was confused. So also at the Robert Hummel meeting, they gave a very brief update on Cascade and the School Street development and the Cascade is still in line to have 60 ownership units. The School Street is. Is seven units, but there is still the conservation issue there. So again, it doesn't sound like there's a whole lot of progress being made there. Again, do you have anything to add? Katherine, Unknown: just emphasizing what you what you mentioned, Mary, which is I was so surprised to hear that Cascade they're talking about, According to Robert, all 60 units being affordable home ownership, which seems like a whole lot of home ownership units to me, I always like to see Jim Grumbach: that's incredible. I know Katherine Provost: I was just surprised by it. I maybe I don't know enough about the demand, Unknown: but I'm shocked. Do they still plan to build a a treatment plan, a sewage system, a sewage treatment system? Okay, I'm amazed. Katherine Provost: Me, me too. It's still, it's still, apparently, right? Mary, the developer, is still really moving forward. So it'll be interesting to see. I mean, as Rachel said at our last meeting, it would be nice to have something done on that site. It'll just be interesting to see how it it continues to change,
Mary Antes: so that that concludes the updates. The next item is considering dates and an agenda for a fall ADU forum. And that was, I think, something Kathy suggested that we get started on. So what? Can you suggest some dates and in the beginning of an agenda? Jim Grumbach: I'm sorry, what month Mary?
Mary Antes: Suggest a date for the Fall ADU forum, Jim Grumbach: right? What month Did you say? Mary Antes: I didn't say I didn't say any month. I'm sorry, right? Kathleen Boundy: I mean, I don't have a real basis for suggesting a date either, other than it does seem to me that, like even the meeting next this the 27th it's, I mean, I don't know how long Rachel's out of town here unavailable before this meeting, so I don't know how much time we're going to have to prepare for that with the planning board. I'm not sure the planning board's position was that a lot of the issues that we raised in our concern letter really went beyond their control. Nothing that they could do about it was their view, which to some extent, is true. I think a lot of it is personally. I think it's issues around what we need to understand better things about set asides and what the ramifications are those set asides are, and who they're going to hurt, and how many, what the impact is going to be, but so I feel like we have a lot of data to collect, still is what I guess my point is. I don't like going into things unprepared, and other than having good forms and a simple process, I don't think it means much if we don't have any answers to give people. And I'd rather say that we're knowledgeable and feel pretty confident what a position is. So I would rather say, Forget September and think in terms of October and even November, possibly, but certainly not go into September and really give ourselves some time to get grounded on this. So, you know, we know what we're selling. And we also, quite frankly, we need to understand where the AGs office is, what their concern is. It may be something, and I don't know if this is I would assume it was simple, the issue about the special permits allowing the additional In other words, we voted, I might be wrong. I don't know okay, because I don't know what the legal position was. A legal counsel's position. I never heard one put forth by the town. But on our motions before the Tom meeting, we voted on by right, and it included, though special permit of additional beyond one unit for per property. And perhaps that should have been in by majority and the two thirds vote, not by majority vote under the by right. I don't know, and I don't know if it's as simple as that, that it could go back to the town meeting, which assume, presumably, if it passed once, it's going to pass twice. So. Not going to be an issue. I just don't know what we're really talking about, where there's controversy, if there's none, or what the issues are, but stuff like that, it seems to me, we need to understand and know where there are issues and problems and and also, like this stuff about the tax exemption. I mean, people might get, you know, really wired up about it, or I definitely have a sense of there's a reaction to this one thing, and this, Jim has probably a better sense of this than I from the planning board. My sense was they're not wild about the idea of more than one per property, and that's why, I think the idea of doing it with us for for affordable units, was one way of I think the wording, and this may be unfair and it may be totally wrong, but it seemed to me that one of the arguments for doing it would be to minimize the number of ADU use by basically saying you could only have more than one by special permit for affordable, if they were affordable, and that would curtail people from doing it. You know, a lot of people wouldn't want to do that. Wouldn't want to restrict their property. I don't know. I might be totally out to lunch, but it just crossed my mind when, when that was saying it, she didn't explain the rationale. It just raised the point that there were some concerns about more than one per property, and it didn't it, you know, whatever. But then, I don't mean to be cynical, but I, you know, I am. Janot Mendler de Suarez: But regardless of what the planning board's intention was, I think the point that you've framed really well Kathleen, is that it essentially could serve as a disincentive to impose that requirement. And although their interest may their espoused interest may be in affordable, our interest is actually in housing, and we want both affordable that the town can count and more housing options period. Kathleen Boundy: so like this, but even if they can't be counted for the 10% exactly, and I think that's correct, Unknown: don't want to, we don't want to create any kind of barriers or impediments to either of those objectives, right? Mary Antes: Maybe the first thing is to to really decide what, what the purpose of this meeting is. A part of our our charge is to promote and so are we? Do we see this meeting as primarily to make the public aware of the bylaw and the possibilities, and rather than at this point, maybe the fine points, Unknown: Mary, do you are you saying the purpose of our meeting with the planning board or the purpose of the housing forum?
Well, I have a concern, and it's based on happened, what happened with the MBTA law and the planning board spent a lot of time and took it over wholy and really screwed it up, in my viewpoint, and they turned it into this thing that really satisfied the requirements, but it was not intended to work, and I don't think we want to allow that. So I think part of the forum, our job should be to promote housing. And, you know, I think we're an independent agency. I don't think we have to bow to the planning boards members whims, and I don't think they all speak with the same voice, but I think Anette has a very set viewpoint. And so I think that the point that Kathy and Janot raise and Mary as well, we should go in with an agenda to promote housing and, you know, and that includes ADU, you know, affordable and non affordable. And we should just say thanks, Anette, that may be your focus, but it's not ours. And the whole point of the housing forum is to educate people and promote it, and that's what we're there for, Kathleen Boundy: right, right? And we can, we can collaboratively work with them to welcome their support for the. Affordable, that's great, but we don't have to be limited in terms of our presentation. And ours can include the broader range, like, like, affordable rentals. They're not going to be included in the 10% but they or they could be, I suppose. But you know, there's an issue here in terms of how we present it, tiny homes, this whole issue of what, what are we talking about? Not, not limiting to 10 year restrictions, but again, making options available. So, no, I agree. Unknown: And the forum itself, you know, I mean, we do want to have control over the agenda, so that we can have a very broad and very interesting, you know, dialog with with the residents, with the public. We want it to, to be informative, but ideally we'd like to, you know, do the four, I mean, the human rights, diversity, equity, inclusion committees already. I think, you know, pretty much I can't tell you the truth. I can't remember if we voted, but very much in courses, having the conversation. And we would like the collaboration of the planning board. And at one point, we had talked about asking Robert, you know, if he would take on, you know, some of the logistical responsibilities to, you know, secure a location and maybe get it on WayCAM, or, you know, I don't know, whatever, but I think that should be part of our agenda, an invitation to fully collaborate with us, but making it clear that we will be putting together the agenda, right? Well, I mean, certainly Planning Board has a full time employee, Robert, who can help out and like to take advantage of that, but I don't think we have to let them limit what we say. That's good point, you know. Mary Antes: Okay, so it seems like there's general agreement that this is to promote and educate the public, yep. So then the next question is, what more information do we want to have? And then perhaps make assignments so that it doesn't all fall on Kathy and and Rachel so tiny homes is one things that has been mentioned a couple times. We this is not something that we've done much talking about those as somebody should be prepared to explain what what tiny homes are and what the options are and and as as one, one topic, are there other topics that we feel we need more. We need to know more in order to inform the public. Unknown: Well, I think one topic, based on what we've discussed, is having sort of the simplified plan at the planning department, where there are proposed layouts, there are questions and answers, and there are sort of an a way to walk through this thing without feeling that it's a terrible burden, and I think that that's something we could offer, because I think we're more interested in this than the planning board is. Janot Mendler de Suarez: Yeah, Mary Antes: I know that gene has has done a lot of looking at at ways to simplify it. So perhaps we can give her that, that responsibility to come up with more information. Are there other things that we need to know. Katherine Provost: I mean, I think back to what we were saying earlier, as much as we can describe the permitting process and ways that we hope that it's been simplified or can be simplified, just to kind of walk people through so everyone's not having to start from scratch as and also as as Jean had mentioned, maybe give some examples of Okay, so a tiny home is one example. But what other examples are there that have been done in other parts of the state or the country that have been successful? Janot Mendler de Suarez: I'd like to talk with maybe Ellen at the Energy and Climate Committee about air, you know, potential collaboration in the forum itself, but looking at the at the issue, not just of you know, the rental cost or the ownership cost, but the living costs and implementation of, you know. The stretch code, or the sustainable building guidelines that the Energy and Climate Committee has been advancing, and to link that to more affordable living. Great idea. Katherine Provost: Yep, great and I'm happy to talk to Concord and Lexington about what they're doing with their housing sites.
Unknown: We need, we definitely need, information about what the attorney general is concerned about. Yeah, we really can't move forward without knowing that, right, right? And Kathleen, somebody, somebody might research if you don't have a handle on it already. The, I can't remember what town you said. Was it Sterling or somewhere that Salem, Salem, yeah, that incentive scheme, any example of incentives that like,
Kathleen Boundy: I mean, I, I would be glad to share an outline that, I mean, I basically did it, and I will be honest, I use AI scary and but I haven't basically an outline that I started doing this in terms of just thinking through how to even approach this, or think about what the possibilities are. And it basically does cover much of what we're talking about by right. Then the permitting streamlining, permitting incentives for the affordable, you know, and then going through that list, and then looking at, you know, providing technical assistance, then streamlining the actual permitting process, which would get back into like the Building Commission already has a checklist, which, you know, he presented as sort of like complete, and I suspect others would say it's not. And then the whole issue was, Gene had put up the pre approved building plans. And all again, about also your sort of the local advocacy around, like the pre approved building plans, and raising awareness in terms of what kind of local organizing needs to happen, what kind of steps need to be done, whether it's Council, the aging and all that type of thing. And then local concerns which may or may not be raised by the Attorney General's issue may I suspect they are not, but I don't know. And then exploring non traditional housing options, and then implementation concerns, barriers. You know, I use the word barriers and impediments with Anette, and she basically took exception to that term because she didn't see them as barriers, because they see this as you know, town zoning and what have you. But to me, these are all. They are impediments, if they're interfering with people's ability to make decisions for themselves. And I don't mean to be a libertarian here, but it does seem to me like when we're talking about setbacks and all that, there may be a lot more wiggle room here than we think, but I don't know, yeah, but anyway, I will be glad to share my list, and whether that will trigger more thoughts for all of us and and then people can option opt into what areas that they would like to explore themselves. And then we can all come together and maybe an in person meeting sit down and really talk through some of this.
Unknown: I had one minor point. It's, you know, the idea of pre approved plans is one thing, but it could be, you know, very helpful just, you know, there's a plan that you can actually build, but to have a set of criteria Kathleen Boundy: that you said that earlier. Elements and Criteria, yes, Janot Mendler de Suarez: It's a different option, but it gives flexibility for your site. If you can meet this set of, I don't know, 10 or 12 criteria, you get your approval without having to, you know, hire more engineers and lawyers and have more meetings and rack up more expenses, Kathleen Boundy: right, right? And that was another thing that I think really does make sense to in terms of cost estimates that might be very helpful, just, just some reality base to all of this, yeah. Unknown: You know, another option to know is Win Mallett, who actually has thought this through from the standpoint of cluster zoning and small units with shared spaces, it might be appropriate to invite win to join us, because he might have some really good ideas that are affordable and little outside the box, and he's a very good advocate, and he doesn't get along with the planning board very well, but that's okay. Janot Mendler de Suarez: Well, yeah, but where he doesn't get along is, taking discretion away from the Planning Board to make every single little decision. Actually what I'm suggesting that we include this criteria, meeting criteria option is very much informed by all those conversations with Win, yeah, because that was essentially the part of the proposal for the solar compact that he yet taken forward.
Mary Antes: Okay, so we have quite a list here, and Kathy suggested getting together personally to figure out who's going to do what. So I'm wondering if we should set a meeting date, meet in public and and go through this list that would be like early September meeting, and then, then October, we can refine it, and November, then have it, have the event. How does that sound? Janot Mendler de Suarez: Sounds good? Unknown: Either good. I am going to be gone the first two weeks in September. Mary Antes: So that means we can give you everything
Unknown: else without me, but I I will not be back. Pardon me, I didn't hear you, Mary Mary Antes: So we can give you everything that nobody else wants. Is what I'm saying exactly. Unknown: Yeah, that's what I was afraid of. I am available starting the 15th. So if we could do it the week of the 15th, if that's not a problem for everybody else, the week of the 15th works for me. It Katherine Provost: works for me as well.
Kathleen Boundy: Yeah, I think I can do it too. Yeah, Unknown: I don't know if there's a particular night of the week that is best, whether it's Tuesday or Wednesday. I think those are the nights we've looked at in the past. Mary Antes: Um, first the 15th or the The Wednesday is the 17th. And does that seem to work for everybody? I can do that. Yeah. Okay, so we'll schedule the meeting for the 17th at seven, in person. Jim Grumbach: Okay, I'm sorry, did you say the 17th? Mary Antes: Yes, Wednesday, the 17th, Unknown: and you said in person, yes. Okay. And where do we meet? I don't think we've ever met in person. Have we Mary Antes: been a while? For sure, town building, okay. Well, that they may, may assign us a different place, but at least we'll start there. Okay, okay, and do you want to set an October date? Is that 7pm Yes, I
it the 15th is would be a month later that Monday is Columbus Day and Indigenous Peoples day, if that affects anybody's travel plans, yeah, Unknown: I'm going to be away the 15th to 17th, but you can go ahead without me. I'm going to be on trial that week, so that's probably not great for me. Unfortunately, Mary Antes: is the 14th better? Or Unknown: the trouble actually starts on the 14th, so the 13 might be better. Mary Antes: Well, that's Columbus Day. I'm not sure we could get a space. Jim Grumbach: I don't think we can do that. I
Janot Mendler de Suarez: What about the following week?
Unknown: I'm still on trial, but it's likely that the trial won't last that whole time, so we say Wednesday, the 22nd
22 i. Janot Mendler de Suarez: It works for me. Unknown: Jean and I have 212 working group that night, but it's scheduled as a three hour meeting from five to eight. Maybe we could, maybe we'd be available at seven, but it's hard to say. Mary Antes: Okay, wondering about the week before the eighth? Yes, because the later we have our October meeting, the later the November meeting, and that's Thanksgiving week. So I'm wondering about meeting on the eighth.
Janot Mendler de Suarez: Good idea. Unknown: So I'm sorry, you suggesting the week of October 6 to 10th? Yeah, Mary Antes: October 8, which is a Wednesday Jim Grumbach: that works for me. Oh, okay,
Janot Mendler de Suarez: so works for me. Mary Antes: I'm sorry. Go ahead. Jenna, oh Unknown: Jean and I also have so there's a three hour meeting that night too. ISIS, I know I'd be surprised if these go that long. Maybe we go ahead and tentatively schedule it for October 8, and I'll ask Tom if okay.
You know, there's also a community center that night that some people might want to attend with the Middlesex County. Da Ryan, Jim Grumbach: okay, Mary Antes: is that? Jenna, October, 8. So what about the seventh? Unknown: Yeah, why don't we try a Tuesday? I think that that's probably better. Janot Mendler de Suarez: Yeah, let's try Tuesday.
Unknown: I can do the seventh.
Janot Mendler de Suarez: I can do the seventh. Are we? Unknown: Are we starting to schedule all of these in person? Mary Antes: Not necessarily. Okay? Unknown: But we can always have people zooming as well as in person, right? Like, right, a hybrid, yeah, yeah, I think that's great. Be nice to see you all up close. Sure I'll recognize you
Mary Antes: the next two dates, the first one will meet in person. We'll make all these assignments and come up with a tentative agenda and a date, and then we can start advertising that meeting and the October meeting will go through everything and make sure we're in good shape, and then have have the forum in November. Unknown: Yeah, okay, that's good. And why don't we? If they want to know when we want to have the forum. Let's just tell them November before Thanksgiving. Yeah, Mary Antes: yeah, okay, yeah, good, okay, good. Now, did I understand getting to the status of the committee? Did I understand that gene has been appointed. Unknown: Yes, that's what she said. Yeah. All right. Mary Antes: And we did get an email saying that Jesse Newberry, who is the the new planning board member, was not able to come tonight, so it looks like we have a full committee. Great. Okay, good, okay, is there anything else that we need to discuss?
Jim Grumbach: I respectfully move to adjourn. Mary Antes: Okay, second, 801, is there a second to that motion? Kathleen Boundy: Yeah, I'll second it. Kathy seconded it, Mary Antes: okay, and a vote? Jackie, yes. Kathy, yes. Catherine, yes. Jan, yes, and Jim, yes, and Mary, yes. So we are adjourned at 801, and.