At their March 25 meeting, Housing Partnership members expressed concern that the group is not consistently included in planning conversations involving other boards and committees, pointing to a proposed warrant article to fund a feasibility study for potential housing development on the Orchard Lane school property.
Housing Partnership member Janot Mendler de Suarez criticized the Orchard Lane feasibility study proposal as premature and lacking coordination with the School Committee, which retains control of the land and is currently engaged in its own long-term facilities planning process. She said the consultant analysis for school facilities — which includes multiple scenarios with estimated costs ranging from approximately $500 million to $1 billion and timelines extending into the 2040–2063 period — does not support near-term redevelopment of the site for housing.
Member Janot Mendler de Suarez further stated that any proposal to spend public funds on developing a feasibility analysis should be weighed against the absence of broader planning regarding appropriate locations for high- and medium-density housing, access to infrastructure, and alignment with town needs, member Janot Mendler de Suarez said.
Members discussed the respective roles of the Select Board and the School Committee in determining the future of the property. They noted that the Select Board had sought to involve the School Committee as a co-sponsor of the article, but that the School Committee had already initiated its own planning work and may not derive direct benefit from the proposed study.
The discussion broadened to the role of the Housing Partnership within the town’s housing governance structure. Members cited the committee’s prior involvement in advancing the St. Anne’s affordable housing project, including facilitating coordination with stakeholders during permitting challenges, as an example of its potential value as an advisory and educational forum.
Member Jim Grumbach said the committee should position itself as a resource for evaluating housing proposals and providing early input to avoid poorly designed projects or reactive decision-making under state Chapter 40B pressures. Members discussed the possibility of requesting a meeting with McCall or Assistant Town Manager Kelsi Power-Spirlet to clarify how the committee can be more formally integrated into planning processes.
Members emphasized the importance of maintaining ongoing communication with state agencies and local officials to ensure the committee remains informed and engaged in housing policy discussions at both the local and state levels. Member Rachel Bratt proposed establishing a regular process to track state housing policy updates, grant opportunities, and program changes from agencies including the Massachusetts Housing Partnership, MassHousing, and the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities.
Bratt also suggested including this information in the monthly newsletter issued by Town Manager Michael McCall to increase visibility of housing-related resources and funding opportunities. Members also discussed assigning responsibility for monitoring agency websites and relaying updates to the town manager’s office, noting that the effort would require ongoing staff or volunteer capacity. They set a target of mid-April to finalize a draft in advance of the May Annual Town Meeting.
The committee also discussed improving data tracking on accessory dwelling unit production. Bratt said she would contact Town Planner Robert Hummel to request updated figures on units approved by right versus those requiring special permits, as well as occupancy data and trends since adoption of the bylaw.
Members briefly reviewed the status of the town’s housing production plan update, noting that an updated request for proposals is being prepared to retain a consultant. Bratt said the goal is to issue the RFP in the near term, conduct interviews over the summer, and begin public engagement in the fall. Funding for the effort is expected to come from the Community Preservation Committee.
Milburn also referenced an upcoming Select Board discussion of the 212 Cochituate Road Advisory Committee report and encouraged attendance, noting ongoing interest in expanding housing opportunities, including for residents with disabilities. Members discussed differing perspectives on housing models, including integration versus higher-density approaches, but did not take any formal position.
