At the Planning Board’s Nov. 5 meeting, associate member Leo Blair casually pushed a manila folder toward the other planners at the table and offered his thoughts on the effectiveness of 40B, the state’s affordable housing law.

“We’re chasing our tail. For every one unit of affordable, we must take three market-rates,” he said, referring to the fact that a 40B development can offer 25 percent of the total units as affordable and sell the rest at market-rate prices. The pressure intensifies with the addition of each new market-rate home, since the state calculates each town’s affordable quota by the 10-year census. “It’s a moving target,” he said, repeating the board’s oft-stated belief that Harvard cannot meet its quota of 16 units per year with 40B as its only tool.

Harvard’s struggle to cope with the dense development allowed by the 40B statute is nothing new to the board. But Blair’s folder contained a fresh strategy for the planners, in the form of a purchase and sale document he negotiated for a tract of land on Ayer Road, valid until September 2008. Blair said he’d like to transfer the agreement to Harvard or another nonprofit group and to see the town or group float a bond to buy the land and build its own 100 percent affordable housing on the site. It would be the best way for Harvard to meet its obligation to build affordable homes, he said, while minimizing impact on already stressed roads and schools.

The board, aided by Blair’s initiative, wants to get a ball in the air before Harvard is overwhelmed by private developers with 40B proposals. In 2007, the Zoning Board of Appeals accepted two projects—one on Ayer Road, another on Littleton Road—for a total of 44 units, with 11 of those affordable. Harvard’s ZBA is now waiting for site plans from Woodland Co., which has filed conceptual plans to build up to 140 four-bedroom homes on the Shaker Hills golf course, with 35 of those affordable. Last April, Townsend-based Transformations, Inc. proposed 18 market-rate and six affordable units on Stow Road.

“The town is like a pressure cooker, and the stew is looking unpalatable,” observed Barbara Brady.

“We need more local control,” concluded Chairwoman Mary Essary.

Blair suggested the town float a bond to buy the property, which backs up to Doe Orchards and Barnum Road, and construct 90 two-bedroom units over six years. He projected a selling price of $200,000 per unit, with some profit to manage the project. Peter Brooks thought the project might be “politically difficult,” but noted that “other towns have done it.”

Before adjourning, the board decided to approach the Board of Selectmen to let them know of the opportunity.

“They should discuss how it should be pursued,” said Essary.

Later in the week, Essary said she is encouraged by Blair’s forthright approach and hopes for a solution to what she sees as a conflict between the Planning Board’s statutory obligation to uphold a Master Plan and the 40B law’s unitary approach to developing affordable housing. Essary said 40B doesn’t provide a sufficient percentage of affordable units per development, fails to recognize many existing affordable properties, and lacks oversight for energy efficiency. Though critical of the law, Essary said her board has been proactive.

“We have been concerned for years about the affordability problem,” she said, citing her board’s successful campaign to get accessory apartments counted toward the town’s affordable housing stock.

At the Planning Board’s Nov. 5 meeting, associate member Leo Blair casually pushed a manila folder toward the other planners at the table and offered his thoughts on the effectiveness of 40B, the state’s affordable housing law.

“We’re chasing our tail. For every one unit of affordable, we must take three market-rates,” he said, referring to the fact that a 40B development can offer 25 percent of the total units as affordable and sell the rest at market-rate prices. The pressure intensifies with the addition of each new market-rate home, since the state calculates each town’s affordable quota by the 10-year census. “It’s a moving target,” he said, repeating the board’s oft-stated belief that Harvard cannot meet its quota of 16 units per year with 40B as its only tool.

Harvard’s struggle to cope with the dense development allowed by the 40B statute is nothing new to the board. But Blair’s folder contained a fresh strategy for the planners, in the form of a purchase and sale document he negotiated for a tract of land on Ayer Road, valid until September 2008. Blair said he’d like to transfer the agreement to Harvard or another nonprofit group and to see the town or group float a bond to buy the land and build its own 100 percent affordable housing on the site. It would be the best way for Harvard to meet its obligation to build affordable homes, he said, while minimizing impact on already stressed roads and schools.

The board, aided by Blair’s initiative, wants to get a ball in the air before Harvard is overwhelmed by private developers with 40B proposals. In 2007, the Zoning Board of Appeals accepted two projects—one on Ayer Road, another on Littleton Road—for a total of 44 units, with 11 of those affordable. Harvard’s ZBA is now waiting for site plans from Woodland Co., which has filed conceptual plans to build up to 140 four-bedroom homes on the Shaker Hills golf course, with 35 of those affordable. Last April, Townsend-based Transformations, Inc. proposed 18 market-rate and six affordable units on Stow Road.

“The town is like a pressure cooker, and the stew is looking unpalatable,” observed Barbara Brady.

“We need more local control,” concluded Chairwoman Mary Essary.

Blair suggested the town float a bond to buy the property, which backs up to Doe Orchards and Barnum Road, and construct 90 two-bedroom units over six years. He projected a selling price of $200,000 per unit, with some profit to manage the project. Peter Brooks thought the project might be “politically difficult,” but noted that “other towns have done it.”

Before adjourning, the board decided to approach the Board of Selectmen to let them know of the opportunity.

“They should discuss how it should be pursued,” said Essary.

Later in the week, Essary said she is encouraged by Blair’s forthright approach and hopes for a solution to what she sees as a conflict between the Planning Board’s statutory obligation to uphold a Master Plan and the 40B law’s unitary approach to developing affordable housing. Essary said 40B doesn’t provide a sufficient percentage of affordable units per development, fails to recognize many existing affordable properties, and lacks oversight for energy efficiency. Though critical of the law, Essary said her board has been proactive.

“We have been concerned for years about the affordability problem,” she said, citing her board’s successful campaign to get accessory apartments counted toward the town’s affordable housing stock.