Predicting the number of future housing units at Devens continued to be a speed bump at the Joint Boards of Selectmen meeting in Ayer last Thursday as the JBOS worked toward developing success criteria for Devens disposition. In contrast to its wrestling with housing issues, the board easily affirmed its unified desire to keep the public informed and involved in the process.
Housing
Picking up a theme from its previous meeting, the JBOS sought a way around the difficulty of predicting future housing development at Devens. All agreed that keeping the current Devens residential community intact is a priority, “Whether it is a village of Devens in a larger entity or something else,” said Ayer Selectman Carolyn McCready.
“Vicksburg Square could throw everything off,” reminded Devens Committee member Tom Kinch, reacting to the idea of a housing cap. “The idea of picking a number out of the air is ludicrous. Housing at Devens should be driven by the land available and density. I challenge each of the other communities that you don’t have a [housing limit] law, so why impose it on Devens?”
“Rate of growth is one way to look at the problem,” suggested Harvard Selectman Lucy Wallace. For historical perspective and contrast, she described Mass Development’s method for determining the housing-unit cap of 282 in the original Devens reuse plan as working backwards from “how much Mass Development was willing to spend on education.”
“Harvard’s traditional rate of growth is just over 1 percent. There hasn’t been the 40B component, but it is building up fast,” remarked Harvard Selectman Leo Blair, implying that the 1 percent rate could change.
“Projected job growth should be the driver for housing,” suggested McCready. “We’re in a new era. The history of our past growth is no longer valid.”
Wallace added that development is also determined by zoning.
“Whatever decision is made will influence zoning and the number of houses. Different scenarios will affect housing numbers differently,” said Devens Committee member Mike Boucher.
In the context that unknown housing growth and associated costs were obstacles to finalizing success criteria, Gilles suggested thinking about other approaches to the problem, such as shared municipal utilities or a student-sharing agreement among the towns if a school population overflows the school system.
“We don’t want to build one whole scenario on what we don’t think we can do or handle,” he said.
“All these years we’ve been talking about our fears,” said Kinch. “Thank you [Gilles] for taking us away from fears and looking into the possibilities of the future.”
Forward progress
At one point, Harvard Selectman Tim Clark urged the board, “Let’s not get distracted by specific numbers. What is the next step?” Clark suggested the board identify any major obstacles to agreeing on criteria.
After exploring ways the Montachusett Regional Planning Commission (MRPC) could help, the board voted to ask MRPC to put together a cost comparison of the findings from the individual community workshops MRPC facilitated last month.
Affirming its desire to keep citizens informed and involved in the disposition process, the board agreed to issue joint press releases to the four communities. Gilles offered to draft an information summary.
“If we learned anything from 2B it was the lack of bringing people along every step of the way,” said Kinch.
Several members expressed concern that Shirley stay involve in the process. Gilles and Blair will contact the Shirley selectmen.
In another effort to encourage citizen participation, the board agreed to rotate bi-monthly among the four communities. The next JBOS meeting is scheduled for Oct. 30 in Harvard.
