by Paul Green ·
Friday, July 10, 2026
I have been deeply involved with Harvard’s analysis of Devens for the past 15 years, starting with the Devens Economic Analysis Team in 2011 and continuing with the Harvard-Devens Jurisdiction Committee, where I have served since its inception in 2018.
In the story headlined “Harvard and Ayer oppose plan to shift Devens zoning power to state agency; Shirley undecided” in the June 26 issue of the Harvard Press, the chair of the Devens Committee is quoted as saying “That process [to allow new uses for Vicksburg Square] has been tried four times. Four times it has failed.” This is a gross mischaracterization of the history of these votes. The outcome may not have been what some people wanted, but the process itself worked exactly as specified by Chapter 498 of the Acts of 1993, the enabling legislation for Devens.
MassDevelopment has called five super town meetings. The 2006 meeting proposed to make Devens its own town. The 2009 and 2012 meetings proposed adding housing at Vicksburg Square. The 2015 meeting proposed adding senior housing in Shirley and making other minor zoning changes. The 2016 meeting rearranged some boundaries between residential, business, and open space areas, including the Oxbow National Wildlife area.
Chapter 498 recognizes four parties that jointly determine the fate of proposed zoning changes: the three towns and MassDevelopment. Devens residents vote in whichever town they reside. This arrangement recognizes that the authority to make local zoning decisions includes the towns. The Devens Redevelopment Enterprise Zone (to use its official name) spans three towns; it is not a separate town. In fact, the town boundaries of Ayer, Harvard, and Shirley have never changed since their incorporation. Portions of each town were under the temporary authority of the federal government while Devens was an Army base. Until June 30, 2033, these areas are under the temporary authority of MassDevelopment. As of July 1, 2033, absent any future legislative action by the commonwealth of Massachusetts, these areas will revert back to local jurisdiction.
Let’s review the history of super town meetings held to consider various changes at Devens. A simple majority of voters present was required in each town for an article to be approved. MassDevelopment, the DEC, and Shirley approved every proposal. Ayer and Harvard cast the deciding votes.
On Oct. 24, 2006, Ayer and Harvard voters rejected a major proposal by MassDevelopment to create a new town of Devens, as well as changing the reuse plan, bylaws, and zoning, and forbidding further changes to zoning for 20 years.
On June 8, 2009, MassDevelopment proposed carving a new zone for Vicksburg Square out of its existing zone, adding two types of multifamily housing to the existing 17 uses. Allowing 19 uses (out of a total of 30 potential uses) in the new zone would have created the largest number of permitted uses in any zone at Devens. No developer was identified. Twenty-five percent of units at Vicksburg Square were required to be affordable at 80% of Adjusted Median Income (AMI); at least 20% of rental units were allowed to be affordable at 50% of AMI. A maximum of 350 units was allowed. Harvard voters approved this proposal. Ayer voters rejected it, citing the lack of a specific plan.
On March 28, 2012, MassDevelopment again proposed carving a new zone for Vicksburg Square out of its existing zone, adding two types of multifamily housing but only allowing 12 other uses for a total of 14 permitted uses in the new zone. MassDevelopment selected Trinity Financial to redevelop Vicksburg Square. Trinity proposed that 80% of the units be income restricted, with 68% of the units affordable at 60% of the AMI, 12% of the units affordable at or below 30% of AMI, and 20% of the units at market rate, numbers reported in both the Ayer 2012 Annual Town Report and the Devens Economic Analysis Team’s 2011 Vicksburg Square Report.
Preference would have been given to veterans and older individuals and their families. A maximum of 246 units was allowed. When added to the existing 70 units (out of 282) of affordable housing required by the Devens Reuse Plan, this proposal added another 196 affordable units (out of 246), raising the percentage of affordable units at Devens from 25% to 50%. Ayer and Harvard voters rejected this proposal.
On June 8, 2015, MassDevelopment proposed four articles relating to zoning at Devens. Harvard voters approved the first three, primarily relating to adding senior housing on an area of Devens adjacent to Shirley, and rejected a fourth article that would have added office and research uses along the southern portion of Grant Road, adjacent to an existing residential zone. Ayer voters approved all four articles.
On Oct. 24, 2016, MassDevelopment revisited the failed article from the June 8, 2015, Super Town Meeting and proposed reconfiguring the boundaries between residential, business, and open space areas, including the Oxbow National Wildlife area of Devens. Voters in each town approved this article.
The only time Harvard rejected a specific proposal to rezone Vicksburg Square for housing was March 12, 2012. This rejection had less to do with the notion of permitting housing at Vicksburg Square, which Harvard had earlier approved in a much less restrictive form, than with the specific proposal from Trinity Financial. Harvard residents have long indicated that they prefer a robust mix of affordable and market-rate units at Devens. The Trinity Financial proposal was widely seen as too heavily tilted towards affordable units. In my view, Trinity’s hands were tied by their decision to use various forms of tax credits to finance the project, which required them to set aside most of the project for affordable units. In addition, during the public hearings in advance of the vote, Harvard citizens, myself included, asked Trinity to consider various changes to their proposal. No such requests were adopted.
MassDevelopment must engage directly with the towns to craft a plan for housing at Vicksburg square that voters will accept.
Paul Green is a member of the Harvard-
Devens Jurisdiction Committee. The opinions expressed in this column are his own.