Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-09-23-AHTBT-min Page 1 of 3 Affordable Housing Trust Meeting Minutes of September 23, 2024 10:30 am Hybrid meeting on Zoom and attended in-person in Parker room, Town office building Affordable Housing Trust Board Members present: Elaine Tung, Chair; Mark Sandeen, William Erickson, Tiffany Payne, Linda Prosnitz Staff present: Ragi Ramachandran, Administrative Assistant Ms. Tung chaired the hybrid meeting and called the meeting to order at 10:34 am. 1. Approve Meeting Minutes Ms. Tung requested a motion to approve the minutes of 9/5/24 Affordable Housing Trust meeting. Mr. Sandeen moved. Ms. Payne seconded. The Trustees voted in favor of the motion 5- 0-0, by a roll call vote (Erickson – yes, Tung – yes, Sandeen – yes, Payne – yes, Prosnitz – yes). Meeting minutes approved. 2. Chair, Select Board, Board/Committee Liaison and RHSO/staff report Ms. Tung attended the Select Board meeting on September 16, 2024 and updated the status of the Lowell Street RFP to the Select Board, about the interviews with developers held on Sept. 16, upcoming site visits to the developers’ sites, and that the Trust will give their formal recommendation on the developer selection by Oct. 2nd for discussion at the Oct. 7 Select Board meeting. Ms. Tung shared that the Community Preservation Committee would like for the Trust to present to the CPC on Oct. 24, 2024 along with LexHAB and Lexington Housing Authority, to discuss community housing and FY26 funding request in advance of the November 1, 2024 application due date. Ms. Tung informed the CPC that the Trust would probably not be ready to present at that time Ms. Tung shared an update regarding Cabot, Cabot and Forbes, the developer of 17 Hartwell Avenue on MBTA buydowns. The developers have proposed some preliminary cost estimates for different buy-down/subsidy scenarios. Ms. Tung will schedule a follow up meeting with the developer. Ms. Payne reported that the Housing Needs Assessment working group analyzed the demographic trends in Lexington in the past 10 years, at their last meeting. A survey is being prepared to gather more in-depth information. Ms. Prosnitz reported that the Housing Partnership Board has sent a letter to the Select Board for their permission to send it to the legislature in support of the two Home Rule petitions. She added that there was discussion on Lowell Street RFP and other MBTA proposals. Ms. Tung read the liaison report from Mr. Erickson regarding LexHAB. LexHAB’s home rule petition to become a 501(c)(3) corporation has been passed by the state legislature. LexHAB is now going to work on the logistics of uncoupling from the Town as well as determine steps forward. Mr. Erikson requested that LexHAB send a letter to the House Speaker requesting that H.2740 and H.2741 be prioritized. The LexHAB Board discussed the request and they will look into it. Page 2 of 3 3. Lowell Street Parcel 68-44 Liz Mancini, the Town’s Purchasing Director explained the Parcel 68-44 RFP process. On Aug. 22nd, the town received seven proposals in response to the Lowell Street RFP. Ms. Mancini reviewed the seven proposals and found all of them qualified based on the criteria established in the RFP, to be evaluated further. A proposal review working group was tasked with undertaking the evaluation which involved assigning ratings to each criterion listed in the RFP. Each reviewer completed an individual ranking sheet for each proposal, and those individual reviews were compiled to get an overall numerical ranking for each developer. After the team reviewed and ranked all seven proposals against the evaluative criteria, the top four highest scoring developers were offered interviews. Based on the results of the interviews held on Sept. 16, the reviewers updated the scoring sheets. Results were recompiled to get to the final rankings that helped form the basis of the recommendation to the Affordable Housing Trust. Michael Schanbacher, Chair of the Planning Board and a member of the proposal review working group stated that the proposal review working group recommends to the Trust Causeway Development’s proposal citing its efficient design, accessibility, and financial leverage. Affirmative Investments was rated the next best after Causeway Development. Ms. Tung stated that the Trustees had visited the four developers’ sites. They visited developments that were over 10 years old as well as new development that had been recently constructed to evaluate their work. Public Comments: Bob Pressman, 22 Locust Avenue, a member of the Proposal working group shared a hard copy with the Trustees, of his comments from the review of the proposals, and process so far. Mr. Pressman felt Causeway Development had the best proposal out of the seven proposals received. Ms. Tung reported that comments were received through emails from Nanette Byrnes, Bob Creech and Richard Jette. Mark Lang, 2 Opi Circle, expressed disappointment at the lack of neighbor involvement in the working group or developer selection process, and concerns about the scale of proposed development from Affirmative Investments. Mr. Lang expressed concerns that very little information was provided on storm water management in Causeway Development’s proposal. Margaret Heitz, 335 Marrett Road, asked if her comments sent via email was received. Ms. Heitz attended the interviews with Affirmative Investments and Causeway Development. She praised the attractive buildings of Causeway, the parking design, and the transparency of Affirmative Investments' project funding sources. She felt it was important to understand how the firms address property management. Ms. Tung acknowledged that the Trustees had received Ms. Heitz’s email. Jonina Schonfeld, 25 Burroughs Road, stated that she was impressed by Causeway Development’s proposal. She highlighted the importance of considering the needs of families, particularly children, in the design. Ms. Schonfeld emphasized the need for spaces for kids to play and engage in activities. The public comments period was followed by detailed discussion between Trustees on the four shortlisted proposals. Mr. Erickson ranked Causeway as his top choice, followed by Metro West. Mr. Erickson praised Causeway’s creative use of the site, and the potential for modular construction to reduce construction impact and costs. He expressed concerns if the outcome of the traffic study will require the entrance to be pushed further away fr om the intersection and the impact it might Page 3 of 3 have on the proposed perimeter loop design. Mr. Erickson felt Causeway’s units were tight but felt strongly that the concerns could be mitigated during the permitting process. Ms. Prosnitz agreed with Mr. Erickson’s assessment, highlighting Causeway's attractive design, efficient use of the site, and innovative approach to affordable housing. She stated that Causeway has done a lot of due diligence to submit their proposal and they were a seasoned developer with good experience in building housing developments. Ms. Payne’s top two contenders were Causeway and Affirmative. She praised Causeway’s contemporary designs, and sheltered parking design. Ms. Payne expressed concern with Causeway’s lack of designated play space for children. She appreciated the development team's interaction and willingness to make affordable housing accessible to families and singles. Mr. Sandeen shared that Causeway’s proposal responded well to the criteria laid out in the RFP, and it integrated well with the neighborhood. He felt it provided exceptional common spaces, building design and integration with the natural surrounding spaces. Mr. Sandeen appreciated how the solar on the roof could help offset some cost for the tenants for the central heating and cooling system. Ms. Tung shared that the design and proposal from Causeway Development exceeded everyone else’s proposals. She felt their proposal aligns with the needs specified in the RFP, and offered the best building design, parking design prioritizing pedestrian experience, community amenities with storage, and plans to preserve the woodland and wetland ecology. She felt Causeway’s proposal was very organized and thought they will bring that organization to their development going forward. The Trustees discussed if they should recommend one or two developers to Select Board, and the consensus was to recommend one developer. Ms. Tung explained the RFP selection process going forward. During the week the Trust planned to complete the due diligence on the financial capacity of the developers as well as checking their references. At the next Trust meeting on Sept. 30 the Trustees will finalize on how their recommendation to the Select Board will be worded. This recommendation will be considered at the Select Board meeting on Oct. 7. Mr. Sandeen added that they were expecting for the recommended developer to present to the Select Board on Oct. 7. There will be an opportunity for the Select Board and the public to ask questions. The Select Board will make a final decision on the developer selection at the Oct. 21 meeting. Ms. Prosnitz made a motion that the Affordable Housing Trust recommend Causeway Development to Select Board as the developer of Lowell Street parcel, subject to the completion of due diligence. Mr. Erickson seconded. T he Trustees voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0, by a roll call vote (Payne – yes, Erickson – yes, Sandeen – yes, Prosnitz – yes, Tung – yes). Mr. Sandeen recognized the Town Staff and Proposal review group, and thanked everyone for their support and efforts to get to this point. 4. Adjourn Ms. Tung requested a motion to adjourn the Affordable Housing Trust meeting. Mr. Sandeen moved. Ms. Prosnitz seconded. The Trustees voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0, by a roll call vote (Erickson – yes, Sandeen – yes, Payne – yes, Tung – yes, Prosnitz – yes). The meeting adjourned at 11:45 am.