• 426 units of Milton’s 9,641 housing units are considered affordable. That is 4.4% of the way toward the required 10%. Milton needs at least 538 more affordable units converted or produced to meet the state 10% target based on existing stock. Based on buildout projections, the number is closer to 600 affordable units
• To receive approval for a Housing Production Plan from the state the plan must include annual affordable housing production goals of 0.50% of the community’s year-round housing stock. For Milton that is 48 units.
• Milton’s demographics are shifting. Overall population growth seems to be slowing with spikes in numbers of seniors and children, and a decrease in young adults. There is also a growing income disparity between owners and renters. The median income of homeowners is $119,420 and for renters it is $27,853 down from $41,071 in 1999.
• About 27% of Milton households are spending too much on their housing. An apartment renting for $1,650 requires an income of ~$72,800.
• Housing strategies included regulatory reform (e.g. adoption of 40R/40S, infill of noncomplying lots, amending of accessory bylaw) and building local capacity through educational campaign, capitalizing the affordable housing trust, and approving the Community Preservation Act.

Senator Joyce was present and spoke of Housing Production Plan as a tool that helps towns “control their destiny.” If a town has a HPP approved it can decline proposed 40B developments for a year assuming it commits to affordable housing target. For Milton that is 48 units and it was acknowledged that will be a hard target to meet. However, Joyce said he was in discussions with state officials and that the opportunity to have an additional 49 units at Fuller counted in the inventory existed and would count against the requirement. Joyce also took the opportunity to say that he was “extraordinarily impressed” and grateful to Alex Whiteside and Katie Conlon regarding the Hendries property and for their efforts to “make that parcel be the best it can be.”

The subsequent discussion by members of Selectmen and Planning Board did not advance the ball to far. Mr. Whiteside voiced his objection to Table 5-1 which identified specific properties such as the proposed Milton Mews and Hillside as sites for affordable housing. He said he did “not think those developments should be built as proposed.” He did not believe that these current projects were ready to put in the plan. Sonnarberg noted that to be accepted there “has to be some there . . . there.” She added “This is your plan, not mine.”

There was some discussion about inclusionary zoning and contributions to the housing trust in lieu of building units. The only clear next step is a follow up meeting but a date for that was not set. Ms. Conlon asked for a meeting in a week. Mr. Whiteside suggested two weeks. Mr. Keohane and Ms. Innes said they would be unavailable. They agreed to consult further regarding setting a date.