Select Board Favors Saving Old House At 127 Old Harbor Rd.

CHATHAM – In a second look at possible scenarios for housing at 127 Old Harbor Rd., members of the select board indicated a preference to include a single-family house — either by renovating the old structure currently on the town-owned property or building a new home.

 That directive is likely to end up in criteria that developers will use to come up with proposals for the project, but at its April 15 meeting the board was not yet ready to have staff issue the call for proposals.

 The house on the property previously served as headquarters for the town’s water department. The 1860-era home has been vacant for years and is in poor condition. A barn on the property is currently used by the town for storage. 

 Despite some opposition from the select board, town meeting voted in 2023 to devote the property to housing.

 After seeing a dozen “test fits” for the former Ellis property, the board in February asked that consultant Utile Architecture and Planning refine the scenarios down to three. Those plans called for five units in three buildings, including a single-family house and two duplexes; four units in three buildings, including two single-family houses and a duplex; and four units in two duplexes. The units could be a mix of homeownership and rentals.

 Last week, board members said they leaned toward the first option, retaining the house and adding two duplexes to the north side of the 41,817-square-foot lot. 

 Whether a developer would be willing to renovate the existing house remains a question, said Housing and Sustainability Director Gloria McPherson. That could depend on the housing being designated as income-restricted affordable housing sold to a buyer at 80 percent of the area median income (AMI), or as attainable housing for a buyer at up to 200 percent of AMI. Another option is to deed-restrict the house to occupancy by a year-round resident, allowable under the state’s Affordable Homes Act, she said. If homeownership is the goal, the gap between the sale price of an income-restricted home and one that is deed restricted to year-round occupancy is “pretty big,” McPherson said.

That scenario also might require the town to subsidize the project to ensure that the units are affordable, she added.

Demolition of the house would require permission from the historical commission, she said.

Select board member Dean Nicastro favored the first scenario, but said renovating the house would be “financially crazy, but if someone wants to come in and do it” that should remain as an option.

 Retaining the existing house would “speak volumes to the community,” said board member Shareen Davis. Board member Jeff Dykens added that doing so would maintain the historical coherence of the neighborhood. Scenario one, retaining the house and adding duplexes where the barn is, “is reminiscent and evocative of what’s there now,” he said.

 Chair Michael Schell said he wouldn’t want the town to subsidize where one unit is affordable but the others are “a stretch” for local residents to afford. And he’s not confident the house can be restored.

 “We’ll find out when we put out a [request for proposals],” he said.

 Community Housing Partnership Chair Karolyn McClelland said while she’d like to see more units, the first scenario offers an attractive range of options with the house and duplexes.

 “This speaks to a lot of what the community needs and what the community expects,” she said. “It offers the best density but doesn’t overwhelm” the property.

 Board members asked McPherson to work with Utile to develop specific design criteria for the single-family house, whether it is renovated or a new structure is built, that can be included in the request for proposals. The details will be brought back to the board before proposals are sought.