The most contentious topic of the meeting was the proposed 42-unit affordable housing project at zero Meeting House Road, which stirred significant public debate. Penrose LLC, selected as the developer following a rigorous request for proposals process, aims to construct a mix of one, two, and three-bedroom units, with a portion designated for local residents. This initiative seeks various waivers from local zoning bylaws, sparking concerns among residents about the project’s impact on the community’s character and infrastructure.

Rio Siceti, representing Penrose, outlined the project’s design, which includes eight townhome-style buildings, management offices, and maintenance facilities. The project promises to provide 61 parking spaces and connect to the town sewer system, aligning with state guidelines for local preference during initial leasing. Residents voiced apprehensions over the proposed density and building heights, which exceed current zoning regulations. Concerns about pedestrian safety, especially regarding the absence of a crosswalk at the driveway and Meeting House Road, were highlighted by the director of public works, who also questioned the adequacy of the stormwater management plan.

Public comments revealed a stark divide within the community. Some residents, like John and Molly Curtain, criticized the concentration of affordable housing projects in South Chatham, arguing that it unfairly targets their neighborhood. They, along with others, urged the board to consider alternative locations and adhere to local bylaws to preserve the town’s character. On the other hand, the Chatham Ecumenical Council and representatives from Holy Redeemer Parish advocated for the project, emphasizing its role in preventing homelessness and supporting essential workers.

The Main Street project, also developed by Penrose, faced similar scrutiny. The proposed 48-unit development is intended to bolster the town’s affordable housing percentage, currently below the state’s 10% goal. As with the Meeting House Road proposal, this project seeks numerous waivers, particularly concerning density and building heights. A landscape architect detailed the design’s integration with the surrounding area, highlighting recreational features and accessibility to local amenities. However, objections were raised regarding the project’s compatibility with Chatham’s historic architecture, with suggestions to incorporate traditional materials like cedar shingles to better align with local aesthetics.

The board members and Penrose representatives engaged in discussions, addressing various concerns about the projects. The need for additional fire hydrants, improved pedestrian infrastructure, and compliance with state stormwater regulations were topics of focus. The board, acknowledging the community’s feedback, agreed to continue deliberations and deferred the decision-making process to a subsequent session.