The centerpiece of the meeting was the proposal for a senior housing development by Leole Companies and Hebrew Senior Life. Representatives from both organizations provided an update on their plans to create 70 to 90 affordable senior housing units on Great Road. The project aims to address the need for affordable housing with supportive services for the senior population in Littleton. Both organizations emphasized the benefits of density from an economic standpoint, with Morgan Pearson from Leole Companies noting the importance of maintaining momentum in the project’s development due to community interest.

Kim Brooks from Hebrew Senior Life joined the discussion virtually, outlining the organization’s mission and their extensive experience in senior housing. Brooks detailed the organization’s comprehensive approach, which includes services like independent living, assisted living, and home health services. She introduced the R3 program, which integrates care and wellness services into affordable housing settings. The program’s proactive health assessments and support services allow residents to remain in their communities for as long as possible.

The development team’s presentation also touched on the historic Tuttle House, with suggestions to relocate it near the newly acquired property across from the common, aligning with the town’s vision. Upcoming meetings with the historic commission are planned to gather feedback on this proposal. Both Pearson and Brooks expressed optimism about the potential collaboration, citing the project’s alignment with the town’s goals and the growing need for senior housing.

The board engaged in a discussion about the complexities and timeline involved in securing funding and approvals for the project. A participant elaborated on the initial stages of design and site control, noting the town’s advantageous “head start” in these areas. They emphasized the need for financial support from the town to access state funding through the tax credit system. The process involves an annual application cycle, with pre-applications due in the fall.

Board members expressed enthusiasm for the project, highlighting the urgency to act quickly to secure funding. Questions were raised about the specifics of the proposed housing units, which would primarily be one-bedroom apartments for independent living. There was a focus on ensuring that many units are “deeply affordable,” with affordability typically set at 60% of Area Median Income (AMI).

The topic of local resident preference for housing allocation was addressed, with the possibility of requesting preference from the state if a market analysis demonstrated a significant need among Littleton residents.

The meeting also delved into the development of the King Street Common, particularly the site plan for the town green. Discussions included the necessity of completing the green area in a timely manner to avoid financial issues with lenders. The completion timeline was debated, with suggestions to require its completion or a bond for its completion after the fifth building’s occupancy permit.

There was contention regarding the necessity of bonds for private property developments, with board members expressing concerns about setting a precedent. The board concluded that bonds should only be required for road completions, not private developments, unless absolutely necessary. The importance of clear contracts and conditions was emphasized to protect both town and developer interests.