Statement on Planned Elm Street PCRC Development

The following statement was approved by the Green Acton Board of Directors, and sent to the Acton Planning Board on Nov. 15 for a Nov. 17 hearing on the project.

This memo urges the Acton Planning Board to deny permitting of the proposed 22 Elm Street Planned Conservation Residential Community (PCRC). We submit that the Planning Board should not allow more houses at 22 Elm Street than would be allowable under the standard subdivision regulations. We suggest that it is not in the best interest of the Town to decide otherwise and to allow the project to go forward.

We urge the Acton Planning Board to deny permitting of the proposed 22 Elm Street planned PCRC for the following reasons.

It would allow more single family houses than would be allowed under a standard subdivision, by including the lot’s unbuildable wetlands in the calculation to determine the number of houses.

Permitting the project would go against the intent of the PCRC bylaw, which was to reduce the impact on the environment, not allow developers to build more large, market-rate, single-family houses.

Permitting the project would go against the intent of the Acton Sustainability Policy, which states, “The Town of Acton, in its actions, policies, budgets, bylaws, and purchasing decisions, will consider and strive to advance sustainability.” We believe that “striv[ing] to advance sustainability” obliges the Town (including its boards/committees) to advantage plans and actions that would do so — for example, protecting open space; re-using/minimizing, and choosing nontoxic, materials (including building materials); avoiding new “natural” gas infrastructure/hookups; optimizing energy efficiency; conserving water resources; et al.).

Detailed Explanation of Each Reason

1. It would allow more single family houses than would be allowed under a standard subdivision, by including the lot’s unbuildable wetlands in the calculation to determine the number of houses.

While we recognize that the Planning Board is allowed to approve PCRCs that use the entire lot (including the unbuildable wetlands) in the calculation of maximum number of allowable houses, we believe that the Planning Board should decide by policy to subtract the unbuildable land from the calculation. A PCRC is a zoning tool that allows a developer to cluster houses on a small portion of a piece of land, resulting in preservation of green space. Application of such a PCRC zoning tool can have a positive impact on land use. However, use of the PCRC could have a negative impact on the environment if used to allow more single family homes than would be allowed without using the PCRC approach.

We propose that the intent of the PCRC is to apply legally required exclusions from buildable lot calculations, such as wetlands. Ambiguity in the PCRC calculation that has benefited developers in the past should be removed from the zoning bylaw. For example, unbuildable wetlands were not subtracted in the calculation of the allowable number of houses at the 180 Newtown PCRC project, and the developer was able to gain approval for 8 very large houses, whereas only two (or possibly three) smaller houses would have been allowed under a standard subdivision In the meantime, until the wetlands are subtracted in the bylaw, we urge the Planning Board to do so “by policy,” using its discretion, because continuing to allow the use of wetlands in the calculation does not benefit the town.

2. Permitting the project would go against the intent of the PCRC bylaw, which was to reduce the impact on the environment, not to allow developers to build more large, market-rate, single-family houses.

Denying the 22 Elm Street PCRC would not stop building at 22 Elm street, but it would result in fewer single family houses on the parcel, as well as smaller houses, according to the developer. In alignment with Green Acton’s housing principles (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NmZHrGvAOrQjb8SKY6fjsoZ5fGzRKgW1SY-S-WPa0Wg/edit) and Acton’s Housing Production Plan (both of which stress the importance of rehabbing existing units and building new only when there is public necessity), we believe that:
• the low-income housing crisis calls for us to to restrict new market-rate building
• our Climate Emergency calls for a halt to building that results in new natural gas infrastructure and further facilitates building of additional houses.

3. Permitting the project would go against the Acton Sustainability Policy. We believe that “striv[ing] to advance sustainability” obliges the Town (including its boards/committees) to advantage plans and actions that would do so — for example, protecting open space; re-using, and choosing nontoxic, materials (including building materials); avoiding new “natural” gas infrastructure/hookups; optimizing energy efficiency; conserving water resources; et al.).

The Acton Sustainability Policy compels the Town to consider the environmental implications of future development decisions. The Climate Emergency declaration that passed overwhelmingly at Acton Town Meeting in September demonstrated the strong will of residents to, among other things, “protect trees, forests, and other open spaces because of their ability to draw carbon out of the atmosphere and store it” — an example of reducing the environmental impacts of our human actions. We believe that this imperative extends to land use permitting of new building projects. We believe that the proposed 22 Elm Street project, and PCRCs like it are abusing the intent of the PCRC Zoning Bylaw, which was to reduce, rather than increase, the impact of building.

Also, note that the developer claimed in the hearing that in a PCRC, the minimum house size is 3,000 square feet, whereas in a standard subdivision, houses would likely be smaller because of the market demand for moderate-sized (around 2,500 square feet) houses, and the possibility that more houses could fit on the parcel. We do not know if there actually is a minimum size, but we see no reason to have a minimum house size in a PCRC and consider this requirement counter to the intentions of the Acton Sustainability Policy.

Below we attempt to demonstrate how the proposed 22 Elm Street PCRC violates the intent of the Acton PCRC bylaw.

This is a drawing of the proposed 22 Elm Street project:

In this drawing, the 22 Elm Street property is in light blue. Note that development is not allowed on land “within” a 75-foot setback from any wetland.

The green area delineates the land that is “outside” the wetland setbacks and is therefore “buildable” according to the applicable setbacks. 

Note that a standard subdivision requires that each house lot be 20,000 square feet, with a 150-foot frontage along a road, and a 40-foot wide driveway (to accommodate fire trucks). If this were a standard subdivision, only two or three houses would be allowed given this requirement.

In summary, because we advocate for minimizing the number of new, large, market-rate, single-family homes in Acton, maximizing affordable housing, conservation of open space, and for using the PCRC as a tool to meet this goal — not to frustrate it — we encourage you to deny permitting of the proposed 22 Elm Street PCRC.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

Green Acton Board of Directors