PLYMOUTH — Plymouth officials are preparing a strategy to reach the state's 10% affordable housing threshold, saying the effort would give the town significantly more control over future development while reducing the risk of hostile Chapter 40B projects.
During the June 30 Select Board meeting, Assistant Town Manager Lauren Lind presented a roadmap showing where Plymouth currently stands, what projects are already in the pipeline and how many additional affordable housing units would be needed both in the short term and over the next decade.
Plymouth currently has 2,163 deed restricted affordable housing units on the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory, representing 8.42% of the town's year-round housing stock. Lind said another 168 units are actively permitted or in the development pipeline but are not yet included on the state's inventory.
If those projects are completed, Plymouth would reach just over 9% affordable housing, leaving the town 238 units short of the 10% benchmark.
Lind said reaching that threshold within the next 14 months would allow Plymouth to maintain Safe Harbor status through the next federal census while giving the town greater influence over where affordable housing is built.
"When a community has 10% or more on the SHI, we are no longer susceptible to unfriendly 40B developments," Lind said.
She explained that the town currently has temporary Safe Harbor protection after certifying its Housing Production Plan in 2025. That protection expires in 2027 unless Plymouth either produces enough affordable housing to maintain Safe Harbor or reaches the permanent 10% threshold before the next census.
Looking beyond the immediate goal, Lind said the town must continue planning because the housing inventory is recalculated every 10 years using updated census figures.
Assuming Plymouth reaches today's 10% goal, officials estimate the town would need about 503 additional affordable housing units after the 2030 census to remain at the threshold when the housing inventory is recalculated.
Rather than waiting for developers to propose projects under Chapter 40B, Lind recommended that the town proactively partner with developers on projects that fit Plymouth's priorities.
"It gives you the opportunity to then really put aside the threat of a comprehensive permit that you don't want to see so that you can focus on things like workforce housing, whether it's increased deed restrictions, areas that you want to work on for housing," she said.
She told board members that friendly Chapter 40B developments allow municipalities to negotiate mitigation measures, evaluate traffic and infrastructure impacts, and guide development toward locations that already have water, sewer and roadway capacity.
The presentation also outlined several housing approaches, including so-called "missing middle" housing such as duplexes, townhouses and small multifamily developments. Lind said these housing types often provide more attainable housing options but can be difficult to build because of zoning regulations, construction costs and infrastructure limitations.
Board members generally supported pursuing the state's 10% goal, although several emphasized that future housing projects must account for infrastructure capacity and community impacts.
Select Board member Kevin B. Canty argued that reaching the threshold would ultimately provide the town with more options.
"I think in my personal opinion, housing should be our number one priority because we're seeing it. We saw it through the master plan process and we're also seeing it on a state, national and even international level that affordability is a major concern," Canty said.
He said achieving Safe Harbor would allow Plymouth to make its own decisions about future housing rather than having projects imposed through hostile Chapter 40B applications.
Vice Chair Richard J. Quintal Jr. questioned whether the town should pursue additional housing before addressing traffic congestion, wastewater infrastructure, environmental impacts and school capacity.
"We know we don't have the infrastructure and the wastewater treatment system," Quintal said. "I'm not in favor of none of it without addressing the traffic, what we're doing with the ponds, the aquifer that everybody so talks about."
Select Board member David M. Golden Jr. said delaying action could leave the town with fewer choices.
"I hear the concerns that my colleagues have raised, but respectfully, if we sit around for the next 14 months and debate the philosophy of whether or not we should get to 10%, we're simply going to find ourselves in a position where those 700 units are shoved down our throat," Golden said.
Lind emphasized that no specific development sites were proposed during Tuesday's discussion. Instead, she asked the board to endorse two planning goals: permitting the 238 units needed to reach the current 10% threshold and developing a longer-term strategy to maintain that percentage after the next census.
Chair Deborah Iaquinto said she believed a proactive approach would allow the town to better evaluate potential projects while keeping the Select Board involved throughout the process.
Lind said any friendly Chapter 40B proposal would return to the Select Board before moving forward, allowing officials to review mitigation measures, infrastructure impacts and financial projections before deciding whether to partner on the application.