VOTE NO on Articles 7 & 8 Town Meeting Monday 10/27, 7 PM Center School
Our Mission
To represent the views of residents, abutters, and friends of the East Lower Village of Stow, MA, who are having the MBTA 3A Housing Zone thrust upon them without being heard first. While the residents recognize the need for the town to create a multi-residential housing zone, we feel strongly that there are many other options to place a new zone in Stow--without potentially displacing dozens of residents and with fewer environmental impacts. The Planning Board has acknowledged they did not consider any potential negative impacts, and only abstract positive impacts when choosing this site.
Have you seen the enormous developments in Concord & Acton currently under development?
The Stow Planning Board wants to zone approximately 14 acres for 139 units "by right" (no permit required) for 15 units per acre of townhome, duplex, and triplex residences along 117 near Erikson's - far away from 495, Rt 2 and South Acton station.
Will Stow Lose Existing Money If We Vote Down This Proposal on October 27? NO!
- As revealed by the Planning Board, Stow only needs to request an extension before the end of the year to remain in compliance
- We do not think that zoning over existing residents' homes is a reasonable decision from the Planning Board when there are undeveloped areas in this town more suited to the requirements and spirit of the law
- The money everyone is afraid of losing is not even a current source of funding for town projects today (see info in resident testimonials below)
- The planning board doesn't have a budget to make this area walkable with a sidewalk or even a designated bike lane--they have only proposed making the zone, then applying for grants to pay for a sidewalk through wetlands
- The Planning Board has had from when the MBTA Communities Act was passed into law in January 2021 and still has until the end of December 2025 to apply for available extensions from the state or put another site to a vote
- This urgency could have been avoided
- VOTE NO on Articles 7 & 8, Monday, October 27, 7 PM, Center School
Traffic and Safety are Already Concerns in the East Lower Village Before Adding 139 Units
- It is dangerous to walk on 117/Great Road in this neighborhood
- Building a sidewalk would not change that without expanding the road
- Due to safety concerns, residents on the North side of the street usually drive to cross the street to get their mail
- It is already difficult to turn on to Great Road from Red Acre or Pompositticut
- When we raised concerns about traffic to the Planning Board, they told us that they would need to conduct a traffic study before deciding traffic was a concern – it seems illogical to study traffic after garnering state approval
- When listing reasons to not choose some alternate sites considered, they did list traffic concerns - without conducting a traffic study
This Site Does Not Help Promote the Intent of the MBTA Communities Act or Homeowners
- The Planning Board hopes that developments will be incremental. If only one or two people sell, then only a few developments will go up. This is their stated intent, and hope developments will be slow and fully occur over a few decades. If this were true, then the touted benefits to the shopping center in the Lower Village will also only be gradual.
- The Planning Board has put the responsibility of these changes to our town in the hands of a few homeowner residents, instead of zoning unoccupied land which could use an infusion of investment from 3A developers.
- What is more likely, as these are large properties, one resident selling will lead to dozens of properties going up relatively quickly. If the largest property were developed, there will likely be 60 new units within a year.
- The Planning Board thinks that just changing the zoning will satisfy the state. But policies are incremental, and it is likely the state will offer incentives or withhold funding based on actually fulfilling the law and seeing full developments in the future.
From the MBTA Communities Act:
- Core Requirements:
- Establish a zoning district of "reasonable size"
- Permit multifamily housing "as of right," meaning no special permits are needed for development
- Require a minimum gross density of 15 units per acre
- Ensure the district is located near an MBTA transit station (within 0.5 miles where possible)
- Not be age-restricted and allow housing suitable for families
72.03(2)(d) refers to “safe, accessible, and convenient access to transit stations for pedestrians and bicyclists" and this makes us believe that the area on South Acton Rd is more suitable than East Lower Village.
72.08(1)(d) refers to the location of the zoning, which would make the South Acton Rd site more appropriate than East Lower Village.
72.02 Sensitive Land definition refers to priority habitat for rare or endangered species.
The Blue Spotted Salamander, is native to this wetland and was found to be a species of special concern.
In 2021, the Air Force worked with the Center for Environmental Management of Military Lands (CEMML) at Colorado State University to assess Hanscom’s natural resources. After reviewing available state data and conducting preliminary surveys for sensitive species, the team concluded Hanscom contained significant natural resources, including potential habitat for the blue-spotted salamander —a species of special concern in Massachusetts."
SOURCE: Red Coats and blue-spotted salamanders | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service https://share.google/kMQHsUUi4tLwx0Oif
The Community and the People
- Residents and abutters of the East Lower Village have hundreds of years of lived experience in this neighborhood
- While no properties are being forced to develop, once one sells and dozens of new housing units go up next door, it might be hard not to sell, especially if it’s an aggressive developer
- The few people that helped choose this site were in essence voting people off the island
- Some of the proposed alternate sites have actually expressed interest and are open or not existing residential space
- If the Planning Board is correct in saying there are barely any other viable sites without existing residents, this means existing neighborhoods are likely to be rezoned in the future, and there is very little room to grow in Stow
Prevent Environmental Destruction
The proposed site at East Lower Village contains several rural and natural landmarks of the kind our Conservation Commission urges us to protect:
- Scenic views of hills and ponds
- A farm whose chickens roam the neighborhood
- Agricultural soils on these properties
- This area was historically known as "Assabet Heights," Stow's first subdivision where cows grazed on the property (probably Erikson's milk cows); developing here would further erode this historical legacy
- Wetlands which are protected by state and local laws
- A vernal pool, which also has state and local protections, and serves as a large breeding ground for turtles, frogs and the Blue-Spotted Salamander
- The Blue-Spotted Salamander has been categorized as threatened in some parts of the state under the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act
- Deer, turkeys, coyotes, bobcats and other animals traverse the large wildlife corridor in the East Lower Village
- Allowing the kind of dense development currently proposed in the East Lower Village would not only threaten this habitat (and ecosystem) but would also force these creatures to find more circuitous and dangerous travel routes
The Process
- Residents and abutters of the East Lower Village had no input or notice of the consideration or selection of the site
- Residents were told of the selection only after the decision
- This violates planning best practices and the Planning Board's own guidelines to engage with stakeholders before making decisions
- The Planning Board did have some public meetings before the decision, but only a few residents from across Stow were aware
- The Planning Board chose the East Lower Village because they could and they had the power to do so. They did so without engaging any East Lower Village resident.
- The forum which was presented did not solicit or accept meaningful feedback from residents to the Planning Board about their decision
- The Planning Board sent out surveys, initially only to other Stow town committee and advisory Board members, and later through another under-representative survey
Alternate Sites
- We are not against the MBTA Communities Act at all
- In fact, we think the Planning Board is trying to make implementation of the law more difficult to promote an unknown agenda
- Building on undeveloped land would enable the town to meet requirements without affecting homeowner/residents.
- The Planning Board does not want to consider unused commercial sites, claiming that they are both not environmentally suitable, and also that they want to preserve commercial sites for potential future businesses
- If they are not environmentally suitable, then they also can't host businesses
- Read our letter to the Board pointing out why the South Action Road site is actually the best choice, as it is closer to the MBTA/Public Transportation
- The Conservation Commissioner of Stow recommended one of the alternate site areas to prevent potential displacement and overdevelopment in the East Lower Village
- Law appears to allow over-zoning of existing multifamily communities with the exception of multi-use (which none of the existing communities are)
Nearby Towns Have Not Chosen Existing Residential Zones for the 3A MBTA Zones
Towns like Harvard, Acton, Maynard, and Wayland have placed these zones almost entirely in unused commercial areas.
Resident Testimonials
Subscribe to learn more about our ideas!
Opt-in for resident updates and organizational communications by email:
Additional Information and Resources
Zoning Info about Communities Act from mass.gov (pdf)
DownloadStow Planning Board list of better/alternate 3A sites excluded from town vote by the Planning Board (pdf)
DownloadLetter to Editor of Stow and Bolton Independent 4/02/25 (pdf)
DownloadResident letter to Planning and Select Board 4/14/25 (pdf)
DownloadNeighbors Letter to Planning Board 6/2/25 (pdf)
DownloadNeighbors letter to Planning Board 8/25/25 (pdf)
DownloadThis website uses cookies.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.