(Illustration by Dsndrn-Videolar via Pixabay)

THE LACK OF affordable and mid-range housing is a serious crisis impacting people and communities across the Commonwealth. Recent arguments, including the ADUs Turn One report from Boston Indicators, conclude without evidence that we should throw out all of the local wetlands, stormwater, and septic system rules to speed up housing development.

That is a dangerous notion that would put local water supplies at risk and expose more people to flood hazards, at a time where those risks are escalating and causing widespread economic harm.

There is a misperception that local wetlands and water protection rules impede the development of much-needed housing. In reality, these local bylaws and ordinances are essential to protecting people, property, and infrastructure, and to supporting local economies. The state notes that every $1 invested in climate resilience yields $13 in benefits through avoided costs and economic benefits.

Why are local water resources and wetland rules important? Water pollution and flooding are extensive problems across Massachusetts. More than 400,000 people live in the 100-year floodplain, with affordable housing disproportionately located in high-risk areas.

The estimated costs of resiliency measures needed by 2050 are up to $130 billion. Preserving wetlands, which serve to store flood waters during storms and mitigate flood damage, is the most cost-effective resiliency measure that can be taken. State plans and programs prioritize local actions to reduce these hazards; state recommendations include adoption of local wetlands, floodplain, and water resource protection bylaws.

Several recent housing reports call for elimination of local wetlands, stormwater, and septic system rules and to substitute them with stronger, consistent state rules. That superficially sounds good, but in reality, this will remove essential local protections with little likelihood of replacing them with strong, scientifically adequate state standards.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s stormwater standards currently rely on outdated data from the 1960s. Updated standards have been discussed for years and remain in limbo. Even if new standards are adopted, they will require regular updates to address a changing climate.

There is a large body of scientific evidence demonstrating the need for naturally vegetated buffers to remain between development and wetlands or waterways. If housing is constructed too close to wetlands and without adequate stormwater management, it can cause flooding on the property and on adjacent properties; it can push water into basements — in both the new housing and adjacent homes and result in impacts to water quality in nearby waterways and water supplies.

Local water resource rules are not causing the problem — they should be considered an important part of the solution. While advocating for increased housing supply, we can and must protect our water supplies from pollution and ensure that housing development is accelerated in places and ways that are safe, healthy, and resilient.

Dorothy McGlincy is executive director of the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions.