Selectmen will take the town’s own Zoning Board of Appeals and developer Dakota Partners to court on the grounds that a recent decision approving a large, controversial affordable housing project in East Wareham was “arbitrary.”

Dubbed Woodland Cove, the project aims to create a 150-unit apartment complex which would consist of six, three- and four-story buildings at the intersection of Red Brook Road and Cranberry Highway. In addition to the apartment buildings, plans call for constructing a community building, recreation space and several parking lots.

Woodland Cove was first unveiled in June 2017, sparking an outcry from Selectmen, the Onset Board of Water Commissioners and many residents. Selectmen and Onset Water Commissioners formally came out against the project, saying that it would impact a myriad of town services, including the Wareham Public Schools, the Wareham Fire and Police Departments and sewer and water service. 

During a public hearing that spanned months, residents voiced concerns on traffic, water quality, landscaping and sewer systems.

Despite these grievances, officials couldn’t take action because of the protection Woodland Cove receives under the state’s affordable housing law, known as chapter 40B.

Under Chapter 40B, local zoning regulations are relaxed for developers in towns where less than 10 percent of homes or apartments are considered affordable. In Wareham, 7.7 percent of residences are deemed affordable. Once completed, Woodland Cover would increase the amount of affordable housing in Wareham by 2 percentage points, just shy of the 10 percent threshold the town needs.

Because Zoning Board members were limited on what conditions they could impose, an outside consultant, Paul Haverty, was hired to navigate the complex approval process. The Zoning Board earned some concessions from Dakota Partners related to parking, landscaping, trash removal and other areas, finally approving the project on Oct. 24.

Town Counsel Richard Bowen stated on Nov. 20 that Selectmen would seek to take legal action against the two parties saying that the decision was both “arbitrary” and “capricious.”

“What we want to do is demonstrate the erroneousness of this decision,” Bowen said.

A lawsuit, which Bowen said would be filed soon, would seek to vacate the Zoning Board of Appeals’ decision or modify it. He noted that the lawsuit might also open up Dakota Partners to further mediation.

“There are a lot of possibilities,” Bowen said. “So we’re looking to see what we can do.”