Massachusetts can make housing more affordable
Brookline and Newton have a lot in common. They overwhelmingly backed Joe Biden and Senator Ed Markey in the 2020 election, and often position themselves as beacons of progressive values. But these two enclaves of success and privilege have recently taken divergent paths toward solving one of the state’s biggest crises: the lack of housing.
Last month, Brookline adopted one of the most significant zoning reforms in town history, surpassing state requirements by making space for the creation of more than 1,500 new housing units. It was a welcome and overdue change for a community that had kept dated, restrictive zoning proposals in place that limited multifamily developments. Newton voters, meanwhile, voted out leaders who proposed going beyond state housing requirements and eventually passed a watered-down housing plan.
Brookline and Newton are not alone in taking different paths. Earlier this year, Lexington and Arlington passed sweeping proposals to ease zoning restrictions and allow for the creation of thousands of multifamily housing units. Braintree, meanwhile, killed a plan to build nearly 500 units in a vacant parking lot while Milton attempted — and failed — to reduce the amount of multifamily housing units it has to zone for from more than 2,400 to less than
1,000. And even after Milton passed its own zoning reform, residents vowed to oppose it through a town ballot initiative.
These stories highlight one of the core challenges of the housing crisis. We pride ourselves on being forward-looking and inclusive as a Commonwealth but when it comes to building the housing that would create more inclusive communities we pass the buck. Voters balk, fearing apartment buildings and dwellers will change their neighborhood’s character and depress property values. This decades-long failure to build has made buying a home nearly impossible for many low- and middle-income families. And the lack of housing impacts the state economy and its overall tax base.
The state must now take action and build 200,000 housing units over the next six years to address the state’s housing needs. The longer it waits, the more residents will relocate, jobs will go unfilled, and the economy (including state aid to communities, schools, emergency responders, and more) will suffer.
One step the state should take is to strengthen the Community Preservation Act, a local option law that allows communities to raise funds for a variety of initiatives, including affordable housing. However, more than a third of the 190 communities that have joined the CPA have failed to invest the required 10 percent of CPA funds in affordable housing, according to a recent study by the Tufts Center for State Policy Analysis, which was commissioned by the Greater Boston Real Estate Board.
To strengthen the CPA, the state should offer increased financial aid to communities that invest at least 20 percent of CPA funds in affordable housing. Additionally, the Commonwealth should require communities that have shirked their responsibilities to make up for their failures by investing CPA funds in affordable housing until they reach their 10 percent minimum threshold.
State leaders should also simplify rules around the creation of accessory dwelling units. Small apartments typically built in one’s backyard or in place of a garage, ADUs offer those looking to downsize or live close to their families an affordable option. However, onerous municipal regulations mean that prospective ADU owners must endure lengthy wait times for public comment and zoning board approval, often deterring their creation.
In California, another state facing a huge housing shortage, the easing of restrictions around ADUs has resulted in 80,000 units being permitted. Massachusetts can learn from California by easing restrictions around the creation of ADUs. The Healey administration’s Housing Bond bill aims to do just this, allowing for the by-right creation of ADUs equal to or less than 900 square feet. Setting these clear, statewide guidelines that do not require unnecessary public input and board approvals will spur production and help create more desperately needed homes.
Massachusetts should also embrace opportunities to create housing on unused state-owned land, a priority that Governor Maura Healey cited during her inaugural address. Earlier this year, the administration sold an unused stateowned lot to a housing developer in
New Bedford, allowing for the creation of more than 80 affordable housing units. It’s a start, and the administration should continue to actively pursue similar opportunities.
It’s easy to criticize Newton and other communities about their housing choices and say “do better.” And they should. But it’s going to take more than that. Together, the steps outlined here will make Massachusetts more affordable and show everyone that our progressive values are more than just empty rhetoric.
This decades-long failure to build has made buying a home nearly impossible for many low- and middle-income families.