BUILDING COALITIONS
ONE PERSON AT A TIME
How to make your voice heard:
Missing Middle housing hasn't had a voice in the state house. Some cities like Cambridge have been able to make change because their renters and middle-income residents have come together to demand change.
We can do that across our entire state.
3. Talk to your friends, neighbors, and family
Why should neighborhoods change? Isn’t zoning working already? Current zoning prioritizes single-family homes. And “there’s little incentive [for cities and towns] to amend zoning ordinances” on their own, according to a policy analyst who worked on the “I AMesbury 2030” plan. Current zoning restrictions are not “preserving neighborhood character.” They’re eroding it. Communities consistently report difficulty staffing police and emergency services, schools, and healthcare systems. As one police chief put it, “housing is a stumbling block for anyone that’s going to apply for a position here.” Updating zoning to allow a broader range of housing options—small multi-unit homes, duplexes, and other “missing middle” types—doesn’t undermine neighborhood character. It strengthens it by making communities accessible to the people who keep them safe, healthy, and vibrant. More flexibility and more housing choices support long-term community health, economic stability, and the welcoming, human scale that residents value.
Won’t these reforms make home buying harder in our communities? Critics are right that poorly structured real estate transfer taxes and fees can have unintended consequences. That’s why the Missing Middle Housing Act targets only high-value transactions. It specifically exempts first-time home buyers, non-profits, and public housing residents. Independent analyses commissioned by the City of Boston and the City of Somerville show that policies like the MMHA will generate millions of dollars for affordable housing, while having only a negligible effect on the real estate market. This small tax on the sale of the most expensive homes will raise critical revenue for housing investments and make tax systems more equitable. By using this kind of tax to diversify housing, support access, and facilitate more market choice, these reforms will actually make buying homes easier.
Isn’t this just a giveaway to make developers rich? It is incredibly expensive to build housing in Massachusetts. Development costs range from $350k to $550k per unit, depending on the community. When costs are too high, construction pivots to profit. “Currently, the most active segment of the construction market in Massachusetts is on the luxury side for mansions because it’s more lucrative,” explained a Harvard Law Professor. “The cost of acquiring land is so high, so they want a proper return on their investment.” For affordable homes, permitting a certain density is usually necessary to make development feasible, so the costs can be spread out across multiple units. Amending our zoning laws is the only way to make this possible. As of right housing shortens the permitting timeline, allowing quicker construction. And publicly financing these projects makes them economically viable.
Won’t allowing by right missing middle housing change the look of our neighborhoods? Our proposal is focused on small-scale, context-compatible housing types, not large apartment buildings. Municipalities are expressly authorized to conduct site plan review by reference to objective design criteria. This allows municipalities to regulate matters such as vehicular access and circulation, building design, landscaping, and screening of adjacent properties. This type of housing is also deeply rooted in Massachusetts’s history. But over the past few decades, exclusionary zoning and “urban renewal” efforts have largely illegalized and eliminated this quintessential New England housing type. Restoring missing middle housing across the state offers a balanced solution to the housing affordability crisis while also paying tribute to Massachusetts’s unique history.
Schools are already overcrowded, won’t new housing cause enrollment numbers to increase too much? The Massachusetts Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) has researched the relationship between new multifamily development and school enrollment numbers. Analyzing changes in housing units and school enrollment across 231 public school districts in Massachusetts from 2010 to 2020, MAPC found that the development of new housing units does not account for the changes in school enrollment seen over the decade. Instead, the analysis found that demographic trends, parental preferences, and the characteristics and affordability of available housing often play a much larger role than housing development in enrollment growth and decline.
Isn’t building new multifamily housing bad for the environment? Because it is denser and smaller, missing middle housing requires less energy to heat and cool each housing unit than single-family houses. Missing middle housing also contributes to key climate goals by minimizing impervious surfaces and water usage per capita. Building compact housing in more walkable, transit-oriented locations also means communities can meet multiple objectives simultaneously: providing housing and preserving open spaces. Encouraging housing where people can rely less on private vehicles and have options of using more sustainable ways to get around also reduces the greenhouse gas emissions contributing to our climate crisis.