As it approaches its 50th anniversary, the original framers of Chapter 40B, Massachusetts’ affordable housing development statute, must be shaking their heads in disappointment – or, given how very long it has taken to get to this point, rolling over in their graves.
The law passed in 1969 had a goal of ensuring that 10 percent of the state’s housing stock was “affordable” to residents earning 80 percent of the area’s median income. As of mid-2011, 39 municipalities had met or surpassed that goal; another 101 had developed plans to get them to that point, giving them safe harbor against 40B developments. That’s a pitiful percentage – less than 40 percent of the state’s 351 communities.
The law engenders a lot of strong feelings on all sides. 40B is an unwieldy law, a hammer that gives tremendous power to developers and leaves residents and town officials feeling crushed in the process. Affordable housing advocates rightly point out that without it, even less affordable housing would have, and will be, created in the commonwealth.
Harsh words are thrown from every angle and interest group – accusations of greed, elitism, snobbery, thievery – and yet the developments almost always inevitably proceed. Communities that have not met the law’s requirements dig in their heels for protracted legal battles that have no chance of success. These communities are engaging in futile fights that will only cost them time, money and reputation.
Take, for example, the battle over the Belmont Uplands. Town officials and residents fought for 12 years to prevent a large 40B development on the Cambridge border. The fight raged in late-night Zoning Board of Appeals meetings (at least one of which did not conclude until 1 a.m.); it was rehashed at every Town Meeting; nary a week went by without at least one mention in the local newspaper.
And yet a special permit was granted in early 2015. In the end the Royal Belmont was built and is now leasing. Approximately 60 affordable units are reserved for residents earning 50 percent of AMI; the rest command rents upwards of $3,000-$4,000 per month.
Belmont is just one example; similar battles have been had in all corners of the commonwealth (although it doesn’t often take more than a decade to get the projects approved).
40B may be a hammer, but it is a necessary one. As more municipalities finally approach their 10 percent thresholds, what will become of affordable housing development in those cities and towns? If their past behavior is anything to go on, most of them will throw a party and thumb their noses at developers proposing multifamily developments. And that’s both selfish and shortsighted.
In the nearly 50 years since 40B was passed, the need for affordable in Massachusetts has only increased. And in those years we have learned that the creation of affordable housing does not destroy neighborhoods or bring down property values, nor does it result in an influx of schoolchildren destined to bring down elite test scores.
Municipal governments should in no way consider their responsibilities discharged once their cap is reached. There is far more work to be done.
