The State House is shown in this 2023 file photo. With less than a month left in its formal session, both chambers of the state Legislature are bringing forward their housing reform proposals. iStock photo

Let’s face it: If a quarter-century of escalating warnings about home prices and rents, and now an exodus of the young and upwardly mobile, isn’t enough to push Beacon Hill to pass a huge, sweeping reform of NIMBY local zoning regs, nothing will.

Anyone still hoping Beacon Hill will demolish local zoning rules that bar or hobble new housing in one grand bill might want to consider the old saying that insanity is doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results.

After literally 25 years of debating all sorts of ambitious plans to boost new residential construction and rein in housing costs, the Legislature’s main accomplishment has been to pass the overrated MBTA Communities Act, which only applies to communities with or near T stations and was riddled with loopholes.

Originally billed as a game-changer when it was passed in 2021, the new law is now expected to provide only a modest boost to housing construction as local officials comply on paper, but stay unfriendly to new housing in practice.

Small Victories Add Up

Fearful of a backlash from homeowners and local officials, state lawmakers are loath to pass any sweeping zoning reform bills, such as removing zoning restrictions on all new apartment construction across the state.

Yet while the jury is still out on this one, housing advocates and the real estate industry may have finally found a workaround.

At the very least, there does appear to be a willingness at the State House to pass smaller but still meaningful reforms that, over time, could amount to a major shift.

A prime example? That would be the House of Representatives’ passage this month of a pair of pro-housing production measures as part of a larger, $500 million economic development bill, per Abundant Housing Massachusetts, which pushed for them alongside groups like CHAPA.

The proposed Yes in God’s Backyard (YIGBY) would allow churches, synagogues, mosques and other faith-based institutions to build new homes on their properties without having to go through a potentially years-long rezoning process.

The impact could be substantial given that as many as 4,850 parcels could be developed into housing under this provision of the House’s economic development bill, an analysis paid for by the Lynch Foundation found.

Another provision would standardize the site plan review process on the local level, so housing developers wouldn’t have to navigate a different set of rules and regulations depending on which city or town they are building in.

The Senate’s draft of the same bill, released late last week and teed up for a vote this week, wants to legalize duplexes on all residential lots statewide, with “reasonable limitations related to septic requirements, site plan reviews, and local guidelines and size limitations,” according to a Senate fact sheet.

These small but significant changes come atop the state’s accessory dwelling unit law, which went into effect early last year and is expected, over time, to result in thousands of new granny flats being built across the state.

“When housing is more abundant, everyone benefits,” Jesse Kanson-Benanav, executive director of Abundant Housing Massachusetts, said in a statement. “Home prices go down, essential workers are able to live in the communities they serve, employers are better able to attract and retain talent, and small businesses flourish.”

Citizens Take Initiative with Ballot Question

There’s also the starter home ballot question, which would bar cities and towns from requiring new homes to be built on massive 1-, 2- or even 3-acre lots.

The proposed law, which is almost certain now to go before voters in November, would limit minimum lot sizes to just 5,000 square feet, as opposed to more than 43,000 square feet – equivalent to an acre – as is now common.

Meanwhile, the newly approved state budget gives local boards broader discretion to grant variances for residential or other projects. A provision in the budget makes it easier to rebuild, expand, or build entirely new homes on smaller, nonconforming lots, according to the Real Estate Bar Association, which pushed for changes.

Additionally, developers with approved projects would now be protected from new zoning changes for up to two years, up from one year currently, while cities and towns can use email and other modern forms of communication to notify abutters and others of variances, zoning changes, and the like.

Don’t Sleep on Building Code Reform

Advocates are also turning their eyes towards more technical-but-impactful changes, outlined in a new report last week by Boston Indicators, the research arm of the influential Boston Foundation, the Harvard University Joint Center for Housing Studies and the design firm Nominal.

An odd quirk in the state’s building codes has made it prohibitively expensive to build triple-deckers and small apartment buildings at a time when the state is starved for such middle-market housing, the report found.

Builders with plans for just three or more units suddenly find that their projects are no longer covered under the residential building code, but rather the much tougher International Building Code.

Designed for large, multifamily buildings, the IBC requires sprinklers, elevators and much more extensive reviews by local officials.

The upshot? It can cost $100,000 more to build a modest three-unit condominium or apartment project compared to a townhome or duplex. That’s not due to any bells and whistles being added, but just the increase in red tape from the more rigorous building code, per the report.

Scott Van Voorhis

“When the requirements, timeline and review processes are the same for a three-unit and a 100-unit building, it’s not surprising that developers will forgo the smaller projects,” Luc Schuster, executive director of Boston Indicators, said in a statement.

The report recommends carving out a new section of the building code designed for smaller projects with up to 24 units, among other things.

Certainly seems like a sensible fix, even if it would take a number of bureaucratic moves by the governor to push it through, the report says.

Massachusetts is a notoriously difficult state to build housing in, and we have some of the world’s highest home prices and rents to show for it.

It’s certainly a big, even overwhelming, problem, but solving it may require lots of smaller, modest changes like the ones above.

At the end of the day, these smaller, seemingly arcane tweaks stand a better chance of making it through the Legislature than a major zoning reform bill.

Scott Van Voorhis is Banker & Tradesman’s columnist and publisher of the Contrarian Boston newsletter; opinions expressed are his own. He may be reached at sbvanvoorhis@hotmail.com.