Townhouses recently built in Plymouth. The state should lower expectations for how much housing its suburbs build, unless it’s prepared to pay big money to incentivize them. iStock photo

Another day and yet another defeat for the MBTA Communities law.

This time it was voters in Needham who went to the polls to reject their town’s plan to comply with the state housing law, which requires cities and towns across Greater Boston to open their doors to a limited number of new apartments and condominiums.

Tuesday’s vote wasn’t even close. Nearly 60 percent of the roughly 11,000 residents who turned out rejected a previously-approved town plan that went above and beyond what MBTA Communities asked, according to results posted online by the town clerk’s office.

And Needham is just the latest town to rebel against the 2021 measure, with more than a dozen towns having rejected plans to comply with the law either in referendums or at town meeting. Milton has infamously waged an ultimately unsuccessful legal battle against it.

The Healey administration and leading housing advocates love to tout all the communities that have passed zoning that complies with the MBTA Communities law, which requires, among other things, a sizeable multifamily zoning district near the local T station, albeit at a density that more resembles a neighborhood of triple-deckers instead of downtown Boston.

By now, 116 of the 177 communities covered under the law have complied, giving a green light to new zoning districts for apartment and condo projects. On top of the dozen or so that outright rejected the law, a number of others are slated to take up the measure in the spring town meeting cycle.

But there has been a widely reported undercurrent of “paper compliance,” with some suburbs placing their new multifamily districts in industrial areas or in neighborhoods already packed with apartment buildings.

The debacle in Needham should be a wake-up call for the Healey administration, which needs to reconsider its whole approach.

And governor, if you’re reading, here are four things you can do right away.

It’s Time for a Makeover

First, enlist the help of some of the state’s top marketing execs and PR gurus: The MBTA Communities law has a serious image problem.

It’s gotten a reputation among some voters as a big-government plan to urbanize small towns and suburbs with massive apartment projects.

There is significant confusion over what the new zoning law actually does. The number of new units that theoretically could be built under the new zoning is routinely confused with the number that would realistically get built, which is far lower.

Also, if you already own a home, the housing crisis may not seem like a crisis at all.

How about giving people like Joe Baerlein or Geri Denterlein a call?

Honey Works Better than Vinegar

Even in blue-state Massachusetts, state government doesn’t have enough staff and resources to effectively enforce the law if local officials are determined to cheat.

It’s time to consider legal forms of bribery, such as lots of additional money for schools, sewers, roads – you name it.

Past efforts to sweeten the pot have failed, relying on highly targeted initiatives that involved a little sprinkle of money for every unit permitted near a train station.

This is a job that calls for hundreds of millions in potential grants and aid to help ease local concerns, not just a few million here and there.

Pick and Choose Your Battles

Third, remember that towns like Milton and Winthrop probably aren’t worth making a stink over.

I don’t see developers lining up to build in Milton, whatever the zoning, while Winthrop is a 1.6-square-mile peninsula in Boston Harbor.

Every attempt by state officials to crack the whip against recalcitrant communities simply riles up potential opponents in other towns, while doing little to advance the cause of actually getting more housing built.

More Ways to Comply

Lastly, start promoting a broader array of housing, including starter homes.

Making MBTA Communities the centerpiece of the state’s efforts to rev up housing production was a real mistake.

The whole program feels like it was crafted to assuage the concerns of transit activists and environmentalists, with creating new housing that people will actually want to live in a secondary concern, if that.

Scott Van Voorhis

Not everyone wants to live near a train station. There should be an equal effort to revive starter homes, create pocket neighborhoods of single-family homes on small lots and other types of new housing.

And it shouldn’t all be tied to proximity to mass transit, which has some serious limitations in the Boston suburbs as it exists right now.

Give communities more options for building new housing, rather than having to buy into a relatively one-size-fits-all program.

MBTA Communities is not the solution to the state’s housing production woes, and it never will be.

It’s time for the Healey administration and housing advocates to put the initiative on the back burner and head back to the drawing board.

And a good starting point might be asking what types of housing Massachusetts residents want, rather than informing them that there is only one choice, take it or leave it.

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.

State Needs New MBTA Communities Strategy

by Scott Van Voorhis time to read: 4 min
0