Multi-Family Zoning Requirements for MBTA Communities

Smuttynose said:
There is a collective freak-out over these requirements that is just not remotely proportional to the impacts.
Click to expand...
The freak-out is proportional to the perceived "loss" of "local control". To be honest, the amount of local control (to exclude) is one of the cardinal sins of the original colonist's forms of government.
 
as02143 said:
The freak-out is proportional to the perceived "loss" of "local control". To be honest, the amount of local control (to exclude) is one of the cardinal sins of the original colonist's forms of government.
Click to expand...
This law gives more control to municipalities than 40b did.
 
tysmith95 said:
This law gives more control to municipalities than 40b did.
Click to expand...
It objectively doesn't though. Mandating anything at a higher level of government is a loss of control for municipalities. However it does give more control for residents and developers, which is probably a good thing right now.
 
Mongo said:
What you need to understand is that that statement is factually wrong. Demand for housing, including multifamily housing, is extremely high and is outstripping supply everywhere in the Boston metro.
Click to expand...

You have to rembember that a lot of the "demand" for MUDs is wannabe landlords... who if they choose the wrong spot, will lose their shirt. They did in 2008 in the burbs, and it will happen again.
 
jklo said:
You have to rembember that a lot of the "demand" for MUDs is wannabe landlords... who if they choose the wrong spot, will lose their shirt. They did in 2008 in the burbs, and it will happen again.
Click to expand...
I don't see why we should care if the demand is from people or people who think they can rent those units. If they want to put their own money on the line and lose their shirt, who are we to stop them? With that logic, the United States would have strangled our tech sector in the dot com boom. God forbid if the minimum income to live in Newton drops below 200k per year. If government protected the assets of incumbents in all markets as strongly as it does for housing here, I think we'd be in a very bad place.
 
TheRatmeister said:
It objectively doesn't though. Mandating anything at a higher level of government is a loss of control for municipalities. However it does give more control for residents and developers, which is probably a good thing right now.
Click to expand...
40B mandated housing as well. Difference is that towns didn't get to choose the location.
 
I'm surprised that some of the more NIMBY communities haven't tried to do some "paper compliance" like re-zoning parcels that have just gotten redeveloped. I haven't been following each town/city super closely, but it seems like an easy-ish way to keep the all the grant money flowing while minimizing new construction.
 
tysmith95 said:
This law gives more control to municipalities than 40b did.
Click to expand...
40B gives a good amount of control to localities/devolves power.

MBTA Communities removes some key local controls - zone size, lowest unit density standard, age restrictions.
 
BOS2BON said:
I'm surprised that some of the more NIMBY communities haven't tried to do some "paper compliance" like re-zoning parcels that have just gotten redeveloped. I haven't been following each town/city super closely, but it seems like an easy-ish way to keep the all the grant money flowing while minimizing new construction.
Click to expand...
I suspect a lot of the early movers are actually doing this. Making small changes that allow compliance. But I also suspect they were already trying to deal with affordability through zoning already.
 
BOS2BON said:
I'm surprised that some of the more NIMBY communities haven't tried to do some "paper compliance" like re-zoning parcels that have just gotten redeveloped. I haven't been following each town/city super closely, but it seems like an easy-ish way to keep the all the grant money flowing while minimizing new construction.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone has done that whole cloth but it’s certainly being included as part of it. I’ve referenced here a few times how Quincy included the large parcel that was just breaking ground on the MBTA’s new bus garage for example.
 
commonwealthbeacon.org

Milton makes interesting case on MBTA Communities Act

“This is a case about the separation of powers and the rule of law—about who sets the rules that govern the Commonwealth and how they do so,” says the Milton brief.
commonwealthbeacon.org commonwealthbeacon.org

TL;DR: Milton says the state law can only fine them (in terms of being eligible for state grants) and can't force them to comply with the zoning rules.
 
Seems dubious at best when Milton's ability to control its own zoning is granted from the state in the first place.
 

In Somerville, triple-deckers are mounting a comeback​

1725638095992.jpeg


“The number of applications to create three-unit homes has surged in Somerville. One builder has applied to gut and rebuild a two-unit residence on Springfield Street into a three-family.

The city has seen a big jump in applications for the ground-up construction of three-family homes since an MBTA Communities zoning change late last year….”

https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2024/09/06/somerville-triple-deckers.html
 
Teban54 said:
commonwealthbeacon.org

Milton makes interesting case on MBTA Communities Act

“This is a case about the separation of powers and the rule of law—about who sets the rules that govern the Commonwealth and how they do so,” says the Milton brief.
commonwealthbeacon.org commonwealthbeacon.org

TL;DR: Milton says the state law can only fine them (in terms of being eligible for state grants) and can't force them to comply with the zoning rules.
Click to expand...
Looks like that's what's been argued in front of the SJC. Seen notes that said that the SJC is unlikely to issue a decision until after the end-of-year deadline.
 
commonwealthbeacon.org

SJC raises questions about MBTA Communities Act penalties

There seemed to be a mixed reception to the arguments on Monday, with some justices inclined to parse legal minutiae that could support a narrow ruling on technical grounds. Others appeared compelled by a broader public policy argument that could allow wide latitude for the state to enforce laws...
commonwealthbeacon.org commonwealthbeacon.org
THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT, grappling with a lawsuit against the town of Milton for refusing to cooperate with the ambitious MBTA Communities housing law, prodded attorneys about the possibility that the law is nothing but a “paper tiger,” where the state’s only recourse against municipal noncompliance is a “twig” – the loss of state grant funds – rather than the “stick” of a court order.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top