Multi-Family Zoning Requirements for MBTA Communities

[KCasiglio]

The main reason to oppose housing is that more houses == more kids == more school expenses. This year - overrides are failing in a lot of towns, and there is talk about firing teachers, and reducing expenses.
I was brought up in a third world country but in a kind of progressive state. Public education is considered sacrosant - I dont know why these discussions even have to happen in the most educated state in the richest country.
If the state were to fund schools adequately in exchange for taking charge of zoning, maybe that would work?

K-12 enrollment is plummeting and state funding is tied to enrollment. Districts are begging for kids. We already covered this.

But you're talking about SFH. This thread is about MUDs. People don't typically cross shop SFH and MUDs. And as we're seeing, there is a segment of people leaving MA because they can't afford SFH. Building MUDs isn't going to get them to stay.

This thread is about a policy designed to lower housing costs. It's not about net migration to/from MA (which, as I'd hope you know, continues to be only in the low positive in large part because of cost of living, whether owning or renting.) and how to increase it. You're taking a point about neighborhood character and changing the subject to something this thread isn't about.

As for SFH prices and MUD prices being unrelated, fine, let's have another basic lesson on how markets work. At the margin (think about all those childless couples you mentioned before) there are plenty of people who would rent or buy a condo within a MUD over a SFH at given prices. Those people are real. That impacts SFH prices. It's no different than the explosion of SFH suburbs making urban rents cheaper. When the building stopped and prices began steadily rising through the 80s, 90s, and 00s, urban rents became more and more attractive to young professionals who in decades prior might have bought a SFH. This is reflected in how the median age of first time home buyers has been rising since the, *surprise*, early 80s.

 

[jklo]

As for SFH prices and MUD prices being unrelated, fine, let's have another basic lesson on how markets work. At the margin (think about all those childless couples you mentioned before) there are plenty of people who would rent or buy a condo within a MUD over a SFH at given prices. Those people are real. That impacts SFH prices. It's no different than the explosion of SFH suburbs making urban rents cheaper. When the building stopped and prices began steadily rising through the 80s, 90s, and 00s, urban rents became more and more attractive to young professionals who in decades prior might have bought a SFH. This is reflected in how the median age of first time home buyers has been rising since the, *surprise*, early 80s.

Yeah no. If you weren't aware, MUD prices in Da Burbz crashed and burned in 2008. Inner Core OTOH started to rise about that point.

 

[KCasiglio]

Yeah no. If you weren't aware, MUD prices in Da Burbz crashed and burned in 2008. Inner Core OTOH started to rise about that point.

What's your point? Demand for the cheapest housing rose during a recession, why wouldn't it? What is even the relevance of this entire sidebar to the thread?

 

[TheRatmeister]

But you're talking about SFH. This thread is about MUDs. People don't typically cross shop SFH and MUDs

I mean, to some extent this is true, but this is also a major case of "People aren't shopping for things that don't really exist." Make duplexes available and people will buy them.

 

[jklo]

What's your point? Demand for the cheapest housing rose during a recession, why wouldn't it? What is even the relevance of this entire sidebar to the thread?

I suspect this bill is specifically to dump poor people (& their kids) in Da Burbz to try to counter the enrollment declines, as mentioned. Actual market rate demand for MUDs in Da Burbz isn't much.

If it was really about Housing, they would be getting serious about density in the Inner Core.

 

[RandomWalk]

Wow. I can’t tell if that is sarcasm and in very poor taste.

 

[shawn]

I suspect this bill is specifically to dump poor people (& their kids) in Da Burbz to try to counter the enrollment declines, as mentioned. Actual market rate demand for MUDs in Da Burbz isn't much.

If it was really about Housing, they would be getting serious about density in the Inner Core.

I just want to make sure I'm understanding you and not putting words in your mouth: you believe the explicit intent behind the MBTA Communities Act is to relocate low-income families with kids to suburban school districts with declining enrollment?

 

[stick n move]

The main reason to oppose housing is that more houses == more kids == more school expenses. This year - overrides are failing in a lot of towns, and there is talk about firing teachers, and reducing expenses.
I was brought up in a third world country but in a kind of progressive state. Public education is considered sacrosant - I dont know why these discussions even have to happen in the most educated state in the richest country.
If the state were to fund schools adequately in exchange for taking charge of zoning, maybe that would work?

You can propose 1 bedroom condos/apartments if theres such a worry, we need lots more of them anyways.

 

[themissinglink]

Westford voters approve MBTA Communities article at Town Meeting

WESTFORD — Voters at the annual Town Meeting passed the town’s proposed MBTA Communities zoning April 27 by a wide margin.

www.lowellsun.com

 

[HenryAlan]

The main reason to oppose housing is that more houses == more kids == more school expenses. This year - overrides are failing in a lot of towns, and there is talk about firing teachers, and reducing expenses.
I was brought up in a third world country but in a kind of progressive state. Public education is considered sacrosant - I dont know why these discussions even have to happen in the most educated state in the richest country.
If the state were to fund schools adequately in exchange for taking charge of zoning, maybe that would work?

That's why these towns need higher density zoning. It increases tax receipts at a faster rate than related infrastructure costs.

 

[malabari]

That's why these towns need higher density zoning. It increases tax receipts at a faster rate than related infrastructure costs.

I am all for increased density - dont get me wrong.

School funding is a valid reason for towns to NOT want more housing. The state doesnt cover all the school expenses - the % paid by the state varies from town to town. Increasing the property tax beyond a certain point would force senior citizens or poorer residents to move out.
McMansions come with high enough property taxes that the school expenses of any child who lives there gets covered.

 

[HenryAlan]

I am all for increased density - dont get me wrong.

School funding is a valid reason for towns to NOT want more housing. The state doesnt cover all the school expenses - the % paid by the state varies from town to town. Increasing the property tax beyond a certain point would force senior citizens or poorer residents to move out.
McMansions come with high enough property taxes that the school expenses of any child who lives there gets covered.

I think you missed my point, which is that density raises revenue more than it raises town expenses. It can provide that extra money needed by the schools and not sustainable under the current tax base. This does not require raising taxes on current residents.

 

[KCasiglio]

Deeply buried in an article otherwise about a Re-Zoning to Allow a Senior Center:

In other business, [Norwell] residents rejecting a zoning change to comply with the MBTA Communities Act. The law requires communities MBTA’s service area to pass new zoning to permit multifamily by right in certain areas.

 

[themissinglink]

Marblehead Town Meeting votes down new zoning to comply with MBTA Communities law - The Boston Globe

Marblehead residents on Tuesday night shot down new zoning rules that would make it easier to build multifamily housing and would comply with the state’s MBTA Communities law.

www.bostonglobe.com

 

[jklo]

I just want to make sure I'm understanding you and not putting words in your mouth: you believe the explicit intent behind the MBTA Communities Act is to relocate low-income families with kids to suburban school districts with declining enrollment?

Only a theory... but more or less. It's the only thing that makes sense.

 

[HenryAlan]

Only a theory... but more or less. It's the only thing that makes sense.

Okay, that's an interesting point of view. If that were indeed the motivation, and were indeed the only meaningful outcome, as ludicrous as that all would be, is it a bad thing to increase access to these school systems?

 

[Blackbird]

If that were indeed the motivation

If that were indeed the motivation, the state could force districts to participate in METCO.

Desegregation and solving the housing crisis might be a little related but they are mostly independent of each other.

 

[RandomWalk]

METCO specifically came about from a fear by the suburbs that education might become super-regional. Bringing a few kids from the city to Lexington would enable the residents to feel like they were doing something, while not disturbing their personal comfort. Attempts to make it reciprocal or expand it met fierce opposition.

 

[Blackbird]

Attempts to make it reciprocal or expand it met fierce opposition.

Attempts to do anything to make these towns less prestigious/exclusive is going to be met with fierce opposition. The point stands that if the state specifically wanted to integrate schools, there are more direct ways of doing so that don’t involve building any new housing.

And really, whether it’s an upwardly mobile 2nd gen Dominican family in the Point looking for a bigger backyard or a multigenerational American family in Michigan or Maryland looking to take an entry-level role at a Boston-area biotech without sacrificing their quality of life, both benefit from having more and newer housing options in towns like Boxford, Wenham, Kingston, Sudbury, etc. Two birds, one stone.