Smart Growth Works for Massachusetts

Prepared by Karen Wiener and Kristina Egan September 2006

Briefing Book for Gubernatorial Candidates on Ways to Build Genuine

Prosperity for the Commonwealth

18 Tremont Street, Suite 401 Boston, MA 02108

617.263.1257 www.ma-smartgrowth.org

The Massachusetts Smart Growth Alliance is a collaborative of seven organizations promoting solutions that enable residents to buy homes they can afford, make it easier to get around, protect natural resources, and provide better economic opportunities for all our residents. The members of the Alliance are the Boston Society of Architects, the Citizens’ Housing and Planning Association, the Conservation Law Foundation, the Environmental League of Massachusetts, the Fair Housing Center of Greater Boston, the Massachusetts Association of Community Development Corporations, and the Metropolitan Area Planning Council. About the authors: Karen Wiener is the Director of Special Projects at the Citizens’ Housing and Planning Association. Kristina Egan is the Director of the Massachusetts Smart Growth Alliance.

Dear Candidate, Across Massachusetts, voters are concerned about the migration of people and jobs, high home prices, inequitable school quality, lengthening commute times, water resources, and disappearing natural areas. In Greater Boston, a poll by UMass and the Metropolitan Area Planning Council found that 88% of respondents thought it was very important or somewhat important to build new housing for working families. Almost 95% said the same for reducing pollution and improving environmental quality. And 84% thought it very or somewhat important to have public transportation in their own city or town. Respondents ranked the cost of housing as the number one most critical issue facing the region. Job creation, transportation, the environment and sprawl followed closely behind. Notably, residents ranked issues of illegal immigration and terrorism as far less important than issues related to growth and development. The spike in gas prices, and the likelihood that gas will remain at the current price or continue to rise, puts the issues of where people live and work - and how far they have to drive - front and center. If you can help solve these problems in a way that supports economic growth, housing, public transit, and environmental protection – rather than pitting these goals against one another - many voters will support you. In other words, supporting smart growth is good politics as well as good policy. With so many demands for scarce resources, we desperately need win-win solutions that support multiple goals at once. We believe we have some of those solutions for you. The policy recommendations outlined in this briefing book include reforms the voters are looking for and the state needs. These reforms support the kind of growth and development that the Commonwealth needs to remain a great state to live in and an attractive state to move to. We all know that real leadership is needed to turn even win-win ideas into reality. Smart growth requires strong executive support for shaping the growth that is coming our way so that we generate long-term prosperity for the state, rather than endangering our competitive advantages. We invite you to be in touch with us if you would like more background, data, or detail. You can reach me at 617-263-1257. With best wishes,

Kristina Egan Director P.S. The Massachusetts Smart Growth Alliance is a nonpartisan organization that does not endorse candidates for political office. We want all candidates to be informed about the challenges that face Massachusetts and the policies that can build genuine prosperity for all of the Commonwealth’s residents.

2

7

Contents

A Call to Action................................................................................................................................... 7 Path to Genuine Prosperity ......................................................................................................................... 7 Building on Our Strengths .......................................................................................................................... 8

Office for Commonwealth Development ...............................................................................................................9 Smart Growth Works for Business................................................................................................... 12

Issues ........................................................................................................................................................... 12 Lengthy Regulatory Process.................................................................................................................................12 The Jobs-Housing Mismatch................................................................................................................................12 Failure to Serve Urban Markets ...........................................................................................................................13

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Streamline Permitting for New Job Centers in Smart Growth Locations.............................................................13 Rebalance Jobs and Housing for Lower-Income Residents .................................................................................13 Revitalize our Core Cities and Older Suburbs......................................................................................................13 Promote Brownfields Redevelopment & Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings....................................................14 Stimulate Rural Economic Development .............................................................................................................14 Strengthen the Non-profit Community Development Field .................................................................................15

Smart Growth Works for Housing ................................................................................................... 16 Issues ........................................................................................................................................................... 16

Lagging Production..............................................................................................................................................16 Large-Lot Zoning .................................................................................................................................................16 Housing Segregation ............................................................................................................................................17

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Reform Zoning to Promote Housing and Stop Sprawl.........................................................................................17 Make Equity a Priority .........................................................................................................................................18 Preserve Existing Private and Public Housing .....................................................................................................18 Preserve Chapter 40B...........................................................................................................................................18 Increase Funding for Affordable Housing............................................................................................................19 Promote Smart Growth Overlay Zoning (Chapter 40R) ......................................................................................20 Reform How Surplus Land is Sold.......................................................................................................................20

Smart Growth Works for Transportation ........................................................................................ 21 Issues ........................................................................................................................................................... 21

Rising Gas Prices .................................................................................................................................................21 Longer Commutes................................................................................................................................................22 Deteriorating Transit Service ...............................................................................................................................22 Obesity and Chronic Disease ...............................................................................................................................22

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 22 Invest in Corridors Appropriate for Growth.........................................................................................................22 Require Appropriate Land Use around New Transportation Investments............................................................22 Strengthen the Existing Transit-Oriented Development Program........................................................................23 Provide New Sources of Transportation Funding ................................................................................................23 Maintain and Enhance Public Transit ..................................................................................................................23 Fund Transit Commitments..................................................................................................................................23 Make Massachusetts More Pedestrian-Oriented and Bike-Friendly ....................................................................24

8

Smart Growth Works for the Environment...................................................................................... 25 Issues ........................................................................................................................................................... 25

Dewatering Our Watersheds................................................................................................................................ 25 Our Disappearing Landscape............................................................................................................................... 26 Crippled Parks ..................................................................................................................................................... 26 Air Pollution ........................................................................................................................................................ 26

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 26 Target MWRA Expansion to Places that are Growing Smart ............................................................................. 26 Act on and Expand the Statewide Land Conservation Plan................................................................................. 27 Restore State Involvement in Land Preservation................................................................................................. 27 Fund Our Parks.................................................................................................................................................... 27

Change the Rules .............................................................................................................................. 28 Address Municipalities’ Financial Straight Jacket .............................................................................................. 28 Advance School Equity ....................................................................................................................................... 29 Plan Regionally ................................................................................................................................................... 29

Glossary ............................................................................................................................................. 30

5 Actions for the First 5 Months ......................................................................................Back Cover

7

A Call to Action Massachusetts is a wonderful place to live. We have quaint seashore villages, vibrant neighborhoods, and a rich history which draws visitors from around the world. We have stunning scenery, beautiful beaches and natural landscapes. We are also a center of learning and cutting-edge industry. As residents, we have a sense of pride and respect for our region. At the same time, we must address challenges that are driving away young families, new employers, and new workers. We need to make the state stronger and better for all who live here. If we don’t act now, we will squander the human and natural resources we value. For several decades, haphazard development of houses, stores, and workplaces has been consuming land for development at a much higher rate than our population has grown - seven times faster, in fact. This spread-out pattern means longer commutes and wasted resources. Soaring home prices are forcing first-time home buyers to buy further and further from where jobs are located. The rural character of our landscapes is disappearing. Our water resources are strained. All these trends are threats to our prosperity and regional competitiveness.

Path to Genuine Prosperity We need economic growth. In order for this growth to fuel the long-term prosperity of the region, we need to plan for it. We need to think ahead about how we want to grow, what we want to build and where we want to build it. Haphazard development of houses, stores, and workplaces has been creating Anywhere, USA in parts of Massachusetts, thus spoiling the distinctive places and communities that have attracted people to the region. Smart growth policies and programs offer a path toward genuine prosperity for the Commonwealth.

Smart Growth Works for Families. By promoting housing production and housing choice, we reduce the cost of living in the state. Also, by co-locating housing and jobs, we can shorten the distances our residents need to commute. Because transportation costs can account for as much as one-third of the family budget (and may soar higher as gas prices rise), reducing travel distances and time can significantly reduce the overall cost of living in the region.

What is smart growth?  

Smart growth means planning ahead for growth and adhering to a few key principles: 

guide development toward places where people are already living and working; steer 

development away from natural areas of value, farms, and environmentally‐sensitive places; and ensure that development makes 

efficient use of roads, sewers, schools and other existing infrastructure we all pay for. 

8

Smart Growth Works for the Economy. Well-planned growth can also create the types of places that are attractive to high-skill workers. Policies that help reverse urban disinvestment shore up local tax revenues in places where many lower-income people currently reside. This helps improve school quality, which may be the most fundamental engine of our economy. By encouraging clustered development, employers, and even whole industries, realize increased productivity. Cities with efficient transportation links are more productive than more dispersed places. Smart Growth Works for Government. Three decades of research shows that more compact development patterns help reduce public costs. In a forthcoming report, MIT economist Karl Seidman states, “Over thirty years, multiple studies have examined the effect of development patterns on governmental capital and operating costs…. The underlying logic is when people and firms are closer together and more proximate to existing government facilities, shorter lengths of roads, storm drains, and water and sewer lines are needed, which reduces capital investment….Studies have consistently found that more compact development reduces capital and operating costs for public infrastructure and services and low density development raises these costs.” Sprawl development is really a hidden tax on our citizens.

Building on Our Strengths The good news is that Massachusetts pioneered many of the initiatives and programs that other states recognize as elements of smart growth: incentives and programs to promote the redevelopment of industrial brownfields, agricultural preservation, historic preservation, affordable housing, and most recently, a law known as Chapter 40R to encourage housing construction near town centers, transit and other appropriate locations. The Romney Administration has publicly voiced a commitment to smart growth principles, and has done a good job of getting these principles out in the public arena for discussion. Through the creation of the Office for Commonwealth Development, the current administration has encouraged the cooperation of the housing, transportation, energy and environmental agencies in order to accomplish smart growth objectives. The governor’s draft 20-year transportation plan includes some very strong smart growth messages and the new highway design manual will ensure that roads help build better communities. We now have some of the building blocks in place for smarter development and preservation. However, some reforms are needed and more has to be done. The administration has recognized the need to increase housing supply, but the current focus has short-changed the need to preserve and create housing affordable to low, moderate and middle-income residents, who truly face a housing crisis. The Commonwealth has not invested enough in transit infrastructure which would improve air quality, support development and increase mobility. And, land protection investments have fallen significantly during the current administration, putting at risk thousands of acres of ecological significance. Bold and decisive leadership is desperately needed to work with the legislature to design sustainable financing for our transportation infrastructure, reform our current zoning which promotes sprawl and undermines housing production, and develop a cohesive state plan for where to build what next and what we need to preserve.

“A region with many creative industries and creative‐class workers will thus attract more of both, while the losing regions—well, they lose them. “ 

–Richard Florida, Professor, George Mason University

9

Office for Commonwealth Development Creating the Office for Commonwealth Development (OCD) was an excellent step toward breaking down the government silos among the housing, transportation, energy and environment agencies. We need to coordinate the state’s infrastructure investments and comprehensively approach how and where we grow in the state. However, there are a number of flaws in the current way the office implements smart growth programs and policy.

• One-size-fits-all Fund. The Commonwealth Capital Fund bundles a variety of environmental, public works, and housing funding programs together into one fund. Cities and towns that file an Commonwealth Capital application are scored based on the smart growth policies the municipalities have pursued. Grant funds are awarded partially based on this Commonwealth Capital score. The establishment of the Commonwealth Capital Fund attempted to align state capital spending with smart growth goals, which the Alliance believes is critical. However, the way that Commonwealth Capital was designed does not recognize the need to protect natural areas of regional or statewide significance; does not adequately differentiate smart growth strategies for different types of communities in different regions; and does not advance fair housing. Because the Commonwealth Capital programs are bundled under one bond cap, the Fund has been set up so that different types of projects compete with one another (for example, a housing project may compete with a sewer project).

Although the Alliance understands the rationale behind a “let the best project win” approach, an unintended consequence has been that agencies cannot be sure of the capital they will be awarded for programs, which hampers planning. Moreover, constituencies who are otherwise united in promoting smart growth compete against one another for funding for their programs. The new governor should evaluate the Commonwealth Capital program and make necessary reforms.

• Restrictions and delays for affordable housing. The current administration has sought to guide affordable housing to smart growth locations, which is a laudable goal. The Alliance supports locating housing in places where people already live and work, and balancing this goal with an approach that provides all Massachusetts residents with fair and equal access to housing throughout the state. However, OCD has focused on too narrow a definition of smart growth locations. Not all municipalities have public transit or even town centers, and often there are other appropriate locations for housing to be built, which should be considered in designing smart growth housing policy. In addition, OCD has added a time-consuming layer of review for proposed housing projects, rather than streamlining the review, which should be the agency’s function. The new administration needs to explicitly recognize that affordable housing is not the major driver of land use consumption, and we need a coherent approach to directing growth to appropriate places while boosting overall production.

• Exemptions for commercial development. We need to be as strategic about where we encourage commercial development as where we encourage residential development. State investments in and permits for all forms of development need to be examined through a smart growth lens. While smart growth criteria are applied vigorously to the production of subsidized housing, commercial/industrial development and market-rate housing are allowed to proceed essentially without constraint.

Smart growth strategies need to be tailored to serve different types of 

communities in all regions of  the 

Commonwealth. 

10

The Alliance’s recommendation is to institutionalize coordination among the housing, environment, energy and transportation agencies through a statewide office. The new governor should improve on the existing Office for Commonwealth Development in the following ways:

• Reform the Commonwealth Capital Fund to reflect a more accurate balance between urban and rural areas, address fair housing issues, and separate out funding needed to protect natural areas of statewide or regional significance that should not be held hostage to a municipality’s score. We need to evaluate the Fund to better understand whether this bundling of grant programs and distribution of funds based on municipal smart growth scores is actually redirecting investment in ways that support regional smart growth.

• Elevate the Department of Housing and Community Development to a cabinet-level secretariat to achieve balance with the other agencies, given housing’s crucial role in the state’s economy.

• Ensure coordination with other departments, particularly the Executive Office of Economic Development, so that all infrastructure investments and policies related to growth and development are coordinated and do not contradict each other – and support smart growth goals.

• Reduce the review time for affordable housing development proposals. OCD created a new interagency review team for housing under the CCF. Prior to the CCF, only DHCD reviewed and scored proposals. Now, after DHCD has completed its review, housing proposals are further reviewed by an interagency review team and each individual secretariat (transportation, environmental affairs, and OCD). This has added significant time to the review of housing proposals, without any discernable benefit. This unnecessary and costly review process should be replaced with an approach that coordinates investment decisions across departments while streamlining the process, rather than delaying it.

The new governor should establish a strengthened office to coordinate the state’s investments among the transportation, housing, energy and environment agencies. 

The State’s Existing Smart Growth Policies and Programs  

1977 Agricultural Preservation Restrictions • Offers  farmers  the  option  of  permanently  preserving  farmland  under  development  by 

paying  farmers  the  difference  between  the  “market  rate”  for  the  land  and  the “agricultural value” of the land. 

• Has saved over 55,000 acres of farmland.   

1998 The Brownfields Act • Established  the  Brownfields  Redevelopment  Fund,  set  up  pooled  insurance  to  help 

developers cope with liability issues, and created the Brownfields Tax Credit.   • Helped to generate over 3,000 jobs, 5,000 new homes, and new tax revenues for cities and 

towns. • In  2006,  the  legislature  recapitalized  the  Fund with  $30 million  and  extended  the  Tax 

Credit until 2010 and made it more usable.  2000 Community Preservation Act • Enables cities and towns to raise funds for affordable housing, historic preservation and 

open space acquisition through voter approval of a property tax surcharge of up to three percent.  

• 111 municipalities have passed CPA,  saving over 4,000 acres of natural areas, building over 600 new homes, and preserving 150 historic sites. 

2004 Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit • Created a new tax credit for restoring historical buildings for homes and jobs. • In 2006,  the cap  for  the credit was  increased  from $10 million  to $50 million per year  to 

accommodate the high level of demand.  2004 Transit-Oriented Development Program • Dedicates $30 million from the Transportation Bond Bill to supporting housing, parking 

and walking and biking facilities near rail stations.   • To date, $7 million has been awarded.  2004 Smart Growth Overlay Zoning Act (Chapter 40R) • Provides  incentives  to  cities  and  towns  to  establish  overlay districts  allowing  a  higher 

density of housing development in downtowns, near transit stations, and in other locally‐designated growth centers.   

• In 2005, a companion piece of legislation passed to hold municipalities harmless for any costs associated with educating the school children that would live in the new housing.  

• Six communities have adopted Chapter 40R districts.  2006 Highway Design Manual • The  new  guidebook  emphasizes  multi‐modal  options  and  requires  that  new  and 

reconstructed roads accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. 

12

Smart Growth Works for Business

Issues Lengthy Regulatory Process Massachusetts needs to streamline the development of new job facilities so that we can compete with other states in industries like biotech, where the market window for new products opens and closes quickly. Companies in these fields claim that other states -- North Carolina, New Hampshire -- do a much better job of expediting approvals and moving projects from conception to completion. Such developments should be sited where they do the most good and the least harm: close to shops, schools, businesses, and recreation in existing downtowns and town centers; in places served by existing roads and water and sewer lines; on old industrial and shopping center sites; or within walking or shuttle distance of public transit service. The Jobs-Housing Mismatch In high-growth areas, concerns over the cost of schools and other public services for new residents cause communities to “over zone” for commercial and industrial uses, while they “under zone” for residential uses, particularly smaller, more affordable houses and apartments. The result? The employees and customers of the new businesses can’t locate nearby, and they

Baker Chocolate Factory – a mixed‐use development built on a former brownfield site in Dorchester Lower Mills 

Photo: Keen Development Corporation

13

must drive long distances to their jobs and to go shopping. The resulting traffic congestion, as well as the increased cost of providing roads, water, and sewer service to far-flung commercial sites, imposes inefficiency costs on Massachusetts businesses. In addition, the lack of housing production has raised labor costs for Massachusetts businesses and hurt their competitiveness in national markets. Failure to Serve Urban Markets Sprawl patterns of development have left many residents in urban areas underserved by retail and other businesses. More than a decade ago, Michael Porter at the Harvard Business School identified these urban customers as an enormous market opportunity. But urban development sites are often plagued by brownfield contamination, poor transportation service, and outmoded zoning constraints. It will require thoughtful attention to smart growth changes in governmental regulations and investment patterns to create a level playing field on which Massachusetts businesses that invest in urban areas may compete and profit.

Recommendations Streamline Permitting for New Job Centers in Smart Growth Locations The Governor has just signed An Act Relative to Expediting and Streamlining the Permitting Process in the Commonwealth. The new law encourages municipalities to streamline permitting for the creation of jobs in "priority development sites." It also provides municipalities with technical assistance through regional planning agencies and other entities. The law encourages cities and towns to designate priority development sites in areas already adequately served by public infrastructure. The Alliance supported these smart growth criteria, but they are fairly weak and must be implemented only "where possible." We urge the new governor to ensure that any regulations or guidelines related to the new law strengthen the smart growth intent of the statute. Rebalance Jobs and Housing for Lower-Income Residents The state must recognize the links between housing, transportation and employment by targeting workforce development strategies to urban centers where lower income people live, and crafting incentives for housing development in those suburbs where a concentration of jobs exist. This approach has the advantages of reducing the need for new transportation infrastructure while boosting small business development and retail in higher density cities and suburbs. Revitalize our Core Cities and Older Suburbs The economic boom of the 1990s bypassed many of Massachusetts’ smaller cities, some of which are still struggling to make the shift from a manufacturing economy to one that is more diversified. We need to restore the economies of struggling cities like Lawrence, Fitchburg, Springfield and New Bedford by targeting state investments to these urban centers. These cities, along with many older suburbs, are attracting an increasing number of immigrants who are creating new businesses. The state should develop a comprehensive suite of policies to help stimulate job growth, housing growth, and workforce development in these places, by:

The new permitting law encourages job growth in appropriate locations.   The new governor should shore up the smart growth intent of the act. 

14

• Targeting Executive Office of Economic Development programs to core urban and older suburban centers.

• Targeting state incentives for streamlined permitting, brownfields cleanup, sewer and water infrastructure, road maintenance, and other public infrastructure to these areas.

• Increasing funding for English literacy programs for limited English speakers so that they can access job opportunities.

• Providing technical assistance to help cities and older suburbs take advantage of local assets and develop successful revitalization strategies.

• Creating more flexible funding programs for use in weak market cities to finance mixed-income development and smaller scale projects.

• Improving regional transportation opportunities, particularly mass transit linkages within weaker market cities, and between these cities and Boston.

Promote Brownfields Redevelopment & Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings In the 2005-2006 legislative session, the legislature made a commitment to redevelopment by expanding two programs – brownfields redevelopment and historic rehabilitation. Two actions are now needed:

• The Brownfields Tax Credit was revised to make it more usable. MassDevelopment and the Department of Revenue need to work together to develop marketing materials that explain how the credit works for developers, community development corporations, municipalities and syndicators. The program should be aggressively marketed.

• The new governor should provide funding to address asbestos and lead contamination in buildings throughout the Commonwealth. (The current Brownfields Redevelopment Fund targets soil contamination.)

• The new governor should encourage use of the historic rehab tax credit by marketing the program.

Stimulate Rural Economic Development Just as it is important to support the redevelopment of our cities and suburbs, the state must craft smart growth solutions that are tailored to the needs of rural areas. Smart rural economic growth can create opportunities while preserving rural character. Strengthening local business districts- where most of the rural jobs are located - can be accomplished by supporting local businesses, and particularly small businesses.

Because downtowns and business districts with older buildings can be more expensive to develop, and therefore less appealing, much of new rural development is taking place on farmland and natural areas outside of town. We need to invest in infrastructure and other upgrades to make the business districts more attractive to small business owners and shoppers. Possible programs include:

In Rhode Island, the historic tax credit has been the main engine of urban redevelopment.

Smart growth policies and programs must include all parts of  

the state.

15

• Helping local businesses expand through technical assistance and flexible financing (Community Development Corporations and Community Development Financial Institutions can offer these services at the local level)

• Ensuring that community-controlled broadband access is available throughout the Commonwealth, allowing people to work from home and local businesses to compete

• Increasing funding for the Agricultural Preservation Restriction Program and for farm viability programs to allow farmers, particularly small farmers, to keep operating without selling off land to raise revenue for ever increasing property tax payments

• Investing in waste water management, one of the biggest concerns in rural areas with respect to housing and economic development.

Strengthen the Non-profit Community Development Field Community-based organizations play a critical role in building and preserving more inclusive, vibrant and productive communities. Non-profit housing developers, including community development corporations (CDCs), regional housing agencies and faith-based organizations, have developed thousands of units of low and moderate income housing throughout the Commonwealth. These developers are willing to tackle tough but essential projects like small infill projects in urban areas, rehab projects in distressed communities, smaller scaled rental projects in rural settings, and denser multi-family, mixed income projects with a higher percentage of affordability. CDCs and other non-profits also undertake other community-building efforts: supporting small business entrepreneurs, providing workforce training, developing local leadership, and administering other programs that benefit families, youth and seniors in communities across the Commonwealth. These programs are typically focused on serving low-and moderate-income households, female-headed households and minority households, who are traditionally under-served or ill-served by more conventional development. The new governor should work with the legislature to support and enhance the capacity of non-profit community-based organizations that develop affordable and mixed-use housing, provide small business assistance and workforce training, and otherwise serve and are accountable to low-and moderate-income families and their communities. This can be accomplished through a combination of a new set aside of funding as part of increased funding for the state's affordable housing and economic development programs, or through a separate state appropriation to support non-profit capacity.

Close to the ground, CDCs can innovate solutions that fit local neighborhoods and spur economic revitalization.

16

Smart Growth Works for Housing

Issues Lagging Production As we all know by now, Massachusetts is suffering from a severe affordable housing shortage that restricts the choices available to families, seniors, young adults and others who are looking for housing. Many regions of the state are experiencing vibrant growth; however, especially in the suburbs of Boston, it is extremely difficult to build new, affordable housing. This especially impacts the lower end of the housing market, where the need for new housing stock is greatest. Large-Lot Zoning It is illegal in many of our communities to build houses in a way that recreates the traditional New England villages developed long ago. One- and two-acre zoning requirements prevalent in many of our towns create a vicious cycle where sprawl development reduces the variety in housing types and prices, encouraging new development in undeveloped areas further from jobs and core services where land is cheaper. Despite a recent moderation of housing prices, housing costs continue to far exceed what households earning the median income can afford. The cost of housing continues to spiral upward, as the supply of moderately-priced housing cannot keep up with demand.

The average lot size for a new single‐family home built between 128 and 495 is 1.3 acres – the size of a football field.  

Source: Ed Moscovitch, President, Cape Ann Economics

Maritime Landing, a 114‐unit Chapter 40B 

development built on four acres in Newburyport. 

Photo: CHAPA

17

Housing Segregation While a lack of affordable housing production hampers our ability to house all of our residents, housing segregation continues to mark our communities. The less-publicized story behind the Commonwealth’s loss of population is the increasing diversity of our citizenry, yet that diversity continues to be concentrated in certain areas. Over the past few years, study after study has documented the fact that Massachusetts remains one of the most racially and economically segregated states in the nation, with a vast majority of our non-urban areas continuing to be virtually all-white. We know that people of color face discrimination in virtually every aspect of the housing market – rental, sales and mortgage lending - while other important segments of the population – notably families with children and those with state or federal housing subsidies - face similar rates of discrimination.

Recommendations Reform Zoning to Promote Housing and Stop Sprawl One of the main engines of sprawl is our outdated state zoning laws and local zoning codes that try to reduce the number of homes built. The result is large-acre zoning and cookie cutter subdivisions. Solving this problem requires a thoughtful balancing between our need for more housing development and our tradition of home rule in the state. To take on this task, we need strong executive leadership that includes all stakeholders in crafting solutions that guide development toward appropriate places, encourage housing construction, and protect significant natural areas. Some possible elements of a comprehensive package include:

• Setting regional performance goals for housing production - including affordable housing production - and providing a package of carrots and sticks to municipalities to meet these goals.

• Requiring community master plans conform to smart growth principles, and making it a statutory requirement for local zoning and development to follow these master plans.

• Reforming the antiquated provisions of Chapter 40A, like “Approval Not Required” and grandfathering. (See glossary for explanation of these and other terms.)

• Amending the state zoning code to encourage clustering by-right.

• Encouraging the transfer of development rights as a zoning strategy, particularly between municipalities.

All of these ideas need to be vetted and expanded through a commission of thoughtful stakeholders that represent a variety of interests, and then, a comprehensive package of solutions needs to be passed as legislation.

Zoning is the blueprint for how we use land in Massachusetts.  Unfortunately, zoning is so broken in our state, small tweaks aren’t enough.  We need a balance between “Build Anything Anywhere” and home rule in order to boost housing production, curb sprawl, and protect the natural resources we depend on.

18

Make Equity a Priority It is time for the state to make increased equity a central goal of its development policies. Massachusetts should make fair housing a priority and devote the necessary resources to ensure that the state’s commitment to equity and opportunity is used as a lever in all spending decisions, particularly those of the Department of Housing and Community Development. The state must complete the long-delayed Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing (rather than relying on an Analysis of Impediments that dates to 1998 and uses 1990 Census data) and draw upon the vast expertise available throughout the Commonwealth to implement a comprehensive action plan to remove those impediments. This must begin with the data collection legislation, introduced but not passed by the legislature during the last session, which would require the Department of Housing and Community Development to collect information on the persons served by the housing it funds. This will enable taxpayers and government to evaluate more accurately how our dollars are being spent and who is being served.

The state can also use the tools it has as disincentives, enforcing the range of existing executive orders and regulations that empower the state to withhold resources from communities that fail to meet fair housing and other equity requirements, such as 760 CMR 47. Finally, the state must use its resources to encourage inclusionary zoning and other practices that will allow the creation of multi-family housing in more communities.

Preserve Existing Private and Public Housing Preserving existing affordable homes usually costs far less than new construction. It helps to finance needed improvements that often benefit the surrounding neighborhood, avoids resident displacement, and does not entail the difficulty that comes with finding new sites. In addition, preservation supports the creation or maintenance of diverse neighborhoods as they redevelop. State public housing represents one-quarter of the state’s affordable housing inventory and is widely dispersed throughout the state. Yet despite its importance, its long-term viability is at risk, as more and more apartments become deteriorated and obsolete due to a lack of state funds. Distressed housing developments cost more to operate, repair and maintain; they blight the neighborhood around them, discouraging private investment and undermining property values; and they exist at a huge social cost to their residents. Preserve Chapter 40B Since its inception, Chapter 40B has been responsible for the production of affordable housing developments that in most cases could not have been built under traditional zoning approaches. Approximately 43,000 units in 736 developments have been created under 40B statewide since the early 1970s, at an average size of less than 60 apartments or homes per development. This total includes approximately 23,000 affordable homes reserved for households below 80% of median income. The level of production has been higher than any other single housing program available in the Commonwealth. As of January 1, 2006, Chapter 40B projects must be consistent with at least five of the Commonwealth’s Principles of Sustainable Development. Alliance members worked with the

The state must structure incentives so that the entire range of actors in development – municipal officials, developers, non‐profit organizations, realtors, lenders, insurers – 

are encouraged to promote open and equitable housing opportunities in every community across the Commonwealth for 

all groups of people.  

Chapter 40B has produced 23,000 affordable homes in the last 30 years. 

19

current administration to develop criteria that would help shape new, subsidized housing developments that optimize our limited natural resources, without compromising our need for more affordable housing. The criteria wisely look at location, which is clearly a critical aspect of smart growth, and recognize that other factors also define smart growth development, and include:

• promoting efficient land use through the development of compact, mixed-use communities

• concentrating development by clustering housing and preserving open space

• protecting the environment and conserving natural resources by using energy efficient technologies and alternative technologies for waste water treatment

• planning regionally rather than town-by-town

• promoting diverse housing types, equity and fairness

The Alliance supports locating housing in places where people already live and work and guiding considerations of location by the principle that all Massachusetts residents are entitled to fair and equal access to housing opportunities throughout the state. The Alliance also supports building housing in places more varied than downtowns or near transit stations. Not all municipalities have public transit or even town centers, but these communities could designate other areas appropriate for growth as good places for housing development. To be clear, the Alliance supports the existing 40B smart growth location criteria and urges the new governor to keep them in place. However, we believe the state should not hold affordable housing to a “higher standard” than housing development in general, which is by far the greatest user of land in Massachusetts. If the criteria result in an undue burden being placed on affordable housing development, there will be less affordable housing built while overall sprawl will continue. We urge the new administration to use all the tools it has to encourage the private market to produce smart growth housing as defined by the 40B smart growth criteria. Again, this points to the need for bold leadership in reforming zoning and offering strong incentives to communities to zone according to smart growth principles. Increase Funding for Affordable Housing The supply of affordable rental housing and homeownership housing is not adequate to meet the needs of low, moderate and middle-income residents in the Commonwealth. We need to provide additional state funds to produce new affordable housing, preserve our existing affordable housing, and provide rental assistance so that individuals and families at the lowest income levels can avoid homelessness. State investments in affordable housing increase the supply of new housing and preserve existing homes; create construction jobs and provide spin-off benefits to other important industries, such as retail and professional services; leverage a significant amount of private sector capital; revitalize urban communities; and prevent homelessness by providing long-term and permanent affordable housing options.

Smart growth isn’t just about building houses near transit.  Business districts, busy intersections, old malls and other places where people already live and work also make sense.  Smart growth development is also compact, green, and well‐designed.

20

Gubernatorial leadership is an essential ingredient for making progress on affordable housing in Massachusetts. For the past 15 years, governors have routinely stated that addressing the high cost of housing is critical to the long-term health of the state economy. Yet state spending on housing has sharply declined. After reaching its lowest point in a decade in FY99, funding has risen slightly, but still remains 46% below FY89 levels without even adjusting for inflation. Promote Smart Growth Overlay Zoning (Chapter 40R) This 2004 law is designed to encourage municipalities to establish overlay zones that allow more compact housing in downtowns, near transit, and in other designated growth centers. The Alliance believes this new program has good potential to boost housing production in appropriate places. A companion piece of legislation (Chapter 40S) was passed in 2005 to guarantee that municipalities are held harmless for the cost of any new school children that come to live in the new housing. As of this writing, six communities have adopted 40R overlay districts. If the program is to live up to its potential, more funding needs to be guaranteed for payments to the adopting municipalities. Under statute, funding is generated through the sales of state surplus land. However, the expedited process for putting such parcels up for sale ended on June 30, 2005, and since then, not one sale has been transacted. Even when the expedited process was in place, surplus land sales failed to generate an adequate income to fund anticipated payments to municipalities. Thus, a predictable and dependable revenue source must be identified for this smart growth housing program. Beyond steps to ensure funding of the law, the new governor and legislature should consider adopting changes that will make towns more likely to adopt 40R – if communities won’t adopt the law, it will not work. Furthermore, we should consider expanding the funding incentives to support the actual production of affordable housing units, consistent with smart growth criteria, regardless of the legal mechanism used. 40R is not the only way to create affordable housing, and a unit created by others means is just as worthwhile as one created in a 40R overlay district. Reform How Surplus Land is Sold The state has hundreds of acres of surplus land that could be used for housing, economic development, and environmental preservation. Under current law, the sale of each parcel must be voted on by the entire legislature. This process, along with local objections, have often slowed down the disposition process and resulted in some parcels laying fallow for decades. During the 2005-2006 session, the House and Senate came very close to passing a piece of legislation that would modify the surplus land disposition process and establish a process to ensure the most appropriate use of each parcel from conservation, housing, or economic development perspectives. The new governor must work with the legislature this next session to pass a bill that allows for legislative and community input while not inordinately delaying sales, and ensures that the sales benefit the Commonwealth as a whole.

The funding source for Chapter 40R is in jeopardy. 

21

Smart Growth Works for Transportation

Issues Rising Gas Prices Intensifying global instability, the rise in the number of severe climactic events, and the fact that oil is becoming scarcer and harder to extract mean that the trend of rising gas prices is unlikely to be reversed in the near future. Gas prices have risen from just under $2 a gallon to just under $3 a gallon in the last two years alone. This has seriously strained the finances of many Commonwealth residents, especially those who “drove until they qualified,” trading longer commutes for less expensive housing.

Transportation costs can eat up to one‐third of a family’s income.  With rising gas prices, it’s even more critical that we find sustainable ways to ease commutes.

Park Street MBTA Station – the heart of the Metro Boston transit system. 

Photo: Conservation Law Foundation

22

Longer Commutes Massachusetts residents are driving more than ever, enduring longer commutes and traveling further distances for work, shopping and recreation. The total amount of miles residents drove increased 75% from 1970 to 2000. All of this driving is in large part due to the fact that we live farther and farther away from the things we do everyday. In fact, MassInc recently reported that one in five workers face a daily roundtrip commute of at least an hour and a half. Deteriorating Transit Service Our existing transit system is at risk as the MBTA is forced to raise fares, defer maintenance and cut back on schedules because of its massive debt burden and the failure of the Commonwealth to provide it with sorely needed additional funding. Outside of the MBTA service area, regional transit authorities struggle to provide even the most basic service. Obesity and Chronic Disease As obesity rates in the United States reach truly epidemic proportions, public health officials have begun to make the connection between our built environment and our weight and general health. A study published in 2003 in the American Journal of Public Health found a correlation between one’s likelihood of obesity and the degree of sprawl in the county in which one lived. They found a similar correlation between sprawl and the likelihood of having high blood pressure. This is not a surprising finding: as more Americans move further from central cities, they become less likely to drive between locations and less likely to incorporate physical activity into their daily lives.

Recommendations Invest in Corridors Appropriate for Growth The state needs to target new transportation infrastructure where existing or planned development will create or maintain convenient, affordable communities. Building the Fairmount Line provides a perfect example of smart, cost-effective investment that takes advantage of existing infrastructure. This commuter rail line, which residents envision transforming into a rapid transit quality line they call “The Indigo Line,” can serve the compact neighborhoods of Dorchester, Mattapan and Hyde Park, which it currently passes through, with the simple addition of stations in these neighborhoods. The minimal investment needed to transform the Fairmount Line into the Indigo Line would stimulate economic development in these communities and link a workforce population to downtown jobs. Require Appropriate Land Use around New Transportation Investments In the same vein, any new transportation investment we make should be accompanied by good land use around that new road or transit line. In other words, communities need to zone land along the transportation corridor in ways that support compact, high-density growth. As a condition of funding for the transportation project, municipalities should be required to re-examine zoning and plan for land uses that support transportation investments and make necessary zoning changes before new transportation projects are built. Where the

A bus trip from Roxbury to downtown takes an hour – the same amount of time a commuter spends on the train from Newburyport to Boston.

23

Commonwealth plans to build new transit stations, compact, transit-oriented communities should be planned. Similarly, municipalities should plan land uses to address roadway enhancements, both to avoid sprawl and to preserve any new roadway capacity the Commonwealth provides. This sort of planning needs to happen on a regional scale. Strengthen the Existing Transit-Oriented Development Program Transit-oriented development provides housing and commercial space near transit nodes, allowing people to easily and conveniently live, shop, work and travel. The $30 million transit-oriented development program has supported excellent projects across the state, but currently will only provide funding for three years. To date, $7 million has been expended. The next governor should award the remainder in the next two years and work to recapitalize the fund beyond the current timeframe so that additional projects can be planned and built. Provide New Sources of Transportation Funding The Commonwealth is struggling to maintain our existing transportation infrastructure so that it is safe and convenient. In recent years, our transportation agencies have focused on fixing existing infrastructure with the limited dollars available to them. While this is a sound way to prioritize investments, available funds are inadequate to maintain our current transportation system at a safe and cost effective level, much less to provide sorely needed additional transit service. Innovative financing mechanisms are needed to boost transportation funding. In selecting solutions, we should consider the full range of alternative funding mechanisms, including tolls, a gas tax and downtown congestion pricing. We need to advance financing solutions which provide incentives for people to drive less and do not penalize lower-income households, so that Massachusetts residents have more and better travel options. Maintain and Enhance Public Transit

The MBTA must be relieved of its debt load in order to provide affordable, attractive service. Ridership has declined on the T due to successive fare increases and diminishing service quality.

In 2000, the T was put on a tight budget that forced it to run more efficiently. This change was needed, but unfortunately, the T was also saddled with billions of dollars in debt and has continued to incur more debt in recent years. One-third of the T’s budget is spent on this debt annually. The T needs relief from this enormous debt load so that it can provide high quality, reliable service that will attract riders. Fund Transit Commitments When the Commonwealth decided to go forward with the Big Dig, it also promised to build a number of important transit projects. These projects were designed to offset the air quality impacts of the Central Artery Project, to provide some balance of investment in transportation modes, and to ensure that once this massive roadway project was completed it didn’t become congested right away. The Commonwealth has found $15 billion to build the Big Dig but has fallen short in completing the transit projects committed to at the start of the Big Dig process.

One‐third of the T’s operating funds go toward debt service.  

Cities and towns need to zone for compact development along new rail extensions.  State funding for transportation projects should be conditioned on good municipal land‐use.

24

These projects include important pieces of new transit infrastructure that will connect housing and employment centers and serve environmental justice communities, such as an extension of the Green Line into Somerville and Medford, connecting the Blue Line and the Red Line, and linking East Boston with Mass General Hospital and Kendall Square businesses. Make Massachusetts More Pedestrian-Oriented and Bike-Friendly While almost all travel, especially travel by transit, includes some pedestrian travel, the Commonwealth does little to promote and protect pedestrian and bicycle routes. Pedestrian and bicycle travel should be considered in all roadway and transit projects and transportation planning should address pedestrian and cyclist needs, both in creating routes for walking and biking trips and providing pedestrian and cyclist access to complement transit and roadway projects. The Safe Routes to School program, which provides funding for sidewalks and other improvements that will make it safe for more children to walk to school, should be a priority.

25

Smart Growth Works for the Environment

Issues Dewatering Our Watersheds Sprawl development disrupts the natural hydrology of the state’s watersheds and impacts both the quality and quantity of our water resources. Sprawl increases the amount of “impervious surfaces”—areas such as roads and parking lots—as more land is paved over in the state’s watersheds. These impervious surfaces intercept rainfall and direct it to stormwater facilities that discharge to rivers, streams, wetlands, and coastal waters, carrying with it a brew of “non-point source” pollutants such as oils, greases, heavy metals, silts and sands, and even pet wastes. The additional stormwater that collects and runs off of paved surfaces can increase the magnitude and frequency of flooding in downstream areas, while, at the same time, polluting rivers, bays and estuaries. Moreover, the rainwater intercepted by paved surfaces is prevented from recharging the underground aquifers that feed drinking water wells and sustain flows in rivers and streams. This “dewatering” of our watersheds reduces the water supplies available to communities and endangers the health of fisheries and other aquatic species that rely on flow in rivers and streams.

Shartner and Nicewicz Farms in  Bolton, 170 acres of active farmland preserved through 

the Agricultural Preservation Restriction program. 

Photo: Trust for Public Land, Jerry Monkman

26

The most extreme example of this problem is the Ipswich River, but other rivers in Massachusetts face serious “low flow” impacts. Our Disappearing Landscape

One of the most obvious impacts of sprawl is the loss of farmland and natural areas. Massachusetts is losing approximately 15,000 acres of land to development annually. Between 1950 and 1990, the state’s population increased by 28%, but the amount of developed land increased by 188%. Of the 5.2 million acres that make up Massachusetts, 1.2 million acres are developed and 1 million acres are protected. That leaves 3 million acres of land whose fate is in our hands.

Clearly, new development is needed and desired. However, it is critical that the remaining undeveloped land necessary for drinking water supply, recreation, biodiversity, wildlife habitat, and agriculture is identified and protected. Crippled Parks Our state parks, forests, beaches, pools and rinks are suffering from years of neglect. Facilities are crumbling, trails are not maintained, and natural resources are not managed properly. Our park agency has lost 20 percent of its staff in the last five years. Massachusetts ranks 48th in per capita spending on parks and recreation at the state and local levels and 50th on spending as a percentage of personal income. Between FY 2001 and FY 2007, the parks budget has been cut by 25%. About $1.7 billion is estimated to be the backlog of park capital needs. Air Pollution As sprawl increases our reliance on cars and driving, it makes our air dirtier and less healthful. Cars, trucks and buses are the biggest source of cancer- causing air pollution, spewing more than 12 billion pounds of toxic chemicals each year, or almost 50 pounds per person. Moreover, the problem is getting worse because the number of vehicle miles traveled has been increasing over the past decade as has vehicle ownership. Development that sites housing near job centers with services nearby reduces the number and length of vehicle trips, thereby reducing vehicle emissions and pollution.

Recommendations Target MWRA Expansion to Places that are Growing Smart The Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) – the quasi-public agency that owns the water pipes and sewer system that feed 45 communities in the eastern part of the state – is considering expanding its service to other communities. In the 1950s we learned that where highways went, development followed. And that sprawled development gave us traffic jams and smog, too many cars, too much lost land, and central cities beset by social and fiscal troubles. The expansion of water infrastructure into previously

We are losing 40 acres of natural areas each day.  Our window to save ecologically significant land 

is rapidly closing. 

Source: Mass Audubon

The expansion proposal seems, on the surface, to make sense: better water supply to growing communities, a promise of reduced rates for the original 45 MWRA cities and towns, more water for rivers that are being drawn dry locally. But the equation is not so simple. 

27

unserved areas will have the same effect. Where water goes, development will follow -- lots of development -- houses, apartments, malls, and office parks, most of them far from existing public infrastructure. New service needs to be targeted to places that are growing smart, not communities with low-density zoning. The decision on how (and whether) to expand MWRA service should not rest with the MWRA - which has a financial interest in expansion – but rather with a strengthened Office for Commonwealth Development, which should have a bird’s eye view on the impact of such a massive public infrastructure extension. Act on and Expand the Statewide Land Conservation Plan The Statewide Land Conservation Plan, developed by a collaborative of public and private interests, identifies for protection one million of the three million acres of land in Massachusetts that currently are neither developed nor permanently protected. This plan is a wonderful resource, but needs to be complemented by a similar vision for priority development areas with input from municipalities and regional planning agencies. In this way, a statewide plan could become a valuable resource to planners around the state struggling to make land use decisions on their own. Restore State Involvement in Land Preservation Massachusetts has a long history of land protection. We are the home of the first dedicated conservation land in the United States and have wisely protected an array of lands, including Walden Pond, Mt. Greylock, the Esplanade, that contribute to our quality of life in many ways. In FY 2003, the state significantly reduced its commitment to land preservation. The current administration slashed funding for land protection programs in half. Between FY 1999 through FY 2002, state investment averaged $56 million annually, and the administration cut this to an average of $29 million between FY 2003 through FY 2006. The state is a critical partner in many land protection efforts that are initiated by private land trusts throughout the state. Without a significant commitment from the state to fund land protection, many conservation projects will not go forward.

While the Commonwealth must dedicate funds to manage and take care of existing state-owned lands, the state cannot ignore the need to also acquire new environmentally significant lands before they are developed and lost forever. A minimum annual commitment of $50 million is necessary to proactively conserve land that has been identified as valuable for drinking water supply, habitat protection, agriculture, forestry or tourism and recreation. In addition to state capital dollars dedicated for land protection, tax incentives also should be enacted to encourage landowners to donate land that is significant.

Fund Our Parks Massachusetts has been endowed with a stunning array of public lands. From the Berkshires to the Cape, our 450,000 acres of state forests and parks – nearly 10% of the state’s land area – provide permanently protected special places where the public can enjoy nature and the outdoors. Our parks are places of relaxation, respite, and recreation. They are places almost anyone can afford to go and they contribute significantly to our economy and our quality of life. Parks, beaches and open space provide healthy environments and enjoyment to our residents and positively impact tourism and the economic vitality of the state.

An annual investment of $50 million is necessary to proactively conserve land that has been identified as valuable for our water, 

food, industry, and recreation.

28

The next governor should make the Massachusetts park system the best system in the Northeast. To do this, a 50% increase in the operating budget of our parks and conservation lands is needed over the next four years.

Change the Rules If we are going to grow as a Commonwealth in a way that maintains and improves our economic prosperity and social well-being, we must incorporate smart growth into all state policies that relate to growth and development issues. By looking at the big picture, we can choose the best places to develop jobs and housing, ensuring that everyone has the choice of a decent and affordable place to live, with equal access to employment opportunities. We can designate special natural areas as places to preserve, and limit the loss of farmland, forests and fields. We can build a balanced transportation system that helps us all get where we need to be when we need to be there. The new Administration must lead the way for Massachusetts and encourage efficient and equitable development. In addition to addressing the specific issues described in this paper, the new governor must play a leadership role in addressing the big picture issues that influence our future development patterns. Address Municipalities’ Financial Straight Jacket The competition for commercial and industrial development that produces local taxes in excess of their demands for public services and the reluctance to zone for new housing have led communities into a lose-lose cycle of competition. Statewide, too much land is zoned for commercial uses, leading to overbuilding, traffic congestion, and boom-bust cycles that end in vacant sites. In addition, large commercial development sites tend to be in outlying areas near municipal borders. There is a perverse incentive for communities to permit projects in locations where all of the tax benefits flow to the host community, while they export the traffic, flooding, air pollution, and other harmful impacts across the border to their neighbor. The new administration should convene a blue-ribbon task force to address the effects municipal dependence on property taxes has on housing production and unplanned, haphazard development. Within 12 months, the task force should recommend modifications to Proposition 2 ½ that will promote smarter growth and greater regional equity.

Reliance on property tax for so many municipal serves drives sprawl.  We have created a sharp divide between good and poor schools, resulting in flight from cities and urban disinvestment.  Competition to attract commercial development – and the taxes it generates – results in big box mega‐malls and strip development.  These are unintended by‐products of how we tax ourselves. 

Access to outdoor activities was found to be the second most important factor in decisions by recent college graduates on whether to stay or 

leave, after job availability.  

Source: The Boston Consulting Group

29

Advance School Equity One of the drivers of sprawl is the flight of families from inner cities to suburbs with higher quality schools. The families that cannot afford to move are stuck with lower quality schools, which perpetuate the poverty and segregation that persists in many of our urban cores across the state. The new governor must address the unequal school quality between urban, suburban, and rural places. This impact should also be addressed by the above-recommended task force on Proposition 2 ½. Plan Regionally Planning is currently carried out in the Commonwealth by municipalities. The result: 351 disconnected plans that add up to less than the whole. Job markets, housing markets, watersheds, commute sheds, and air basins do not respect city and town borders. These issues must be approached regionally.

The new administration needs to provide incentives for municipalities to work together to plan for growth, such as more flexible land use planning tools, priority access to economic development funding, and the ability to raise and share tax revenues. The new administration also needs to study the ways regional planning agencies could be more effective in promoting housing and economic development while preserving natural resources, with a minimum of public spending to build new infrastructure.

“Communities can be shaped by choice, or they can be shaped by 

chance.  We can keep on accepting the kinds of communities we get, or we can start creating the kinds of 

communities we want.” 

--Richard Moe, National Trust for Historic Preservation

30

Glossary Affordable Housing Housing where the yearly expenses of owning or renting are no more than 30% of the gross income of households making 80% or less of a region’s median income. Agricultural Preservation Restrictions A program established in 1977 that offers to pay farmers the difference between the "fair market value" and the "agricultural value" of their farmland in exchange for a permanent deed restriction which precludes any use of the property that will have a negative impact on its agricultural viability. Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing States and localities that receive housing and community development block grants from the federal agency HUD must periodically analyze the impediments to fair housing that exist in their jurisdictions, develop action plans to address them, and report their findings to HUD as part of their annual performance review. Approval-Not-Required A provision of Chapter 40A that virtually exempts the division of roadside properties into building lots from the local review process for a subdivision. This encourages sprawl development along roads and often results in sub-par quality roads and blind driveways. Brownfields Abandoned or underused properties where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived contamination. Brownfield sites include abandoned factories and other industrial facilities, gasoline stations, oil storage facilities, dry cleaning stores, and other businesses that formerly dealt with polluting substances. Brownfields Redevelopment Fund A $30 million state revolving loan fund that was established in 1998 and recapitalized in 2006 to encourage the reuse of brownfields in economically distressed areas throughout Massachusetts by providing flexible, low-cost financing for site assessment and clean-up. Chapter 40A The state’s zoning enabling legislation, called the Zoning Act. The statute was originally enacted in 1954 and was updated in 1975. The statute is well-recognized as having some of the most antiquated zoning provisions in the nation. Chapter 40B The state’s comprehensive permit law, enacted in 1969, which established an affordable housing threshold of 10% of housing stock for every community. In communities below the 10% level, developers of low and moderate income housing can seek an expedited local review under the comprehensive permit process and can request a limited waiver of local zoning and other restrictions which hamper construction of affordable housing.

31

Chapter 40R Chapter 40R encourages municipalities to adopt zoning overlay districts that allow higher density residential and mixed-use development in smart growth locations by providing fiscal incentives to cities and towns. Chapter 40R provides cities and towns with an up-front zoning incentive payment, a density bonus payment per unit of housing constructed, and priority consideration for various discretionary grant programs. Chapter 40S Created in December 2005, this plan will reimburse cities and towns for a broad range of costs associated with school enrollment growth as a result of 40R development, including increases in local public or charter school attendance (K-12) and the need for services such as special education programs. Commonwealth Capital Fund The fund coordinates state capital spending programs that affect development patterns to ensure that state investments promote projects consistent with the Office for Commonwealth Development’s sustainable development principles. Commonwealth Capital explicitly endorses planning and zoning measures that are in accord with administration policy and encourages municipalities to implement them by linking state spending programs to municipal land use practices. Community Development Corporation A form of community-based organization engaged in local housing and economic development activities. Although CDCs vary in size and scope, most are non-profit, tax exempt 501(c)3 organizations that are located in and serve a designated community where the median family income is below 85% of the regional median family income. Community Preservation Act A law, enacted in December 2000, that allows cities and towns in Massachusetts to raise local property taxes to acquire and protect open space, preserve historic buildings and landscapes, and create and maintain affordable housing. It also provides significant state matching funds to participating communities. To date, 111 municipalities in the Commonwealth have adopted the CPA. Conservation Easements A conservation easement (or conservation restriction) is a legal agreement between a landowner and a land trust or government agency that permanently limits uses of the land in order to protect its conservation values. It is an alternative to outright land acquisition. Fair Housing The practice of removing discriminatory practices and outcomes from the housing market as guided by federal, state and local laws and regulations, including affirmative duties for policy makers on all levels. In Massachusetts, specific bases of protection are provided based on race, color, national origin, gender, religion, family status, disability (federal), as well as sexual orientation, veteran status, marital status and age (state). Grandfathering Under existing land use law in Chapter 40A, a landowner can file a preliminary plan for a new development and the zoning for that land freezes in its current state for eight years. This makes it extremely difficult for cities and towns to change zoning because as soon as a municipality announces they are considering zoning changes, anticipatory, back-of-the-envelope plans can be filed, effectively negating any benefits anticipated from the zoning change.

32

Greenfield Undeveloped land without any infrastructure. Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit A 2004 state program in which a certified rehabilitation project on an income-producing property is eligible to receive up to 20% of the cost of rehabilitation expenditures in state tax credits. The tax credit is capped at $50 million annually. Land Use Reform Act/ Community Planning Act A proposed bill that would update the Commonwealth's zoning laws to require consistency between local master plans and zoning, reduce the current “grandfathering” time period, eliminate the statutory exemption provided by the state’s Approval Not Required plans, and promote effective local planning. Regional Planning Agency The 14 regional planning agencies in Massachusetts, created by the Commonwealth, operate under an independent boards of directors. The agencies project demographic trends, develop comprehensive regional plans, provide technical assistance to cities and towns on land use and other issues, and advocate on issues of regional importance. In most parts of Massachusetts, RPAs also staff the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) which program federal transportation funds. Smart Growth Planning ahead for growth and adhering to a few key principles: guide development toward places where people are already living and working; steer development away from natural areas of value, farms, and environmentally-sensitive places; and ensure that development makes efficient use of land, roads, sewers, schools and other infrastructure we all pay for. Sprawl Poorly planned development which spreads growth out over large amounts of land; puts long distances between homes, stores, and job centers; and makes people more and more dependent on driving in their daily lives. Statewide Land Conservation Plan A collaborative effort between Executive Office of Environmental Affairs and a number of conservation, recreation, and watershed groups in the state which has identified one million acres of land in the Commonwealth for protection over the next 20 years. Transfer of Development Rights The conveyance of development rights by deed, easement or other legal instrument from one parcel of land to another. It is a mechanism used to encourage development in certain areas and not in others. Transit Oriented Development Mixed-use, higher density development centered on existing or new public transportation facilities.

18 Tremont Street, Suite 401 Boston, MA 02108

617.263.1257 www.ma-smartgrowth.org

5 Actions for the First 5 Months

1. Establish a Strengthened Office to Coordinate Smart Growth Development The next governor inherits a state that is shedding population, is mired in a housing crisis and is losing the character that makes it great. All these issues need to be addressed through an agency that coordinates the state’s investment and policy for housing, transportation, environment and energy. OCD represents a great concept that needs to be reformed; the next governor should establish a strengthened office to ensure smart development and conservation throughout the Commonwealth. 2. Align State Incentives and Disincentives to Support Smart Development and Smart Preservation State agencies sometimes work at cross-purposes. The next governor should examine all of the state agencies’ priorities, policies and investments and rationalize them to promote efficient development in appropriate places and strategic land preservation in areas of natural significance. 3. Support Zoning and Housing Legislation that Boosts Housing, Curbs Sprawl, and Protects Natural Resources It is illegal in many of our communities to build houses in a way that recreates the traditional New England villages developed long ago. Average lot size for new homes has been increasing, reaching the size of a football field in some places. It’s no wonder we have a housing crisis. At the same time, we are losing 40 acres of open space a day. We need a comprehensive package of zoning reforms to stop squandering our land and driving our human resources out-of-state. 4. Identify and Establish New Funding Streams for Transportation The roads are crumbling, T service is deteriorating, and the Big Dig needs some major repairs. We don’t have nearly enough funding to fix, let alone expand, transportation infrastructure. The next governor needs to work with the Finance Commission, stakeholders, and the legislature to identify steady revenue streams to relieve the T’s debt, expand bus and rail service statewide, fund the Big Dig transit commitments, and fix our roads and bridges. 5. Raise the Bond Cap to Boost State Investment in Affordable Housing, Transit, and Land Conservation After years of steady or declining investment in our housing stock and our land, the next governor needs to raise the bond cap so that the state can preserve affordable housing, build new homes, fix our transit, repair our parks, and acquire critical pieces of land.