Massachusetts officials say the state must add 222,000 new homes by 2035 to meet demand, according to Governor Maura Healey’s office. The urgency is reflected in two parallel economic‑development bills passed by the House and Senate in July, now being hammered out by a conference committee.
Faith‑Based Housing Initiative
The House version includes a “Yes in God’s Backyard” (YIGBY) provision that would allow faith‑based organizations to develop multifamily housing on up to four acres of land they already own without needing local approval. Projects could reach 30 units per acre, with at least 20% of those units set aside for income‑restricted families. Buildings may rise to 45 feet, or taller where local zoning permits.
An analysis by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and The Lynch Foundation identified roughly 5,000 parcels owned by religious institutions—over 20,000 acres—that could support more than 60,000 new homes. If half of that land were developed, the study projects an additional $60 million in annual tax revenue, because while religious land is tax‑exempt, the housing built on it would be taxable.
Local officials remain cautious. New Bedford’s public information officer, Jonathan Darling, said city planners “don’t see anything coming” from the YIGBY provision in their community. A separate proposal to convert the former Holy Family Holy Name School in New Bedford into condos would not qualify, as the provision excludes land zoned for or used by schools.
Rep. Steven Ouellette (D‑Westport) noted that three Westport parishes merged in June 2025 and now own land that could be repurposed for housing. He warned, however, that his constituents in Westport, Freetown and Acushnet are wary of overpopulation and unchecked build‑out, a sentiment echoed in New Bedford.
Duplex Expansion Across the Commonwealth
The Senate bill takes a different approach, allowing duplexes on any residentially zoned land where single‑family homes are permitted, regardless of local zoning restrictions. Municipalities could still impose “reasonable” regulations, but they may not prohibit duplexes under three stories or make them financially infeasible.
According to Jesse Kanson‑Benanav, executive director of Abundant Housing Massachusetts, duplexes are already permitted by right or special permit in about 70 % of the state. He called duplexes “the backbone of working‑class housing opportunities” and argued that easing restrictions would help keep rental and ownership costs down.
Rep. Christopher Hendricks (D‑New Bedford) praised the duplex provision as a “big step” for his district, noting that it could add much‑needed housing without dramatically altering neighborhood character.
Streamlined Site‑Plan Review
Both bills would create a statewide site‑plan review system, replacing the patchwork of local review processes that many developers say create arbitrary barriers. Under the new system, cities and towns would have 90 days to approve or deny a project, with automatic approval if no decision is made within that window.
The legislation also bars local zoning codes from dictating a development’s aesthetic and gives developers up to three years to complete “substantial” construction before municipalities can require re‑approval.
Additional Housing Measures
Beyond YIGBY and duplexes, the bills allow towns to convert underused commercial properties into multifamily or mixed‑use housing and to offer tax incentives for such projects. The House version earmarks $50 million for grants and technical assistance to participating communities.
Rep. Christopher Markey (D‑Dartmouth) said the package is meant to “give everyone a chance,” from renters to first‑time homebuyers and families seeking a permanent home. He emphasized a balanced approach rather than a single, one‑size‑fits‑all solution.
Advocates argue that the combined measures could help stem out‑migration, ease employer hiring challenges, and bring new tax revenue to municipalities that have long struggled with vacant or underutilized land.
Original reporting: Alexandria, VA News – WTOP News — read the source article.
