Mandatory Density Regulations: A Flawed Approach To Housing Growth?
In the ongoing debate over housing policy, one question looms large: Should the state mandate higher housing density in communities to address the housing crisis? While the push for upzoning and increased density is often presented as a universal solution, a look back at a 1975 Massachusetts Department of Community Affairs (DCA) report reveals a more nuanced perspective—one that still resonates today.
The 1975 Massachusetts DCA Report: A Cautionary Stance on Density Mandates
The report makes a striking statement:
“Establishing mandatory density regulation is not an acceptable technique for increasing housing production. Not only is such a solution unfair to areas already fully developed, but in some cases, the requirements of certain density regulations may be justified.”
At first glance, this might seem like a rejection of density as a housing strategy. But a closer look shows that the report was not opposing all density increases—rather, it was criticizing a one-size-fits-all mandate that disregards the realities of different communities.
Why Blanket Density Mandates Can Be Problematic
The Unfair Burden on Fully Developed Areas
One of the DCA's main concerns was that many Massachusetts communities were already built out by 1975. In such towns and cities, there was little undeveloped land left, and increasing density would require tearing down existing structures, straining infrastructure, or fundamentally altering neighborhoods.
Forcing blanket density increases on fully developed areas would not add housing in a practical or equitable way—it would instead create disruptions without necessarily producing affordable or sustainable growth.
Infrastructure and Community Capacity Matter
Housing density isn’t just about zoning—it’s also about infrastructure. A town’s ability to handle more residents depends on its:
Water and sewer capacity
Road networks and public transportation
Schools and emergency services
In 1975, many Massachusetts suburbs had infrastructure designed for low-density living, meaning a sudden influx of multi-family housing could create service gaps, congestion, or higher municipal costs.
Even today, many towns pushing back against state-imposed zoning changes argue that infrastructure constraints make rapid density increases impractical or even harmful.
Recognizing That Some Density Regulations Are Justified
Importantly, the report does not reject the idea of zoning regulations entirely. In fact, it acknowledges that some density regulations may be justified, likely referring to cases where density is planned strategically—rather than imposed indiscriminately.
This suggests that instead of blanket mandates, a more targeted, community-driven approach to density might be preferable.
What This Means for Today’s Housing Debate
Fast forward nearly 50 years, and Massachusetts is once again grappling with zoning and density regulations. With housing costs skyrocketing, state leaders have pushed for aggressive upzoning, especially in communities near transit hubs. However, the concerns raised in 1975 remain relevant:
Should towns with limited infrastructure be forced to increase density beyond their capacity?
Are state-imposed density mandates fair to fully developed communities?
How can density regulations be crafted in a way that balances growth with sustainability?
A Smarter Approach: Thoughtful, Community-Driven Planning
The 1975 DCA report highlights the risks of treating density as a silver bullet for the housing crisis. Instead of forcing uniform changes across all towns, policymakers should focus on:
Encouraging housing growth in areas with infrastructure to support it (e.g., transit corridors, underutilized commercial zones)
Allowing communities to tailor density increases to fit their specific needs and capacities
Investing in infrastructure improvements so that higher density is sustainable long-term
Promoting mixed-income housing solutions that address affordability without overwhelming local services
Conclusion
While increasing housing supply is essential, history has shown that mandatory density regulations can backfire if applied without careful planning. The Massachusetts DCA recognized this nearly 50 years ago, and its cautionary words still hold weight today. Rather than forcing all towns into the same mold, the state should work with communities to find solutions that make sense for their unique circumstances.
By learning from the past, we can push for smarter housing policies that balance growth with fairness, sustainability, and local input.