A new proposal headed to the Nov. 3 state election could open up traditionally undersized lots to home development in the down Island towns.
Ballot question seven, if passed, would allow single-family homes to be built in residentially zoned areas as long as the land is at least 5,000 square feet (approximately 11 per cent of an acre), has 50 feet of land bordering a road, and has access to public sewer and water.
The initiative has drawn support from Gov. Maura Healey, housing advocates and the Vineyard’s state senator Julian Cyr for its ability to help bring more housing opportunities to Massachusetts.
Island planning, building and zoning officials said the measure, if passed, would open up many parcels in Tisbury, Oak Bluffs and Edgartown to development that would have been considered too small under existing zoning.
That has caused some concern among Islanders, who worried the proposal could bring more development that feeds the second home market. Proponents say the law does allow towns to prohibit the new development from being used as short-term rentals, and there is a potential to put further restrictions on them in the future.
The ballot question was put forward by Legalize Starter Homes, a Lowell-based organization that hopes to see more options for people trying to make a living in the Bay State.
“The goal is to create homes that are smaller, lower cost, lower maintenance,” said Andrew Mikula, the chair of the Yes on 7 campaign. “This should be the baseline allowance everywhere in Massachusetts that has the infrastructure.”
Municipalities would be able to put restrictions on height, setbacks, parking and whether the properties could be rented out on a short-term basis.
The ballot question would only affect the down Island towns, as Aquinnah, Chilmark and West Tisbury don’t have municipal water or sewer. But planners said the down Island towns have many of these sorts of lots that would be eligible should the question pass.
“There are a slew of small lots, postage stamp lots, in Oak Bluffs, Vineyard Haven and Edgartown,” said Adam Petkus, the Oak Bluffs building inspector.
The proposal has drawn criticism from organizations such as the Massachusetts Municipal Association, a nonprofit that provides advocacy and training for communities, for overriding local planning by setting a new limit regardless of existing neighborhoods and other conditions.
“Local officials are directly responsible to taxpayers, and this would remove significant oversight on behalf of their residents,” association executive director Adam Chapdelaine wrote in a rebuttal to the ballot question.
Some Island officials had similar concerns.
“It seems to me that it makes a huge change in how zoning works in Edgartown,” said Julia Livingston, a member of the town planning board.
With the Island’s housing market continuing to climb to new heights, Ms. Livingston worried that this law could encourage more market-rate single family homes instead of affordable units.
“The market is for homes that most people on the Island can’t afford,” she said.
Ms. Livingston described the proposed legislation as a “sledgehammer” that would break up the local regulations that have been put in place over the years.
“It would just change the look and feel of parts of Edgartown where the lot sizes are bigger than 5,000 square feet,” she said.
The law doesn’t go into detail on what “access” to water and sewer means, and Tisbury planning board member Ben Robinson felt that sewer capacity could be one of the biggest factors for the legislation on the Vineyard.
“What happens when there is not enough sewer flow,” he said.
When legislation is passed by petition at the election, lawmakers often make tweaks to the law to make it easier for implementation. Laura Silber, the Martha’s Vineyard Commission’s housing planner, said Islanders will advocate for rules that work for resort towns.
“Polls are showing the question is likely to pass, so we are working with the district legislative delegation on statutory language amendments which would ensure anything subsequently enacted aligns with the year-round housing needs of seasonal Communities,” she said.
The petition backers looked at sewer, water and land maps to attempt to calculate how many homes the proposed law could create. Their study did not have a number associated solely for the Vineyard, but they estimated it could result in between 116 and 185 homes per year for the Cape and Islands, with a majority coming on the Cape.
Based on the sewer systems on the Vineyard, though, it was likely that Edgartown would be the Island community that could see the most development.
Senator Cyr said he endorsed the proposal because Massachusetts is experiencing one of the worst housing crises in the country.
“We were last of all 50 states for permits per capita,” he said.
Still, he understood concerns from Islanders about whether these homes would become seasonal properties as Islanders struggle to continue to live here.
“Almost any home, whether it is an existing property or a new build, is likely to go to the second home or investment market without any sort of restriction,” Mr. Cyr said.
A chair of the state legislature’s joint committee on housing, Mr. Cyr said lawmakers would explore restrictions for the Island to require the homes be used year round, and said that the measure could create smaller homes that would be cheaper to put affordable housing restrictions on.
“Overall, I think this is a good policy that will build more housing for Massachusetts and put more housing in reach for working people,” the senator said.
This article appears in October 2 2026.