Ask Perplexity AI: What is the Feasibility of Building 700-900 New Units of Housing in Amherst?
Missing Middle Housing. Photo: Nels Nelson / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)
This column from Ira Bryck is part of a new series entitled “Ask Perplexity AI”. Each column will pose a question to Perplexity AI seeking an analysis of a challenge facing the town. Bryck understands that Artificial Intelligence is not Actual Intelligence, but it’s better than Real Stupid; and like life, it’s garbage in, garbage out. Read previous “Ask Perplexity AI” columns here.
The Prompt
Considering the unique context of Amherst, Massachusetts as a New England town with a transient student population and pressure for growth, analyze:
- The feasibility of adding 700–900 housing units of housing, given challenges like community opposition, infrastructure limits, and investor dominance.
- Objective metrics (e.g., infrastructure thresholds, density standards) to determine if the town is at its “full” functional capacity without becoming urbanized.
- Policy tools to ensure new “missing middle” housing (e.g., co-ops, ADUs, backyard cottages, mother-in-law suites, duplexes, triplexes, low-rise apartments or townhouses) remains affordable and owner-occupied, avoiding conversion to student rentals controlled by absentee investors.
Integrate perspectives on balancing growth skepticism with housing equity and sustainability.
Amherst’s housing challenges intersect with competing priorities of growth, infrastructure, and community character. Below is an analysis integrating questions about growth assumptions, obstacles to housing production, and sustainable capacity limits:
Challenges to Adding 700–900 Housing Units
Amherst faces significant barriers to meeting its housing targets, even with state-mandated goals:
Community Opposition: Vocal resistance to density and student-centric housing persists. For example, the East Gables affordable project faced organized opposition before approval, requiring advocacy mobilization to succeed. Planning Board members note that even minor zoning changes spark contentious debates.
Construction Costs: Affordable housing projects now cost $500,000–$600,000 per unit due to inflation, delays, and regulatory hurdles. Delays alone add $2M–$3M to project budgets.
Zoning Limitations: Restrictive rules, such as single-family zoning and parking mandates, block missing middle housing. While the 2025 Housing Production Plan advocates upzoning, Amherst’s approval processes remain “the most process-heavy” in the region.
Infrastructure Strain: Existing water/sewer systems and emergency services are already stretched. Adding density without upgrades risks overwhelming systems, as seen in debates over expanding apartment complexes.
Investor Dominance: Market-rate developers prioritize student rentals, which are more profitable than affordable units. Over 9,000 off-campus students compete with year-round residents, skewing the market toward transient housing.
Determining “Full” Capacity in a New England Town
Unlike cities, towns like Amherst (pop. ~40,000) prioritize preserving community character while supporting services. Key metrics for evaluating capacity:
Infrastructure Thresholds
Water/Sewer: Systems must handle peak demand without overflows or shortages.
Emergency Services: Fire/police response times should not exceed national standards (e.g., 4–6 minutes for emergencies).
Schools: Capacity must align with family-sized housing growth.
Density and Land Us
Amherst’s zoning allows 5–17 units/acre, but overcrowding occurs when developments exceed infrastructure limits.
The UN-Habitat defines “functional urban areas” as having ≥1,500 people/km² with supporting services15. Amherst’s current density is ~1,100 people/km², suggesting room for growth if infrastructure scales.
Community Consensus: Surveys show residents prioritize preserving green spaces and historic neighborhoods over unchecked growth. A town is “full” when growth erodes shared identity or environmental sustainability.
Missing Middle Housing Solutions Avoiding Student Rentals
To create housing for year-round residents without enabling investor speculation:
Owner-Occupancy Requirements: Mandate that duplexes/triplexes have at least one owner-occupied unit, as attempted in earlier Amherst policies.
Community Land Trusts: Acquire land for permanently affordable housing, restricting resale to income-qualified buyers.
Cooperative Housing: Prioritize limited-equity co-ops where residents collectively own buildings, preventing investor buyouts.
Targeted Zoning
Restrict high-density zones to non-student populations (e.g., senior housing or workforce units).
Impose rental caps (e.g., no more than 25% student renters per block).
Incentivize Local Developers: Offer tax breaks or grants for projects with income restrictions, bypassing large investors29.
Balancing Growth and Limits
Amherst’s path forward requires rejecting the “growth-at-all-costs” mindset while addressing acute housing needs:
Prioritize Infrastructure: Tie new housing to water/sewer upgrades and transit expansions (e.g., PVTA route enhancements).
Preserve Permanently Affordable Stock: Use CPA funds and state grants to expand non-market housing.
Engage Stakeholders: Adopt participatory budgeting for housing projects to build community buy-in.
The town is not yet “full” by quantitative standards but risks qualitative overcrowding if growth outpaces consensus and infrastructure. Strategic, small-scale missing middle housing—coupled with anti-speculation policies—offers a middle path.
Any human occupied area has a natural carrying capacity, and one of the constraining features in our area is the potable water supply. While it’s good that we just protected another 50+ acres of surface supply watershed, we cannot become the “Happy Valley equivalent of the Boston metro area” with that natural resource limitation.
Of course there are other constraints as well, but of all the ones identified by PAI, the most serious one is that imposed by nature herself.