Opinion | Hampshire’s Land: Zone for the Future, Not the Next Developer

Hampshire College is closing, and now Amherst has a different problem: What happens to the land?

The easy answer is to say housing. Amherst needs housing. Amherst already has a stated goal of creating 200 affordable homes for households earning below 100% of area median income over the next five years. But if the answer to every Amherst land-use problem is simply to build more apartments, we should at least ask whether we are solving the problem or reproducing it on a different piece of land.

That is why the Hampshire campus zoning matters so much.

The town is now studying how the approximately 800-acre Hampshire campus could be used after the college closes. The July zoning-study information session made something very clear: Hampshire College owns the property and will ultimately decide what happens to it. But Amherst controls zoning. The town’s study is examining developable areas, water and sewer capacity, roads, housing-market demand, and economic-development opportunities before writing new zoning.

That means Amherst should not wait for a buyer to arrive with a proposal and then ask: “Can we make this work?”

The question should be reversed: What does Amherst need this land to do — and what zoning will make that possible?

Don’t Turn Hampshire into Another Student Housing Pipeline
Housing absolutely belongs in the conversation. But there is a huge difference between housing that Amherst needs and housing that happens to be financially profitable to build in Amherst. Amherst could add hundreds or thousands of units while doing very little to solve the town’s underlying problem.

The town has already been wrestling with the consequences of its college town housing economy. Downtown Amherst is being reshaped by large residential projects, while residents continue to argue about whether the community is losing too much of its year-round population. The Hampshire property gives Amherst an opportunity to be more specific.

If housing is permitted on the Hampshire campus, zoning should prioritize year-round housing, workforce housing, family housing, and genuinely affordable units, rather than simply maximizing the number of bedrooms that can be squeezed onto the property.

And the town should ask a brutally practical question before approving anything: What does this development contribute to Amherst after the ribbon-cutting?

More residents mean more demand for roads, emergency services, schools, utilities, and other municipal services. A development that produces housing but adds little recurring municipal revenue can still leave current taxpayers carrying much of the infrastructure burden.

The town’s Master Plan lays out a long-term blueprint for land use, housing, economic development, natural resources, transportation, and municipal facilities. That is exactly how Hampshire should be approached.

Then There Is the Farm
The other extreme would be to preserve the entire property as open space or agricultural land.

Amherst’s 2026 Open Space and Recreation Plan identifies the Hampshire campus as containing significant agricultural resources, including prime agricultural land. Agriculture could support farm businesses, food production, educational programs, agritourism, farmers’ markets, and outdoor recreation. It would also protect land that cannot simply be recreated once it has been paved over. But agriculture alone probably does not answer Amherst’s fiscal problem.

A farm can create jobs, generate economic activity and community value, and protect land. It does not necessarily produce the level of taxable commercial activity that a successful business district or innovation campus could.

So Amherst does not have to be all development or all preservation.

This Is Where Alex Kent’s Idea Gets Interesting
Alex Kent’s proposal to create an innovation incubator on the Hampshire campus deserves more attention than Amherst’s usual reaction: putting every new idea through the civic equivalent of a 12-step referral process.

His idea is essentially this: turn Hampshire into an economic engine rather than another residential development. And, importantly, the for-profit businesses it would house could potentially expand Amherst’s taxable commercial base.

A stronger economic base might be able to pay for the things residents already complain about: roads, public safety, Department of Public Works (DPW) facilities, schools, infrastructure, and housing.

The town’s current zoning study explicitly says it is examining opportunities for economic development alongside housing demand and infrastructure capacity.

So Alex’s proposal may be one of the ideas the zoning study should be considering.

There Are Real Precedents
The idea is not simply “build a tech incubator and hope.” Former institutional or industrial properties have been converted into economic-development districts that combine research, entrepreneurship, training, and commercial activity. Amherst should commission a serious feasibility study.

Could UMass, Amherst College, and the remaining Five College institutions provide research partnerships?

Could Massachusetts economic-development agencies help finance the infrastructure?

Could companies receive incentives tied to actual job creation, apprenticeships, and tax generation, rather than simply receiving another tax break?

Those are questions with measurable answers.

UMass Creates an Awkward Comparison
Amherst residents have watched the University of Massachusetts make substantial capital investments in athletics and recreation. The university built the $34.5 million Football Performance Center in 2014, and it has continued investing in McGuirk Alumni Stadium and other athletic facilities. UMass has also developed a much larger long-term capital plan that includes major athletics, recreation, academic, and infrastructure projects.

The point is that institutions invest in the economic and institutional assets they believe will generate value for their future.

Why couldn’t the Hampshire campus become an economic asset for the town?

If UMass can make a multimillion-dollar bet on a football program, Amherst should at least be willing to investigate whether a former college campus can become a multimillion-dollar bet on clean technology, agricultural innovation, advanced manufacturing, health research, and entrepreneurship.

That comparison of the two investments reveals that vision is not free, and neither is refusing to have one.

The Smartest Answer May Actually Be All Three
This is where I think Amherst should go. Not housing versus farms versus Alex Kent’s incubator. Rather, housing + agriculture + economic development.

Preserve the environmentally sensitive, agricultural, and forested portions of the property. Use the portions with appropriate infrastructure and development capacity for carefully planned housing — but make it housing Amherst actually needs, not simply another student apartment complex. Then create an economic-development district around research, technology, agriculture, clean energy, health care, and advanced manufacturing. Build paid apprenticeship and workforce-development programs into the zoning and development agreements.

And make one principle nonnegotiable: Development must produce public value. And that principle should be established before the land is sold.