Event recap: Legalizing Mid-Rise, Single-Stair Housing in Massachusetts

October 10, 2024

On October 10, Boston Indicators convened close to 400 people in-person and online for a conversation about what could be a key piece of addressing our housing challenge in Greater Boston – stairways.

More specifically, the group came together in the context of a report called Legalizing Mid-Rise Single-Stair Housing in Massachusetts, produced in partnership with the design firm Utile and the Joint Center for Housing Studies (JCHS) at Harvard. The thesis is simple – Greater Boston could accelerate its ability to construct new multi-family housing if we changed the current building code to allow single stairways in small to medium-sized buildings up to six stories tall, with four units per floor. The prospects for these so-called “mid-rise” buildings look promising, and advocates are excited about a new approach to our housing shortage woes.

As Boston Indicators Executive Director Luc Schuster said in opening the morning’s forum, “If new policy reforms like zoning changes are going to be implemented to full effect, we need to make sure the types of housing we need can happen on the ground.” He introduced JCHS Managing Director Chris Herbert, who positioned housing is “a classic ‘wicked problem,’ that is, a bad situation resulting from a really complex system, with no easy solution.  Fixing one element often makes another worse.” He added, “We need a wide range of expertise in crafting a solution—including architects, who are often left out on the policy side.”

Co-author Sam Naylor from Utile presented key findings and compelling images from the report. Current building code and market forces combine to make the only feasible mid-size new development take the form of a so-called double-loaded podium building. Other parts of the world call this “hotel housing” because of its long, straight corridors with unit entries on either side. These units, unless on corners, have only one exterior wall, limiting daylight for some and preventing cross-ventilation for all. The culprit? A building code that requires two staircases that was developed in the years before sprinkler systems were commonplace—or required.

While the two staircase requirement sounds sensible on its own, Naylor and others suggest that in a world of fireproof materials, improved sprinkler systems and smarter designs, building small structures with two staircases is not cost-effective.  “Double-loaded” buildings also require larger lots, so small land parcels site idle. Even in Greater Boston’s limited development space,  Utile estimates that 130,000 new units could be built in a construction type called point access blocks – buildings of up to six stories with four units per floor built around a single central staircase/elevator, designed with fire safety measures such as shortened distances from farthest points to egress, higher fire-ratings on unit doors, and sprinklers.

This is not an outlier idea. It’s common in Boston’s brownstones and buildings of three or fewer stories. The U.S. and Canada are almost alone in their limitations of single-stair buildings to three stories. As Naylor said: “Buildings winning awards abroad and held up as ideals in architecture school are illegal here. Point access blocks have been the bedrock of city living for centuries. Let’s code for the scale of housing we need and the kind of homes we want to live in.”

Eduardo Mendoza, Policy Director at Livable Communities Initiative in Los Angeles, shared his journey from planner to single-stair advocate, and then joined a panel discussion moderated by JCHS’s Carlos Martín, Director of the Remodeling Futures Program. Panelists representing development, architecture, academia, and policy tended to agree with Elizabeth Whittaker, AIA, Founder/Principal of Merge and an Associate Professor in Practice of Architecture at Harvard Graduate School of Design, who said, “It’s a no-brainer that this should be adopted.” She shared how her firm’s project to build much-needed worker housing in pricey Jackson Hole, Wyo., overcame residential neighborhood objections when a three-story point access block format was proposed (since “no one wants a double-corridor extruded box in their neighborhood”). But, she noted, a taller building would have been able to have more units and better address this critical need.

Agenda

Welcome
Luc Schuster, Executive Director, Boston Indicators
Chris Herbert, Managing Director, Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies

Report Presentation
Sam NaylorAIA, Associate, Utile

Report Response
Eduardo MendozaPolicy Director, Livable Communities Initiative

Panel Discussion and Audience Q&A
Ian HatchPartner, Fulcrum Land & Infrastructure
Tim LoveFAIA, Founding Principal, Utile; Lecturer in Real Estate, Harvard Graduate School of Design
Carlos MartínDirector, Remodeling Futures Program, Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies (moderator)
Eduardo MendozaPolicy Director, Livable Communities Initiative
Elizabeth WhittakerAIA, Founder/Principal, Merge and Associate Professor in Practice of Architecture, Harvard Graduate School of Design

Ian Hatch, Partner at Fulcrum Land & Infrastructure, stressed that “the efficiency this proposal offers is that it renders developable many lots that are too small for the double-loaded building.” Small lots make up a large percentage of buildable lots in Boston, especially near existing transit. “This is what we need to reach our climate goals,” he added. Another side benefit, moderator Martín pointed out, is that these smaller multifamily buildings are more likely to be owned by “mom and pop” landlords, helping to vary the economic fabric.

But how to get to this new code landscape? Mendoza observed, “The building code world is very conservative. Which is appropriate. But we build code based on catastrophes of the past. The two-stair requirement is from a fire in 1890 and it’s just stuck. Traditionally governments have given all deference to the building code–writing entities. They function in their own silo. But the ICC has the same tax status as the NFL. And the reluctance to break this paradigm is changing. Which could be an existential identity crisis for the code writers.”

Said Tim Love, FAIA, Founding Principal at Utile and a Lecturer in Real Estate at  Harvard Graduate School of Design: “Each of the different disciplines that deal with code is protective of their turf and expertise. The next step is to get building code and fire consultants and government types to work together and be less defensive. That’s necessary in Massachusetts if we’re going to get anywhere with this. For the real reform to happen we need the right people in the room with open minds, not coming in with ideological position. We all need to work together to deal with the housing crisis.”