Certainty By Design: A Faster, Clearer Path to Housing Production

Local opposition to new housing often begins long before zoning or density even enter the conversation, it starts with design. A 2021 study out of London found that residents consistently rated visually appealing buildings as more acceptable, independent of height or density. In other words, communities aren’t just reacting to the number of units; they’re reacting to what those units look like.

Yet most communities rely on outdated or highly subjective design-review processes that create uncertainty for developers and anxiety for residents. Clear, predictable design standards offer a middle path: they maintain community character while giving developers the certainty they need to build.

Design standards aren’t about perfect architecture. They’re about predictable rules, reliable timelines, and fewer last-minute battles. When communities know what they’re getting, and developers know what is expected, housing production becomes a lot easier.

Why Design Shapes Perception

When residents object to new housing, their concerns are rarely only about the number of people moving in. Instead, many often worry about how the building will look and feel:

• Will it complement or clash with existing architecture?

• Does it feel human-scaled, walkable, and welcoming?

• Will it contribute to a vibrant streetscape, or feel like a monolith dropped from above?

Researchers in London in 2021 found that, particularly as development pushed further into more suburban areas; design can make a difference in promoting density that is higher than the existing suburban fabric." Participants were shown a series of buildings with similar densities and asked to rate their support for the projects in their communities. When it came to taller buildings, the only design intervention that significantly increased support was a pitched roof versus a flat roof. This response replicates itself in a recent experience described below in Orleans, Massachusetts on Cape Cod.

These are goals we should aim for as we work towards building stronger, more sustainable futures for our communities, alongside providing the necessary housing to accommodate current residents and future growth. The reality is that communities are more inclined to support housing that aligns with the existing architecture and design of a neighborhood, even if it is somewhat denser than current structures. While people may have an abstract fear of density, often picturing a large multi-family building they dislike in their area, they might be more receptive to new, tastefully dense housing when they encounter attractive, well-designed multifamily homes, complemented by tree-lined streets, thoughtful facades, and ample natural light.

Easing The Path To New Housing on Cape Cod

Cape Cod is at the heart of Massachusetts' growing issues with housing availability and affordability. A rising share of the housing stock is being used by seasonal visitors and for second homes, causing year-round residents, a crucial piece of the area's economy, to be pushed further from the Cape. As housing availability and affordability continue to worsen, more than half of Cape Cod's workforce commutes over the bridges to the Cape. Attempts to introduce new housing and specific development projects often face strong NIMBY opposition, with legal challenges arising in many communities. Many of Cape Cod's main streets and downtown areas have remained unchanged for decades, despite being ideal locations for infill housing development to meet the increasing demand for affordable housing options in the region.

Recently, Downtown Orleans, largely unchanged since the mid-1900s, embarked on a broad downtown planning process that will look to attract new investment in "middle-housing" and mixed-use development to the Downtown. As part of the creation of a "Downtown Housing Overlay District" on Orlean's Main Street, design firm Utile along with town planners went through a series of exercises with residents, asking them specifically what types of designs they thought 'fit the character of the community.'

Overwhelmingly respondents panned this larger 4-story building, number 3 on the graphic above, recently built in Cambridge that has a much more urban context to it. Every single respondent said this was a "bad fit for Orleans."

At the same time, there was near-universal approval for a newly constructed, denser 3-story complex located nearby in Hyannis. In the Utile community engagement survey, 12 participants expressed strong support for this design, despite its greater massing and density compared to the Cambridge building, as it houses 44 units on only 1.6 acres. Just one participant in the survey considered this proposal inappropriate for Orleans.

Why This Matters for Housing Production

One of the biggest challenges in housing policy isn't just restrictive zoning, it's the political instability that surrounds each project. When every proposal becomes a debate over taste, nostalgia, or personal preference, even well-situated multifamily housing can face years of delays. This uncertainty raises costs and deters all but the wealthiest developers, sending a chilling effect through the homebuilding community.

Design standards have the potential to alter this scenario...

When communities articulate their preferences for the appearance and feel of buildings, they can lessen some of the intensity of public debate while centering public input, not on an individual project basis but during a broader master planning process aimed at streamlining the regulatory barriers to housing production and injecting more certainty for home builders in the process. Instead of neighbors opposing housing outright, discussions become more constructive: “Build it like this, not like that.” Once people can envision how new housing will fit in, some will become more open to the idea of new housing, softening elements of opposition.

And when design predictability is combined with zoning reform that actually allows modest density, such as small apartment buildings, cottage courts, townhomes, and mixed-use buildings, communities unlock a potent combination: housing that is financially viable, with fewer permitting uncertainties, community-supported, and architecturally cohesive.

A Win-Win-Win Approach

Communities want predictability. Developers want clarity. Residents want to feel confident that new housing will make their neighborhoods better, not worse. Design standards offer a practical path toward all three goals.

• A win for the community, which gains new homes that reflect its identity through a less adversarial process while gaining needed new housing supply.

• A win for developers, who gain certainty, speed, and reduced risk and in turn, reduced costs.

• A win for future residents, who gain access to walkable, well-designed neighborhoods where they can live, work, and build a life with more housing to meet residents needs at their phase of life and price points.

I fully appreciate that not all opposition to housing is genuine or reasonable, and some people will only be satisfied with a complete halt to housing production. At the same time, it's important to recognize that the average resident is more likely to support new housing that aligns with local design aesthetics.

We are not going to solve the housing crisis by ignoring aesthetics, nor by letting design politics stall needed housing. Part of the way forward involves making design predictable and transparent. When communities articulate what “good fit” looks like, the development process becomes less adversarial and more productive.