Boston voted 69% yes on Question 7, which wouldn't change zoning here. Statewide, it's too close to call

Boston voters backed Question 7, the statewide measure on minimum lot sizes for single-family homes, by better than two to one. Statewide, the question was too close to call Wednesday morning. Even if it passes, it would not change what can be built in Boston, because the state law it amends doesn't cover the city.

All numbers here are unofficial. They come from the city's unofficial results page, last updated at 3:46 a.m. Wednesday with all 275 precincts reporting, and from news reports cited by time below.

Boston's vote

• Yes: 119,998 (69.25%)
• No: 53,286 (30.75%)
• Left blank: 12,064 of the 185,348 ballots counted on this question

The city notes that election-night totals do not include hand-counted ballots, provisional and overseas ballots, some write-ins, or mail ballots that arrive late but on time. Mail ballots postmarked by Election Day count if they arrive by 5 p.m. Friday.

Statewide: nearly tied

• 6:06 a.m. Wednesday: "Yes" led by 195 votes with 80.02% of the vote counted, according to Boston.com's live results blog, citing the Associated Press.
• 9:20 a.m.: With nearly 82% counted, the AP had "no" ahead with 50.2%, Boston.com reported in a 9:26 a.m. update.
• 9:39 a.m.: CBS Boston reported that Question 7, along with Question 5, still had no projected winner.

WBUR described the question Wednesday as split 50% to 50%. It reported that Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin's office expects to certify results, likely on the first Wednesday in December, and that the law would take effect 30 days after certification if it passes.

Could there be a recount? Any registered voter can petition for one if the margin is no more than 0.5% of votes cast, Boston.com reported. It added that the chance of a recount fell as "no" pulled ahead.

Why Boston's vote doesn't decide anything here

Question 7 would allow single-family homes on lots as small as 5,000 square feet, on residential land with public water and sewer and at least 50 feet of street frontage, in communities that now require more, Boston 25 News explained. It does that by amending Chapter 40A, the state Zoning Act. Boston has its own zoning code under a separate law, so the measure would not change Boston's rules, according to Boston 25 and the Boston Globe.

Mayor Michelle Wu endorsed the question anyway, the Globe reported. The Massachusetts Municipal Association opposed it, saying zoning should stay a local decision. The association's executive director said at a legislative hearing that "zoning decisions are inherently local," Boston.com reported.

Boston's strong yes vote matters mostly as a signal of how city voters feel about smaller lots. In Boston, those rules are set by the city's Zoning Commission and the council, not the ballot.

What our records add

Boston's own lot-size item has not had a hearing. On June 3, City Councilor Brian Worrell filed an order for a hearing on eliminating minimum lot size requirements in District 4 (docket 1103). Introducing it, he said zoning in his district requires lots of 3,000 to 7,000 square feet for one- to three-family homes, and that more than 60 vacant city-owned lots fall below the 3,000-square-foot minimum (watch at 4:55:14).

The order was referred to the Planning, Development and Transportation Committee. As of today it has been there 154 days, with no hearing in our records. Seven colleagues are co-sponsors: Breadon, Culpepper, FitzGerald, Flynn, Louijeune, Mejia and Murphy.

The council took no position on Question 7. We found no council resolution on it this year (our Oct. 27 story). Our pre-election explainer has more background.

What's next

• Wednesday, Nov. 4: The city expects to post unofficial precinct-level results during the day. Our results overview covers what remains to be counted.
• Nov. 18: The city's deadline to certify official results, according to the results page.
• Early December: Statewide certification, per WBUR. A recount petition would follow its own timeline.