Massachusetts Question 7 remained unresolved Friday morning, Nov. 6, after unofficial returns erased an early lead for the proposal to allow single-family homes on smaller lots.

The measure had about 54% support at 11 p.m. on election night Tuesday, Nov. 3. Later returns reversed that advantage, Patch reported. Associated Press figures at 10 a.m. Wednesday showed 1,138,519 votes against and 1,118,084 in favor—a gap of 20,435 votes.

By Friday morning, approximately 99% of votes had been counted, but the result remained too close to call, Boston 25 News reported.

Correction: An earlier Brookline Record article reported that Question 7 had passed based on initial election-night returns. That conclusion was premature. The outcome remains unresolved.

What it would mean for Brookline

Brookline voters supported Question 7, according to the Greenfield Recorder.

If approved, the measure would allow single-family residential use without a special permit or other discretionary zoning approval on qualifying lots in districts that allow residential uses. Lots would need at least 5,000 square feet, 50 feet of frontage and access to public water and sewer.

Municipalities could retain reasonable regulations concerning setbacks, building height and bulk, according to the official ballot text.

Brookline’s single-residence districts have minimum lot sizes ranging from 7,000 square feet in S-7 to 40,000 square feet in S-40. Some other districts already allow detached homes on smaller parcels, according to a Bushari Team zoning analysis. Existing rules remain in effect while the outcome is unresolved.

Housing effects and local control

Tufts University’s Center for State Policy Analysis estimated that Question 7 could generate approximately 750 additional homes annually statewide, with Boston-area suburbs likely to see the greatest activity.

The analysis also found that the measure would reduce municipal authority over construction rules affecting roughly 850,000 parcels. Those are statewide estimates, not a forecast for Brookline. Tufts voters’ guide

Supporters argue that allowing homes on less land would expand housing choices. Opponents have raised concerns about local control and whether newly built homes would be affordable. The proposal contains no income restrictions or sale-price caps guaranteeing affordability.

What comes next

The final count will determine whether the zoning proposal becomes law. Until a result is established, neither supporters nor opponents can claim a definitive outcome.