Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

3720-To-One t1_jd7b6aq wrote

Cool story.

Want to show me where in your dead it shows that your neighborhood is frozen in time from the moment of your purchase, and that you are entitled to your neighbor’s property?

It doesn’t? Didn’t think so.

NIMBYs can get bent.

The state is growing, there’s incredible demand for housing, and it isn’t Boston proper’s sole responsibility to house everyone.

If you don’t want to have to live near anybody, move to the Quabbin.

You also realize that at one point your suburb was all forest and corn fields. How come it was okay destroying that “neighborhood character” to make room for your cul-de-sac?

9

PLS-Surveyor-US t1_jd82kzk wrote

Nothing in my deed says its frozen in time. Zoning is presently decided on locally by local people looking out for their local community. Once you allow the state to start picking and choosing these elements for all zoning then Mass will have jumped the shark.

There is still a smaller population in Boston compared to the 1960's. The sewer and water infrastructure in place can handle any of this growth for the next few decades EASILY. Farm communities would have to build waste water treatment plants plus schools to do what can be easily done in the urban areas. Suburban communities would similarly have to increase the size of their piping systems and other infrastructure to handle large increases in population.

Plus most of the jobs are in the cities...so commuting shorter distances will put less a stress on both roads and rail infrastructure.

I never said it was BP's role to house everyone. There are other cities in the state plus I have stated here and elsewhere that I agree with increasing density near commuting options. I have these right in my backyard (defeating your main argument). I am 100% in favor of very dense housing options near MBTA stations.

I live near people now, I never said otherwise. You can't buy land near the quabbin anyways...its protected from development.

I don't live on a cul de sac...my house was built in the 80's from leftover scrub land (side of a hill) and wasnt much use for farming or anything. Removing the houses there now and replacing with triple deckers is not the answer to the housing "crisis".

FWIW, we should preserve rural farmland as much as possible so that we can feed people....building denser in the urban areas is the best answer to supply issues. Boston is going crazy building lab space...they should build more condos to go along with them.

4

3720-To-One t1_jd85elj wrote

Cool, and when every single suburb thinks they are special and that housing should be built somewhere else nothing gets built.

Your suburb isn’t special. It doesn’t exist in a vacuum.

I’m glad the state is finally telling these suburbs to shape up.

Lab spaces… you think the people who work in these offices and labs only live in Boston proper?

Funny, suburbanites have no problem outsourcing their office, labs, hospitals, museums, sports stadia, etc. to the city.

4

PLS-Surveyor-US t1_jd8dmzc wrote

Gillette is in the burbs...128 has loads of office spaces as well as other cities like Worcester, Lynn, Springfield. You are missing the point that the infrastructure exists to handle the load IN THE CITIES. No need for special treatment plans or even large scale construction of new schools or roads. I am near an MBTA station for a reason. I expect that others will want that same thing and I think it makes sense. Evicting a bunch of cows because there is a T station half hour drive away (followed by a 90 minute commute) seems like a dumb place to harass a town over how many units they put in.

fight the good fight all you want. I hope this becomes a major issue in the next election and people will vote out the people that pass this style of reform. Feel free to vote how you wish.

3

3720-To-One t1_jd8wzcp wrote

So many cows in places like Weston, Wellesley, Newton, and Lexington…

2