Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Desperate-River-7989 t1_jd7td1v wrote

We still need to plan on there being additional growth as long as the Commonwealth is growing. Most of the growth is happening in the metro Boston area, so that's where more housing needs to be built. If you don't build housing that's how you end up with large homeless populations and the unaffordability crisis we've seen in California and other places on the west coast over the last decade or two.

Saying the schools can't take it isn't a plan and it isn't sustainable. The state typically helps municipalities with the capital cost of building schools, but towns still need to allocate money for such a project, or end up with over-full schools. But if you're building more housing, that usually means that your tax base increases as well which should help fund the schools and other services that residents need.

Growth is coming whether we like it or not, all we can decide is how to react and plan.

1

heavyiron382 t1_jd7ukh7 wrote

I agree that growth is coming but it should be natural and not forced. And more building should supply nore taxes is a big should. Generally with complexes the tax revenue doesn't match the added municpal burden and thus it is placed on rest of the community who in central ma are already struggling with surging costs.

0

wittgensteins-boat t1_jd8aal3 wrote

Is zoning "natural"?
No, it is a human created institution.

There is nothing natural about one acre lots in one town, and multifamily housing on the other side of a municipal boundary.

Thus mandated zoning merely extends the human made institution.

5

bionicN t1_jd854wf wrote

natural growth would require lifting zoning laws.

there's nothing natural about forcing single family housing or low density. the demand for more housing is there.

more housing will reduce total costs by reducing absurd housing costs, which are a much bigger part of most people's finances than taxes.

2