Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

idreamofchickpea t1_j8npcbt wrote

Apartments are not just for lower income lol. Don’t get me wrong no one should be too poor for adequate housing but that’s a different consideration. Not that middle class people are doing so well with housing either.

Suburbs are inefficient and unsustainable. I do get that many people like them, not criticizing your taste. Dense housing is the only feasible option I see for the future.

In Vermont I’m not even sure what counts as suburbs, though. What’s a suburb of middlebury (wheee the author lives)? Weybridge?

5

cpujockey t1_j8nr4eb wrote

> I do get that many people like them, not criticizing your taste. Dense housing is the only feasible option I see for the future.

I see your point and I respect it. However, I think that dense housing really only works in burlington - that's where the majority of folks are anywho.

> In Vermont I’m not even sure what counts as suburbs, though. What’s a suburb of middlebury (wheee the author lives)? Weybridge?

well - north ave in burlington would be a good example. unless there is some definition of suburbs my highschool education is failing me.

2

Intru t1_j8v3qj2 wrote

Density is relatively, most villages and towns in VT have some level of density. Density includes things like duplexes or triplexes, four or five unit apartments buildings. Also a lot of old apartment blocks in small towns are pretty easy to miss you can easily dismiss a three story apartment building in Putney VT or Wilmington with a large single family farm house at first glance. You have the general stores with a unit of housing on top all over the state, that's density. We need to open our minds that we need this type of density everywhere.

1

greenglasstree t1_j8sa0z4 wrote

Burlington definitely has suburbs: Colchester, Winooski, Shelburne, Charlotte, Williston, etc.

Burlington needs to densify and add more mid-rise buildings to accomodate working class people.

1