Avadya

Avadya t1_j8f7se2 wrote

One of the biggest issues in the greater Boston area is the close proximity of single family suburbs to the downtown area…however, the difference between metro Boston and the seacoast is about 3 million people. Their crisis is rooted in centuries of slow development from single, to double, to triple family homes.

Vertical building on the seacoast likely would consist of 3-4 story townhomes or apartment complexes, rather than 15-20 story highrises. Dover and Portsmouth aren’t high rise cities surrounded by well established suburbs, it’s basically suburbs surrounded by undeveloped land. The seacoast runs the risk of establishing spread out suburbs doing stuff like OP posted.

Rather than pigeonholing itself into slow development, the seacoast area could be relatively innovative and prioritize townhomes, triplexes, and apartment buildings, rather than standalone single family homes. This would allow people currently living in the city to stay in the city that they enjoy

8

Avadya t1_j8f2jn0 wrote

Boston is dealing with an even worse affordability/ availability crisis at the moment, so I can’t imagine “handing over” part of a state is good for much other than a thinly veiled meme excuse for “keeping things the way they are”, which is typically bad for business, diversity, education, investment, ecology, etc…

10

Avadya t1_j8f028k wrote

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. This isn’t the type of building that really helps take a chunk out of the work-force-housing availability/affordability crisis. These aren’t anywhere near walkable jobs, aren’t own-able, and are a inefficient in terms of utilities.

To really make a dent, these cities and towns need be building vertical, high density, multi-story/multi-family housing.

16