>The City will seek grants and donations to fund the capital costs.
>
>For more information or questions, please contact the City Manager's Office at manager@lebanonnh.gov or 603-448-4220.

Here's a bit more on the project details so far: City Partnering in Design and Operation of Childcare Facility

Oh I'm with you on this, with one correction, most of our grandparent, us millennials and boomers, actually did need/use trains to Boston, and pretty much every single town in NH up to the 1950s that how we moved around. Although not in NH my grandfather always complained about that we got rid of trains, trolleys, and train travel, he always lamented how annoying and stressful it is to drive into our state capital, San Juan, with a car and wished the trains were still there. The man was a coffee farmer from the sticks and still could see the value of good public transit.

Or you know we can de-center car oriented development and you know prevent sprawl, promote livable density and promote rail down to mass and other work corridors so that less traffic happens. A lot of our community's urban centers and older suburb could use some density and could handle a modest bump-up in it. It's a win win we keep sprawl outside of the woods and we increase housing without going full 10 story towers, not like that was going to ever happen anyways, especially when most recidencial zoned land in the state is reserved for single family which is part of the reason why we can't build more affordably (yes i know there's a lot of other factors as well) just preamting the density means skyscraper crowd.

This is something that doesn't get talked about enough most our towns where denser until suburbanization rolled in and then closed the development gate behind them while also inexplicable not allowing towns and city center to keep it's density. Then we pretend we lived in the woods but most of us live in suburbs and depend on suburban amenities for goods and services.

I love to read it when your done, this is something I'm also Greatly concerned about.

I think of that as a symptom not the cause. It's really death by a thousand cuts. We have exclusionary suburban focus zoning of the 1940s and 1950s , that bans or makes it impossible to build anything but single family housing in over 70% of residential zoned land. Preventing things like small mix used, boarding homes, hostels, duplex, triplexes, etc. Economic decline in large portions of the state's municipalities, shifting of job centers, disconnect between available stock and desired areas, car centric tourist development, bizantine building and safety codes. Rise in costs, etc. Speculative real estate markets and Airbnb are just another nail in the coffin of affordability.

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.

The problem with the suburbs that they are not resilient long term and are restricted to single family housing and car based comercial, single family housing is that it's the only housing typology allowed in a lot of our residential zoned land. That's the problem its zoned out diversity of housing stock. You should be able to get the housing type you want but when you gate keep it so the only housing you can get is only one type then we create the hot mess we are i.

There's way of stoping suburbs and promoting sustainable communities that grow. Act 250 is a barrier but never trust a developers, lot size maximums and up zoning all single family zones to allow for up to 4 units. Allow soft commercial and edu in all residential zones. Have developers cover the maintenance of road and water infrastructure in developments of given size for up to 10 years so they have to cover the first cycle of maintenance. Remove parking minimums, lot size mins, floor area ratios, allow for single access blocks, ban drive thrus, ban street facing parking lots, require all commercial to have main entries to be street facing, etc, etc.

Probably a shitty embroidery shop, that's why they are force to pick up the garbage costumers the other shops don't have the need to deal with. Just by your recollection you have to go through a list of businesses before even getting to the one that served you. That says a lot of i had to go down to my fith choice of something it either means i should probably have some patience and call a few time or hold off on doing it till later. But it seems your have some heavy narcissistic tendencies so this will go over your head.

The way single family housing zoning mandates force developments to spread farther and farther out. This reality might be difficult to achieve unless your wealthy enough to afford to live that far.

We have allowed for our trucks and SUV to get too big for no real reason so now truck grills are much higher up than the use to. We need to regulate the size and weight of our larger vehicles more strictly, they are also the cause of our up tick in car fatalities nation wide.

Puerto Rico has it in their state constitutions where the high water mark plus a pretty sizable buffer are public domain. Which dates back to the Spanish crown wanting to control the coastline as a resource. But yeah Oregon isn't the only US jurisdiction that make the coastline public.