Dover vs. Sherborn (Boston, Norwood, Holliston: neighborhood, buy, live in)

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by MikePRU

From your perspective I was talking about the same thing. However, that won't hold true depending on who is looking at the issue. Like a lot of people, you have a lot of trouble seeing things from the other side of the argument. You can only understand what you want and what you feel is right. You have no concept that other people might have a different take on things and that doesn't make them right or wrong. It just makes them someone else.

This being said, there's a lot of ways you can look at this issue. If you increase the density in a town and drive down the home prices, don't you think someone is going to be hurt in that scenario? Perhaps, the people that already own homes there and paid a premium for what the town was at that time? You have no care or concern for those people? Likely, they put their hard earned money into a house because it offered them what they wanted. Maybe it was to live on multiple acres. Maybe it was to look out of their windows and see trees and not neighbors. Maybe they value privacy and wouldn't feel comfortable living in a dense environment.

You only seem to be concerned about the people who can't currently afford homeownership or are forced into long commutes because of affordability. What about the people who can pay for those houses? Are they not a part of our society too? Do they not deserve any consideration?

I don't think anybody is denying their perspective. It's totally understandable, and human nature. I just think some see a tone of selfishness in those who obtained their "paradise" (which at ONE point was undisturbed nature like everywhere else), and expect to slam the gate shut on everyone else. I'm all for private property rights, all day long, and any day of the year. You buy your 10 acres, nobody should have a right to that outside rare cases of eminent domain. It's telling OTHERS what they can and can't do with their property (although I understand reasonable zoning and QOL guidelines to some level), that I take some issue with. You pay $2m on a home, you should never COUNT on your town remaining exactly the same 100 years from now ESPECIALLY if it's 15 miles from a major city.

Originally Posted by MikePRU

Personally, I like conservation land. It gives families places to walk/hike in and nature to enjoy without having to drive for an hour to get west of Worcester. I enjoy that our suburbs offer a variety of environs. There's something for everyone here.

I do too, I think most do. There has to be a happy medium though.

Originally Posted by MikePRU

It's just not the simple problem of "we need more housing let's just build like crazy" that you're presenting. Over development is also what causes the RE market to crash harder in downturns. Our perpetual housing issue actually helps to support the RE values of homeowners so that they don't lose their shirt like people in Las Vegas, Miami, and Detroit did 10 years ago.

I don't think the Boston area ever has to worry about "overbuilding".

Originally Posted by MikePRU

Chances are you'll see more urban environments get even more dense before a place like Sherborn increases in density. Increased density is often a thing that happens slowly around here and tends to work from the center (Boston) outward.

But a major problem with the Boston area is its "leapfrog" development patterns. You have ultra low density towns closer to the city like Dover, Sherborn, Lincoln and Carlisle while you in turn have more distant towns like Franklin and Mansfield that have been more friendly to development and are significantly denser. Many on this forum do not appreciate the increase in housing costs and increased commutes that brings, or its environmental impact.

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by MikePRU

Like a lot of people, you have a lot of trouble seeing things from the other side of the argument. You can only understand what you want and what you feel is right. You have no concept that other people might have a different take on things and that doesn't make them right or wrong. It just makes them someone else.

If we were talking about putting pineapple on pizza, I’d agree with you. However “people are different.. *shrug*” usually isn’t a good enough answer for most questions about ethics and economics.

Maybe it was to look out of their windows and see trees and not neighbors. Maybe they value privacy and wouldn't feel comfortable living in a dense environment.

Maybe they can sell their home and move elsewhere if their town starts to change too much.

I know Needham is not going to be allowed to get anymore dense at least in the immediate future because our schools and other town amenities don't have unlimited capacity and it wouldn't make financial sense to start projects to improve capacity at this time.

You don’t think Needham will need a second high school, eventually?

Over development is also what causes the RE market to crash harder in downturns. Our perpetual housing issue actually helps to support the RE values of homeowners so that they don't lose their shirt like people in Las Vegas, Miami, and Detroit did 10 years ago.

Do you really think Boston is anything like Las Vegas, Miami, or Detroit? Construction wouldn’t become that important an industry in the area even with a 100% increase from what we’re seeing now.

Originally Posted by massnative71

You pay $2m on a home, you should never COUNT on your town remaining exactly the same 100 years from now ESPECIALLY if it's 15 miles from a major city.

One more time for the people in the back!

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by MikePRU

I know Needham is not going to be allowed to get anymore dense at least in the immediate future because our schools and other town amenities don't have unlimited capacity and it wouldn't make financial sense to start projects to improve capacity at this time.

Originally Posted by Boston Shudra

You don’t think Needham will need a second high school, eventually?

Ugh. I tried so hard to move on from this without making a fuss. But you do realize that by not building a second high school [and housing], most current Needham-kids will be effectively forced to not raise their own kids in Needham?

Like...you’re telling the people who grew up there that they are no longer welcome.

[CaseyB]

Originally Posted by Boston Shudra

Ugh. I tried so hard to move on from this without making a fuss. But you do realize that by not building a second high school [and housing], most current Needham-kids will be effectively forced to not raise their own kids in Needham?

Like...you’re telling the people who grew up there that they are no longer welcome.

So what? That happened to lots of us who were raised in wealthier towns. You can't afford to buy there, at least not initially. Nobody has a "right" to live in a specific place.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by CaseyB

So what? That happened to lots of us who were raised in wealthier towns. You can't afford to buy there, at least not initially. Nobody has a "right" to live in a specific place.

I think the point he was trying to make was, a side effect of ultra NIMBYISM and resistance to certain kinds of progress often means losing the very people who make a community what it is. Ironically, extreme efforts to preserve the region's "character" has actually resulted in the loss of character for so many towns.

[FCMA]

Well if kids want to live in their metro Boston hometowns, I hope more parents are training their kids that they might need to consider not pursuing their dreams to chase high-paid professions at all costs. Some lucky ones will have dreams that align with the obscene cost of living, others can sacrifice theirs at the altar of STEM majors, while still others will stay true to themselves but have to settle for long commutes from Gateway cities and podunks like many of us do. Nobody has a right to live anywhere, and so we find that those with traditional middle class professions objectively don’t deserve to live too many places near Boston anymore unless they marry “up”, inherit, or get really scrappy, while the smug ‘haves’ who, of course, objectively deserve all the nice things get to be all NIMBY and inhibit any potential housing solutions.

[trevor0101]

Hi all. Is the area of Sherborn near Holliston less desirable, or bad in someway? I have a friend that's trying to due diligence on a townhouse there (Fields at Sherborn) there prior to going to contact. His agent seems to think the only drawback is distance to Boston. I figured this group may know otherwise! TIA

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by massnative71

I think the point he was trying to make was, a side effect of ultra NIMBYISM and resistance to certain kinds of progress often means losing the very people who make a community what it is. Ironically, extreme efforts to preserve the region's "character" has actually resulted in the loss of character for so many towns.

This.

Originally Posted by trevor0101

(Fields at Sherborn)

Seems like the new-construction, “McMansion” type of development that people on this forum seem to hate. I personally think it looks very nice. Not too much yard space, and hopefully the walls are well soundproofed. It’s a bit far from the major highways, so commuting to downtown Boston could be a pain.

[CaseyB]

Originally Posted by trevor0101

Hi all. Is the area of Sherborn near Holliston less desirable, or bad in someway? I have a friend that's trying to due diligence on a townhouse there (Fields at Sherborn) there prior to going to contact. His agent seems to think the only drawback is distance to Boston. I figured this group may know otherwise! TIA

Does he care if there are 40B units there?

[MassTech]

Originally Posted by CaseyB

Does he care if there are 40B units there?

I don’t think so. He said that having a few subsidized homes there isn’t a big deal to him. He was trying to figure out if there is something else he’s missing.