@GeoffBattista Never read the comments. But it's a reminder why the article is still necessary even though the message is getting banal. Don't relegate it to the editorial board and the opinion section!
https://t.co/79QZrRlyda
https://t.co/7HYsUoM37u
@MiroBTV@AlexRFarrell
This belief that all decisions in VT need to be communal is deeply flawed. Legislature needs to be pushed hard on permit appeals. Another year wasted.
"I wasn't consulted at every step of development" is precisely why we need to reform the permit appeals process. I used to think it was good for developers to get public feedback, but now I think it gives the mistaken impression that every neighbor's concern has to be addressed.
@GaryWinslett You don't have to give up on the efficiency of the grid to calm traffic in a neighborhood. This is Seattle. Major arterial on the left. Quiet tree lined streets on the right. Narrow streets with mini traffic circles and dead ends that have pedestrian cut through.
@mattyglesias This has always been an option for conforming to anti-massing regs. The question is why architects and developers choose to comply by adding features the general public considers unappealing. (And if those regs aren't generating this desired result, why do they exist?)
@GaryWinslett This is the kind of design that Complete Streets (mandated in VT since 2011) is meant to encourage, though I don't see many examples of it locally. It's buried in VT's guidelines, but "plan the network, not just the street" is an important point.
I love my community. Kids walking or biking to school, extracurriculars, friend's houses. They go downtown with friends to go to the candy shop or for boba or ice cream. We give the elementary aged kids a watch and tell them when to be home for dinner.
Our survey wasn't perfect . Reality probably differs somewhat from the exact numbers we show here.
But even if we have over-estimated the "can't leave house share" by 200%
The share of kids prohibited from playing in the yard SHOULD BE 0%!!!
Adding supply might work somewhere else, but not in VT. VT is unique, exceptional. VT requires bespoke, Rube Goldberg machine solutions. I'm being flip. I think we should try allowing people to build housing.
A new study by UVM researchers suggests building more homes may not make housing more affordable — because investors are competing with cash for what’s built. https://t.co/F94CyTnZ0d
@GaryWinslett Small bright spot is that Montpelier just loosened its sprinkler requirements over the objections of the fire chief and planning director. It now conforms with state regs exempting buildings up to 6 units.
@GaryWinslett We are moving in the right direction, but progress is painfully slow. Removing tier 3 and road rule is good, but we still haven't fully solidified tier 1 designations. We have builders waiting and waiting for our growth areas to be approved by LURB.
You don't often get great state-level polling on housing politics, especially in small states, but there's some new polling out on housing in Vermont. It shows:
1) Vermonters overwhelmingly think there's not enough housing,
2) see housing costs as a big problem,
3) view it as the most important issue right now, and
4) and want fast action to promote development.
All of this points to the extent to which the loud, vocal minority that opposes essentially all development (usually on environmental grounds) is exactly that.....a loud, vocal minority.
Hidden in this article is a story about a community held hostage by a single individual. The state capital's ability to build housing and grow is entirely at the whim of one ornery person. Legislature dropped the ball not addressing the appeals process this year.