Gloucester Housing Production Plan

Gloucester Housing Production Plan

jasongrow
Joined: 16 Jan 2007, 10:15

06 Dec 2017, 03:13 #1

Anyone concerned with the issue of housing, affordable housing, development, pending development etc. in Gloucester should really take some time to read through the Housing Production Plan: http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/documentcenter/view/4238 There is some really good, really concerning information in that report. Given the Fuller project and other things on horizon, it's compelling reading. 
Reply

Karly
Joined: 20 Feb 2010, 02:12

06 Dec 2017, 11:10 #2

I agree and have also been recommending it to people.  It is very interesting and packed with information about demographic trends, available land, our projected future housing needs and much more.  It is where I learned that we need a lot more housing (both affordable and market rate) even as our population declines due to the aging of our households...fewer people per unit.  After a few reads online, someone nice gave me a hard copy!  Good for coffee table discussion :-)
Reply

Cathy (Admin)
Joined: 13 Aug 2005, 09:30

06 Dec 2017, 16:16 #3

I've linked to and referenced the HPP several times in the Fuller Watch thread and noted this section in particular:

One of the goals identified in The Housing Production Plan is to review and revise the Zoning Ordinance to encourage production of affordable housing.  Included in strategies listed to achieve that:

"Explore modifications to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to create incentives for the production of more inclusionary units while discouraging payments in lieu of building units. Consider reducing the threshold for triggering inclusionary housing from eight units. Enforce the provisions of the ordinance to ensure actual construction of the required affordable units. Consider an alternative calculation for the payment in lieu of so that it is an amount equal to the required number of affordable housing units multiplied by the median price of a market-rate home comparable in type, size, and number of bedrooms over a period of 18 months prior to the date of application submission."
Reply

jasongrow
Joined: 16 Jan 2007, 10:15

06 Dec 2017, 17:42 #4

Sorry for the duplicative post, I don't follow along like I used to... hopefully folks will take the time to read it though. It's going to have significant ramifications over the next 10-20 years.
Reply

Karly
Joined: 20 Feb 2010, 02:12

06 Dec 2017, 17:47 #5

It deserves its own thread, jason.  It is about much more than Fuller, though very important to that discussion.
Reply

William Taylor.e
Joined: 30 Mar 2007, 04:27

06 Dec 2017, 18:45 #6

jasongrow wrote: Anyone concerned with the issue of housing, affordable housing, development, pending development etc. in Gloucester should really take some time to read through the Housing Production Plan: http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/documentcenter/view/4238 There is some really good, really concerning information in that report. Given the Fuller project and other things on horizon, it's compelling reading. 
I skimmed through the first 30 pages, Jason and will do more later. I would like to have your synopsis.

It does not seem like there will be a measured increase in jobs way up here at the end of 128 and would this not mean we do not need any or much more affordable housing ( I don't know what thet really means as it has to shift every decade). If Gloucester catered to increasingly wealthy households would not that mean a better tax base, more local businesses doing well and therefore a better everything from engagement in schools to public works? We have a harbor and waterfront that is ripe for development and that most likely would not be affordable development.
It seems crazy to build housing and have people have to got "down the line" to Danvers or Beverly or further to get work. 
You make a living by what you get. You make a life by what you give..
Reply

moro
Joined: 02 Jul 2014, 19:56

07 Dec 2017, 03:48 #7

I think you might be on to something William.  Maybe we come up with a "wealthy housing only" policy, instead of all the fretting about affordable places?
Reply

jasongrow
Joined: 16 Jan 2007, 10:15

07 Dec 2017, 04:01 #8

moro wrote: I think you might be on to something William.  Maybe we come up with a "wealthy housing only" policy, instead of all the fretting about affordable places?
I really didn't know how to respond to William, Moro, but I think you nailed it. 
Reply

stanb
Joined: 02 Jul 2008, 13:31

07 Dec 2017, 09:49 #9

How about loosening up regulations that prevent single family home owners from building inlaw
apartments for needy relatives. Not the answer , but would help.  
Reply

Karly
Joined: 20 Feb 2010, 02:12

07 Dec 2017, 12:40 #10

William Taylor.e wrote:
jasongrow wrote: Anyone concerned with the issue of housing, affordable housing, development, pending development etc. in Gloucester should really take some time to read through the Housing Production Plan: http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/documentcenter/view/4238 There is some really good, really concerning information in that report. Given the Fuller project and other things on horizon, it's compelling reading. 
I skimmed through the first 30 pages, Jason and will do more later. I would like to have your synopsis.

It does not seem like there will be a measured increase in jobs way up here at the end of 128 and would this not mean we do not need any or much more affordable housing ( I don't know what thet really means as it has to shift every decade). If Gloucester catered to increasingly wealthy households would not that mean a better tax base, more local businesses doing well and therefore a better everything from engagement in schools to public works? We have a harbor and waterfront that is ripe for development and that most likely would not be affordable development.
It seems crazy to build housing and have people have to got "down the line" to Danvers or Beverly or further to get work. 
Absolutely stunning.
Reply

Fortune Cookie
Joined: 13 Nov 2010, 17:37

07 Dec 2017, 13:07 #11

It fits in nicely in this time of Trumpism, you have to admit. Coddle the wealthy, screw the middle class. 
₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪

Fortune Cookie

₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪₪
Reply

William Taylor.e
Joined: 30 Mar 2007, 04:27

07 Dec 2017, 15:22 #12

I see the reality of the situation is lost on those of you who responded. I think you do not want to recognize what is true I am not saying it is right or just but stating what I believe are the facts. Towns with residents who have more wealth generally have better everything from public and private services to schools.

A lack of resources of any type will cause a population to degrade whether it be cultural, social or economic and the opposite is true. You should not deny that the creation of wealth raises all boats. Without that wealth you have no museums, libraries, parks, cultural events or schools. 
You make a living by what you get. You make a life by what you give..
Reply

harbordog
Joined: 07 Jun 2008, 11:56

07 Dec 2017, 15:39 #13

wow - a lack of resources will cause a population to degrade.
that is pretty cold.
I would rather live in my world than yours any day.
Reply

battlingignorance
Joined: 01 Sep 2012, 12:06

07 Dec 2017, 15:51 #14

How about re-visiting the wholly NIMBY-driven DOUBLING of buildable lot sizes up in Lanesville that was thrust through when the sewer went in up there?
Reply

Island Annie
Joined: 27 Sep 2005, 04:41

07 Dec 2017, 18:58 #15

You should not deny that the creation of wealth raises all boats.
If you believe that, I have a tax plan to sell you.
Towns with residents who have more wealth generally have better everything from public and private services to schools.
Largely because those towns with money also have families. Manchester, H-W, North Reading; all very family oriented, with lots of resources.

The wealthy moving into Rockport, and probably Gloucester, have generally raised their families elsewhere, and are not as invested in having great public resources, putting greater pressure on the families who do live here in the form of increased user fees and other costs.
"...the problem with pounding a square peg into a round hole is not that the hammering is hard work. It's that you're destroying the peg." ."

-Paul Collins


    
Reply

Damon
Joined: 25 Jun 2007, 22:00

07 Dec 2017, 19:25 #16

Yes, Island Annie we are having the same problem in Gloucester.
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Reply

William Taylor.e
Joined: 30 Mar 2007, 04:27

07 Dec 2017, 20:46 #17

Wealth and school quality from the Atlantic monthly:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/ar ... ls/497333/

Wealth of our local towns. Of a total of 351, Manchester is no. 8.....Essex is No. 88, Rockport No. 92 and Gloucester No. 156. I suspect that Essex may move up a bit more because of it's school connection with Manchester.

But I live in your world harbordog...and sometimes reality is cold and unfair. Without wealth donors supporting various non profits life in Gloucester would most certainly be degraded.

 I certainly do not espouse coddling the wealthy or screwing the middle class, fortune cookie, but the reality is that wealthier cities and towns are just plain better off and able to offer advantages that other places do not have.

And Jason, you work for a living and to what do you owe your ability to afford what you need? Someone with money who can afford to pay you what you are worth.

This is the way our system works and if you have a better system, a system that is "workable idealism" then let's have it. So far no society has been able to solve this problem over the long term.
You make a living by what you get. You make a life by what you give..
Reply

jasongrow
Joined: 16 Jan 2007, 10:15

07 Dec 2017, 22:27 #18

William Taylor.e wrote: Wealth and school quality from the Atlantic monthly:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/ar ... ls/497333/

Wealth of our local towns. Of a total of 351, Manchester is no. 8.....Essex is No. 88, Rockport No. 92 and Gloucester No. 156. I suspect that Essex may move up a bit more because of it's school connection with Manchester.

But I live in your world harbordog...and sometimes reality is cold and unfair. Without wealth donors supporting various non profits life in Gloucester would most certainly be degraded.

 I certainly do not espouse coddling the wealthy or screwing the middle class, fortune cookie, but the reality is that wealthier cities and towns are just plain better off and able to offer advantages that other places do not have.

And Jason, you work for a living and to what do you owe your ability to afford what you need? Someone with money who can afford to pay you what you are worth.

This is the way our system works and if you have a better system, a system that is "workable idealism" then let's have it. So far no society has been able to solve this problem over the long term.
Maybe with all the extra wealth we could afford a gate at the entrance.... 
Reply

moro
Joined: 02 Jul 2014, 19:56

07 Dec 2017, 22:40 #19



WT gets a special visitor on Christmas Eve!
Reply

William Taylor.e
Joined: 30 Mar 2007, 04:27

08 Dec 2017, 04:16 #20

jasongrow wrote:
William Taylor.e wrote: Wealth and school quality from the Atlantic monthly:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/ar ... ls/497333/

Wealth of our local towns. Of a total of 351, Manchester is no. 8.....Essex is No. 88, Rockport No. 92 and Gloucester No. 156. I suspect that Essex may move up a bit more because of it's school connection with Manchester.

But I live in your world harbordog...and sometimes reality is cold and unfair. Without wealth donors supporting various non profits life in Gloucester would most certainly be degraded.

 I certainly do not espouse coddling the wealthy or screwing the middle class, fortune cookie, but the reality is that wealthier cities and towns are just plain better off and able to offer advantages that other places do not have.

And Jason, you work for a living and to what do you owe your ability to afford what you need? Someone with money who can afford to pay you what you are worth.

This is the way our system works and if you have a better system, a system that is "workable idealism" then let's have it. So far no society has been able to solve this problem over the long term.
Maybe with all the extra wealth we could afford a gate at the entrance.... 
I would be delighted, Jason, if you could show me a more realistic approach to having a well functioning and successful city. It takes money and lot and lots of it to make a place better and more desirable and that money comes from wealthy people who contribute in so many ways. Successful communities just don't happen spontaneously. 
You make a living by what you get. You make a life by what you give..
Reply