Boston must not shy away from population growth! The city should do what it can to make room for as many rural New Englanders as needed
You consolidate; demolish or repurpose abandoned buildings. Are we to forego development now because growth will slow down in future?
-
-
Certainly it's much easier to accommodate a declining population in an overbuilt city than a burgeoning population in an underbuilt one
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Why would u need to? long as u don't have tax incentives which reward leaving vacant buildings up, landowners can do most of it themselves
-
This still goes back to the question tho: are we just supposed to never accommodate booms? Ban growth in cities? C'mon man
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.