Whoever can
a) Build the most housing units. I dont care for big towers. Make a ton of 8-10 story buildings all over Boston. Closer to the core 12-16 stories.
b) Fund the MBTA
c) Achieve further equity in Mattapan, Roxbury, Dorchester, Hyde Park, etc with recreation and amenities.
d) Redo the whole liquor law situation in Boston. Help lower the cost of Liquor licenses dramatically.
a) I agree, but with the likely top runners, especially with Wu getting large endorsements, I don't think we'll see housing in Boston added on the scale we've had under Marty. Most candidates note they understand the need for more housing, but have been rallying against many of the developments of late for their "neglection" of their effects on traffic, quality of life, etc. This is where I "disagree" with most of them, and I have concerns going forward on the affordability of our metro area under the top runners.
Traffic impacts, specifically, result from our mandated parking minimums. The city requires a development have x-amount of parking spaces, which provides incentive and convenience to the office workers or residents of the building to use their car over transit, biking, or even walking. Eliminate parking minimums and developers will happily oblige, as the construction cost per unit drastically decreases, and hopefully, the unit prices themselves will drop as well, leading to more affordable development with less traffic impacts. Developments impacting quality of life, etc. are always going to be a challenge. While it'd be nice to get truly well-designed and well-intentioned/socially aware developments, that's ultimately up to a developer with the goal of making x% return on a project, and with that, it's not a matter of "well, simply take (x-y)% to make a higher quality development, or leave it" since the banks and investors will simply pull out if the lower return and higher risk is presented to them, and they will be forced to leave it. It's an extremely tricky balance to achieve in developments where the community/social impact is a top priority. They should be running on platforms that promise to eliminate or at the very least decrease parking minimums, provide more coordination for affordable housing and more/easier access to grants, loans, permits, etc. to incentivize developers to build affordable housing, rather than the current language coming from their websites that seem like they would add complications and likely delays to the already long and risky real-estate/building process.
b) A mayor can only push for more MBTA funding, and the city can't really afford much of their municipal budget to be sent to an agency that requires hundreds of millions, billions even, to effectively get to where we want to be. MBTA funding, especially in the coming 1-3 years, is really on the state and state pushing the federal government for more funding. This is also dependent on how ridership returns after COVID.
c) I imagine you'll see that under the new mayor, but it'll likely still be a stretched out process with planning, studies, more planning, community meetings, grant applications, and finally design and construction work.
d) That'd be nice, for sure.
www.bostonglobe.com
