Most desirable Massachusetts suburb? (Boston, Worcester: school, live, law)

[tysmith95]

Originally Posted by mwj119

Being that your list of towns are more similar than different, I included Concord and Lexington on their behalf. Lincoln is identical to Carlisle. Wayland to Sudbury. Weston is very, very similar to Dover.

And, in 2018/on CD, you hear more about the towns I listed. I think ppsqft in places like Needham, Arlington, and even Bedford prove that desirability of the new home buyer is vastly different than it was 20 years ago. On a ppsqft basis, Arlington is 30% more expensive than Wayland. Surprised? That’s the demand these days.

Wellesley and Lexington are more similar then different, so why include both? /s

Also Needham is basically an extension of Newton /s

[Jmmmm]

What about Wellesley?

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by tysmith95

Wellesley and Lexington are more similar then different, so why include both? /s

That's my main issue with this list, being the lack of variety in choices. With a couple of exceptions, all are Metro-west/minimal economic diversity/semi-high density and neighboring one another for that matter. With a metro area so large and with such a wide range of community options, shouldn't things be mixed up a little bit? I mean the Lexingtons, Newtons, Winchesters do have their appeal; but they certainly aren't for everyone.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by massnative71

That's my main issue with this list, being the lack of variety in choices. With a couple of exceptions, all are Metro-west/minimal economic diversity/semi-high density and neighboring one another for that matter. With a metro area so large and with such a wide range of community options, shouldn't things be mixed up a little bit? I mean the Lexingtons, Newtons, Winchesters do have their appeal; but they certainly aren't for everyone.

Concord
Winchester
Newton
Needham
Wellesley
Hingham
Manchester-By-The-Sea
Marblehead
Lexington
Belmont

None of them fit in to the standard usage of "Metro-west" which is outer suburbs where you can hear the roar of trucks on 495.



The list is white collar professional bedroom towns where the 5%ers raising families live and there is a high fraction of 1%ers. It's incomplete but that's a start of the list. If that's not your demographic, make some other list.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

None of them fit in to the standard usage of "Metro-west" which is outer suburbs where you can hear the roar of trucks on 495.



The list is white collar professional bedroom towns where the 5%ers raising families live and there is a high fraction of 1%ers. It's incomplete but that's a start of the list. If that's not your demographic, make some other list.

Several "things":


1. That absolutely IS Metro-West, it's "center" is generally considered to be Natick/Framingham (not outer suburbs at all) but it certainly includes the 128 as well as 495 towns.


2. "white collar professional bedroom towns where the 5%ers raising families" do live there. They also live on the S Shore, N Shore, the more leafy Metro-West towns like Dover, Medfield and Sudbury which were totally omitted from the list, as well as everywhere in between.


3. OP specifically left "desirability" open to individual interpretation, for any demographic. I stand by my opinion that most of those towns have zero appeal to me whatsoever. No ocean. No scenery. High traffic. Very little local charm. I can see why they are super expensive, and that there is a high demand for those unlucky to work on 128 and need good schools with a somewhat reasonable commute. But to me, that doesn't exactly define "desirable".

[UsAll]

Originally Posted by BostonMike7

Everyone is going to have their varying opinions.

My choice is Lynnfield.

My friend and his wife, who owns a home on the North Shore, if he has to go to an Apple Store and prefers to not have to travel into Boston's Back Bay or Cambridge or Chestnut Hill or Burlington to do so, goes to a newer Apple store which relocated a couple of years ago from Northshore Mall in Peabody into a shopping center in Lynnfield.

I haven't been to Lynnfield personally (yet)-- though having seen photos of it on the web --but he tells me that, overall, it is very beautiful and affluent.

[UsAll]

Originally Posted by CaseyB

OP is right about Somerville and Cambridge, but Brookline is a town (not a city). I certainly consider it a suburb of Boston. Newton is a city and it's on the list.

Regardless of whether they are technically (i.e., legally and politically) classified as a "city" or a "town", Brookline and Newton both function as what is typically called, in geographic/topographic parlance, "edge cities". They EACH have an both an urban-like chracter AND a suburban-like character (a hybrid of the two characteristics) and yet both blend in rather seamlessly with the main city(ies) which abut and surround them. They are situated on the very edge of the main primary city of the region (even being able to easily-enough walk between them and Boston) and have the aboveground T trains (streetcars) serving both of them extensively enough as well as commuter rail (as to commuter rail: in certain parts of them or close enough to them) and of course buses.

In summary: They are each considered a particular TYPE of suburb which has come to be called an "edge city" by urban and suburban planners (even if one is legally incorporated as a "town" and one is legally incorporated as a "city"). To me, Brookline actually seems in look-and-feel to be more like a city, all-in-all, than does Newton (i.e., a city but with suburban-like parts encompassed within it as well). Just like the City of Boston incorporates, for instance, the neighborhood of West Roxbury within it which, to my inspection, appears suburban-like (or enough so).

[UsAll]

Of the entire list of suburbs which started this thread:

Concord
Winchester
Newton
Needham
Wellesley
Hingham
Manchester-By-The-Sea
Marblehead
Lexington
Belmont

I've been to each of them (to-date) other than Manchester-by-the-Sea. They each have their own winning virtues that make them "desirable" as places to live. Which is "most" desirable among them? Depends on the person considering the question, of course. The answer is wholly subjective from person-to-person. It's like asking me (with myself being an adult male) which actress or entertainer would be the most desirable to be intimate with and make love with: Jennifer Lawrence or Ariana Grande or Jennifer Aniston or Beyonce Knowles or Whitney Houston or <etc. etc. etc. etc.>, amongst a host of many others that could be named as well. My answer (for me) is that they are ALL most-desirable to me and I'd be so very pleased and happy to have any one of them as my intimate partner.

Hence (just speaking for myself here), in the same way, I'd be very pleased to be able to live in any of these named suburbs such Newton or Winchester or Wellesley or Lexington and the others (or most others) as well. Assuming that I can, in this imagined scenario, well-enough afford to live in ANY one of them (with money not being an object, per se), choosing the "most desirable" one for ME would probably come down to a combination of these factors:


1. proximity to the heart of the city/metro core (better for me overall than being too too distant and living a wholly car-dependent life by virtue of where I live)

2. proximity to trains (ideally desiring both MBTA subway or streetcar trains and commuter rail to be available within it or walkable enough to it even if located in an adjoining municipality (i.e., with it NOT simply being only a car-commutable municipality like Watertown or Lexington are and hence having to fall back on buses) <----- NOTE: THIS IS ALL SAYING THAT, EVEN IF I CAN AFFORD TO ALWAYS OWN A CAR OR OTHER MOTOR VEHICLE OF WHATEVER TYPE AT ALL TIMES, I MAY NOT WANT TO ALWAYS HAVE TO TAKE MY VEHICLE WITH ME AT ALL TIMES EVERYWHERE I GO (ESPECIALLY INTO VARIOUS PARTS OF THE DENSE URBAN AREAS)

3. having close-enough proximity to good hospitals (ideally a trauma center hospital[s])

4. a good-enough abundance of day-to-day shopping of all or many types within it and not all only being accessible by car only but also (or enough so) by walking

5. of course, the overall environment and upkeep of the suburb should be clean and kempt all-in-all (not letting parts of it to become outright dumps) and kept as crime-free as is reasonable


Note that the OP's original list of suburbs didn't mention, for instance, Brookline or Melrose or Salem or Beverly or Quincy or Braintree. All in all (with my ultimate decision being a compromise decision on my part), I'd prefer Brookline (which is not on the OP's original list). If told in this thread to limit my choices only to the OP's original list of suburbs, I'd choose Newton. That is, I love Lexington and Winchester otherwise but Newton (or Brookline, if offered as a choice) has a better combination of the above-mentioned factors to make it the best compromise decision for me personally.

[redplum33]

Originally Posted by UsAll

It's like asking me (with myself being an adult male) which actress or entertainer would be the most desirable to be intimate with and make love with: Jennifer Lawrence or Ariana Grande or Jennifer Aniston or Beyonce Knowles or Whitney Houston or <etc. etc. etc. etc.>, amongst a host of many others that could be named as well. My answer (for me) is that they are ALL most-desirable to me and I'd be so very pleased and happy to have any one of them as my intimate partner.

Dude... Whitney Houston died in 2012.

[UsAll]

Originally Posted by redplum33

Dude... Whitney Houston died in 2012.

I know that! I'm not an ill-informed person.

I'm saying if she were still alive and maintaining her normal health and appearance that she'd been known for in her heyday (i.e., not having her health and appearance so measurably diminished compared to what they used to be by virtue of her substance use and abuse), she'd be a most-desirable woman (to me) to have as an intimate partner (amongst a host of other named and unnamed females to consider).