What's wrong with Marshfield? (live in, residential, areas)

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Everywhere? I wouldn't say that. My point is that population is largely based on a few basic

1) Birth rates - I think we can agree that birth rates have been low for quite some time

2) Immigration - Between the last president and COVID this is unlikely to change anywhere

3) Domestic migration - obviously this is happening. We've seen some leave NYC and especially SF.

Who wants a population boom? There's plenty of open space in the state to build and rebuild. Town census is better than federal census because the grant application process is constantly dependent on it.

Much of the aid that cities and towns receive is largely based on population growth.

Chapter 70 - School financial aid - Less students means less aid

Chapter 90 - Road reimbursement for state routes. Less cars on the road and less employers means less aid

COA Foundation grant - number of seniors. I think everyone is going to take a hit due to covid from this

Circuit Breaker - special ed aid. Extremely complicated to say the least.

Then factor in businesses and the demographics on age of their stakeholders. The Berkshires has aged out and it reduced it to mostly Airbnb's and NY'ers getting second homes in the area as people couldn't find much for work.

A single town as out outlier?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scituate,_Massachusetts
Scituate 1.5% growth in ten years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax,_Massachusetts
0.2%. 18 people in ten years...18

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge..._Massachusetts

5%...ok cool...but what

https://www.bridgewaterma.org/Docume...al-Town-Report

"Of the 9,779 census forms mailed to households, 5,304 were returned and 4,475 were not.
The 2010 Federal Census numbered Bridgewater’s population, including the Correctional
Institute facilities and Bridgewater State University students living in Bridgewater, at
26,563. Because of the limited number of returned local censuses, the Town count is lower
than the Federal count. "

well obviously that 5% is based on the university and the prison...nice try. I also know this because that's where I attended and I have family in the area.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshfield,_Massachusetts
25,132 is the 2010 census number
https://www.marshfield-ma.gov/sites/...r-web_copy.pdf
25,521 is the 2019 estimate. that's 1.5%

So in approximately ten years Marshfield has grown 1.5%, Scituate is 1.5%, Halifax is 0.2%, Whitman is flat, Rockland is -1%, Pembroke is negative. Hardly outliers when there's about six of them.

Plymouth, Hingham and Abington have grown quite a bit. it's at about 10%, those are your "boom" towns. It might be interesting to see who those three grew so much and why the others are lagging. It can't just be waterfront property.

Much position? The fact of the matter is the cost structure of the south shore makes it very hard for small businesses to run. You have literally no manufacturing (distribution and making beer doesn't count). Retail had declined as well, even before covid. It's great that a 300,000 house went to say 550,000 in 15 years but it came at a cost of what most people would consider part of small town new england setting. The default plan was just to get housing and it did but then it stalled. It's hard to say a place is unique and special when it is largely seen as a homogeneous blob of cookie cutter houses.

That's not really indicative of which census is more reliable. I honestly do not know, but would imagine that varies from town to town as well.



Towns like Rockland and Whitman I can see a slight decline, neither have a lot of buildable land and both are kind of aging out. Neither are really sought after by those from elsewhere. Bridgewater is DEFINITELY growing, I am familiar with that town as well and there has been a significant amount of construction over the past 10-20 years.



But I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make, with your constant singling out the S Shore while highlighting trends that are nationwide? I mean you seem to be a downer about many places, but how about an example (anywhere in the Northeast) that is getting it "right"??? To me, the South Shore stacks up pretty well by looking at available numbers and comparing to other parts of the region. Saying "no" to every place that comes up, doesn't really help anybody.

[mdovell]

The issue I see in the environment we have is that we can't really lobby the feds for more immigration and we can't tell people to have more kids. I've mentioned some of this on the CT board but it comes down to this. We have to be more accommodating in terms of diversity, especially with people of color and the LGTBAQI community.

Make no mistake I'm no liberal or progressive here. But if communities don't do at least some outreach they are going to lose potential residents. This is like schools competing over students. In Pembroke there's 300 students that live in town that don't go to their school system. Most of that segment is out of district. That means that it isn't even some private or religious school. Maybe it's a vocational program but until the district has a survey no one really knows.

Places need to be affordable. No I don't mean section 8 or some tax credit program. If people cannot afford to live in an area they will eventually leave. No one wants to struggle living in some basement studio efficiency. Long ago I saw a $1,000 basement apartment in Lexington. Who would want to live in that?

If you don't see people having kids or adopting eventually the area ages out. People are only in that age at that time. We've had waves of generations and you can't sell things to the same people at different ages. No one buys life insurance at age 5. How many 80 year olds skateboard? We still have some amusements but it isn't exactly the same.

More communities should take in Metco students. If the district numbers are low this comes without any cost to these communities. Tuition follows the student.

Worcester and Hartford are two of the hottest housing markets in the country right now. Yes there are those that left larger cities but they went to smaller cities. Cincinnati also comes to mind. People want to see services and sometimes that means larger populations. I now live in a small town (about 12K) but I'm in the section that has about half of that in a six mile area. As a result I have public water and sewer, trash removal (included with property taxes), instacart, choice of two internet providers etc. If I lived a mile or so away I wouldn't have access to any of this. I'm not saying that we need to build significant cities again but costs will go up if we don't have density. Businesses can and will pull out of areas if there's no population growth. It's an obsession and there's probably business professors doctorial thesis's on this.

[CrowGirl]

I apologize if this has already been mentioned, but I didn't see it in the first couple pages of posts. When we were trying to decide where to buy I very much considered Marshfield. I work on the South Shore so I was looking at all the usual suspects. However, I eliminated it from consideration based on its flood profile. If you look at FEMA maps you will see it is quite low and considered at considerable risk for flood. It's called Marshfield for a reason. That is simply a non-starter for me, so we took Marshfield off the table.

[mdovell]

Originally Posted by Lila1966

23 Year resident of Hingham and realtor...I love Marshfield! Ive enjoyed living in Hingham and the south shore in general is amazing but I have sold homes to my Hingham friends that are ready to get out of dodge and they have found lovely homes in Marshfield. Get more house for the money, the property is beautiful (almost Vermont like) and they are so happy they moved there. Granted it is a little further out from the city if you have to commute but if you don't, it's a nice place to live. Schools for the most part are what you make them.... education comes in part from the home and advocate for your student when the school puts up roadblocks so they don't fall through the cracks, it happens in any school. Good luck!!! Welcome to the South Shore!

New flood maps are around. Some flooding is expected just look on the houses on stilts in Hull. It's been that way for decades. But if we think that Duxbury Beach and Humarock is going to be around in 30 years that might not be the case.

https://floodfactor.com/city/marshfi...s/2538820_fsid
https://floodfactor.com/city/duxbury...s/2517860_fsid

Flooding is not just ocean based. Hartford for example has some issues due to infrastructure and proximity to the river.

[mdovell]

This was just reported about the cape but it could also apply for the south and north shore.

https://www.wgbh.org/news/local-news...from-the-coast

A condemned trailer on a hill by the beach surrounded by caution tape for only 900K. What's the worst that could happen?

Property taxes decline and then the affluent areas then become more like a gateway city. Everything was put into one industry and then it declines. These are seasonal areas of 2nd home owners so this gets complicated fast.

I can see flood insurance going up or more areas being denied at least to governmental insurance. Perhaps a denial of a 30 year mortgage with a limit at 15 to 20 years. Perhaps being seen like an earthquake zone but with water.

[porterhouse]

Originally Posted by CrowGirl

When we were trying to decide where to buy I very much considered Marshfield. I work on the South Shore so I was looking at all the usual suspects. However, I eliminated it from consideration based on its flood profile. If you look at FEMA maps you will see it is quite low and considered at considerable risk for flood. It's called Marshfield for a reason. That is simply a non-starter for me, so we took Marshfield off the table.

The majority of Marshfield is not in a flood zone, including some places right on the water. It seems rash to eliminate the entire town based on this. I would look at the map on a property by property basis.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by porterhouse

The majority of Marshfield is not in a flood zone, including some places right on the water. It seems rash to eliminate the entire town based on this. I would look at the map on a property by property basis.

Here's a link to the FEMA flood zone map site. Enter Marshfield MA and scroll around. It sure looks to me like more than half the town is at least zone AE. A big storm at a king tide would cause a lot of problems. The first thing I did researching before buying my house was looking at a flood zone map. You can certainly buy property in Marshfield that isn't in the flood zone but the property taxes could get ugly as the town deals with ocean levels rising.



https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search#searchresultsanchor

[mdovell]

Originally Posted by porterhouse

The majority of Marshfield is not in a flood zone, including some places right on the water. It seems rash to eliminate the entire town based on this. I would look at the map on a property by property basis.

Right and although that is true most aren't going to do that. If the name actually says Marshfield what are they picturing exactly. Marsh means low lying lands that are flood and field is wide.

[porterhouse]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

Enter Marshfield MA and scroll around. It sure looks to me like more than half the town is at least zone AE.

If you're looking at non residential and uninhabited areas, maybe. If you look where people actually live in Marshfield, no. This map might allow you to see that a bit more clearly https://marshfieldma.maps.arcgis.com...b152c3d922d%0d

There are certainly areas of Marshfield that are very susceptible to storm surge, just like many costal towns.

[mdovell]

the point is well made though in that if/when there is more flooding if it damages higher ended properties it can sap tax revenue. The center area is fine but if you have sea levels rise it can connect a few areas. Green Harbor Marsh if connected could cut off three neighborhoods. we also have to remember there are more than judge bridges. Culverts can not always be seen as easily.