Recent comments in /f/vermont

deadowl t1_j9qk4af wrote

You could even park somewhere with bus service to a T line--but yea, if you don't want to have your wallet simultaneously experiencing projectile diarrhea and projectile vomiting when it comes to parking, that's what you've gotta do. If you've got handicap tags meanwhile, you don't need to worry about parking nearly as much.

1

ceiffhikare t1_j9qiikc wrote

If you are going down 3 feet by hand then you may as well spend another 10 min and go another foot if you can. 4' is the rule that i grew up with and deeper is better cause you can add drainage first, which is always a good idea. I had to reset a meter post that was at 3 feet that i didnt set after like 25 years so take from that what you will.

3

DarkLordMittens t1_j9qii27 wrote

My mailbox is a treated 4x4 about 4-5 feet down. It's been 3 years and still straight. My horse fencing was fresh cut logs 2 feet. No problems with the posts stoutness, some of the skinny ones broke at ground level when I tried to remove them.

May your dig be rock free.

13

Choice_Match6161 t1_j9qie2x wrote

All meters are free in Boston From Saturday night through Monday at 7am. Also free on Holidays. You can probably park in Permit parking for free too but I would stick with the meters.

1

PromiseNorth t1_j9qi1pi wrote

And weed out the ones they don’t want to do & make sure that the profit is commensurate. For OP I’m more or less expressing how challenging it is to get small jobs contracted. I was ready to write a check for 50k and couldn’t get someone for 6 years even with excepted bids and 50% material down payments to reserve slots.

3

MrBusRider t1_j9qh5yf wrote

Post depth should generally be equal to half the height. Clean 3/4” in the bottom of the hole can help especially if you have poorly drained soils. If you are on clay maybe go deeper. If you’re going to use concrete and you’re on sand, you’ll be fine with 3’. Better yet use a ground screw, there’s very little surface area for the frost to push against.

7

homefone t1_j9qfr3o wrote

Good. Local municipalities shouldn't be able to restrict all housing development, maybe barring large single family homes. The median home in Massachusetts costs well over $600K. If you'd like to fix the problem before we arrive at a similar point, the only way to do it is to build more housing and that's impossible without addressing local zoning.

1

implante t1_j9qe1of wrote

Reply to comment by Ok_Emu703 in Hi Guys, by Plus-Frosting6472

This is 100% the correct answer. OGE consignment is the way to go. Head straight downstairs when you get there. They don't rent though but you'll likely find great deals on a secondary ski outfit.

BTW, great timing on your trip, with today's storm.

3

wholeWheatButterfly t1_j9qdy60 wrote

The risk is there end up being more regulation on affordable housing because Act 250 comes into play with 10 units or more, and developers are generally going to want to build more than 10 cheap units at once (whether in an apartment building or single family neighborhood). Once Act 250 kicks in, it is a uncertain bureaucratic process which could lead to years of disputes (which adds to cost), and even ultimately shut down the process. It's much easier and less risky to build one or a few luxury houses because it is less regulated.

I think lots of developers would prefer to make 20 cheap homes than spend the same amount on fewer luxury homes, but it's just a risky process with act 250 on top of other permitting and zoning. Making tons of cookie cutter houses or an apartment complex is, in many ways, easier than making a handful of luxury homes, since you can much more easily reuse material and designs.

4