Rental Units at Westwood Station
I was surprised to see the news story this week that the "luxury condos" planned for Westwood Station had quickly become apartments. And then there is the proposal to allow a grocery store to sell beer and wine. These are the kinds of things that happen in this town with no publicity (until after the fact) and no effort to involve the affected residents. Perhaps this stuff is discussed at the many, many meetings that have been going on, but if so, why isn't it publicly discussed until decisions have been made? After the decisions have been made, the only discussion we can have is negative complaining which tends to get tuned out by those it doesn't affect directly. I would love to hear if the Selectmen candidates have any ideas on how we could create some way for ongoing involvement by the community in the growth of Westwood Station.
With respect to the rentals, I have some basic questions? Why in the world would the developer want to go into apartment management? If there is a rental market, then some of the purchasers of the condos will rent them. But how can you ever expect apartments to become owner-occupied units? Why not just remove (if there was one) the zoning restriction on renting and let the market sort out what percentage of the condos are owner-occupied?
I think a prosperous, successful Westwood Station might inspire people to want to move here and condos would give some of them (younger professional people just starting out) an entry into the residential real estate market that they could not otherwise afford--an alternative to a starter home out on 495. But making it 100% rental from the start means the people will likely live here and move on. If I were a young professional person...why would I want to rent an apartment in Westwood when I could do as well in Somerville without being stuck out in the burbs? How will these rentals compete with the Jefferson Place rental across from the Dedham Corporate Center rail stop?
I'm supportive of Westwood Station, but I think the residential component is something that is often overlooked, but actually critical to the success of the project. Economic development these days is all about creating a place where people want to live, not just attracting companies or building stores. More affordable owner occupied units would seem to me more marketable than apartments, but I don't know what if any market analysis has been done. Clearly, the real estate market is a problem right now, but it would be great to get more insight and more community involvement in this process.
As a side note, I would like to encourage commenters to use real names when they respond to articles on this site. Authors like "Westwood Resident" and "Concerned Resident" make good points, but I think it is much more effective for people to use their real names--at least a first name and last initial. The early internet was all about anonymity, but these days I think people are looking for greater transparency and authenticity.
Comments
Westwood Station
You make some excellent points that are worth engaging in a discussion. On your first point, my understanding is that that CCF wants the option to treat the condo's as rental units to protect them from a downturn in the real estate market. As you point out, it seems that we are certainly in that downturn and that it will be several years before the cycle rights itself. I don't believe the developer intends to be 100% rental, they simply want the option to generate rental income from unsold units. This seems reasonable to me, especially if the alternative is a ghost town of empty condo units. Perhaps CCF intends to implement a rent-to-own program.
Your request for people to use their "real names" in posts is a double edged sword. The reason we vote anonymously is to allow people to freely express their beliefs free from reproach of others; to encourage the free exchange of ideas. Certainly, there are instances where a real name should be mandatory, such as when posts come from a party-of-interest (town official or board member, political candidate, person seeking to do business with the town). It is true that attaching a real name to a post lends weight and authenticity to the author's views because they are willing to stand behind them. But if we want to encourage participation of the general citizenry, I think we must accept anonymity as a legitimate and viable option.
Rentals vs. Condos
Yes...CCF is trying to protect CCF in this rough market. However, there is no protection for the Town of Westwood. All restrictions have been lifted. I understand the market is tough but keeping the project the current size and just changing condos to rentals is not the solution. 1000 rental units is almost 25% of town housing units. And the way this process happened is completely unacceptable. The Planning Board was presented a plan to give a permit to. They were told no more than a certain number would be leased and there would be strict controls. The permit was issued and the BOS then changed the terms. Unacceptable. Hopefully the meeting on Wednesday between both boards will bring about some solutions that benefit the town and it's residents and not just CCF. Sorry not to use my real name but in a town this small, I do not feel comfortable especially with behavior I have witnessed.
Looking forward to meeting
First of all, thank you for your comment. I realize this issue is causing a real trust issue in the town and I'd rather have anonymous thoughtful comments than no comments here.
I'm not able to attend that Planning Board meeting, but I hope someone will report back here (and I am sure it will be covered in the local press.) What I hear again and again is that the people most affected by these things, whether they support the overall project or not, feel excluded and misled. It seems to me, even as the project proceeds, there has to be a way to provide meaningful involvement in a constructive manner. Could there be some kind of joint CCF + town board to arbitrate disputes? Could there be a regional organization with representatives from all affected parties (including our neighbors Canton and Dedham) to plan mitigation of the difficulties that are sure to come? I don't know what form something like that would take, but it is in everyone's interests to work something out so this project can be made to beneft and not divide the town.
I am surprised that the Planning Board position occupied by Henry Gale is going uncontested whereas there are 4 people vying for the BOS position. Again, I'm naive and inexperiened--I don't know what goes on at all these meetings and how the power dynamics work in this town. But I would think even though the overall project has been approved, there would be many, many direct and indirect consequences to plan around. Does the town have an existing structure for this kind of thing? How do we get involved? If not, we should. I blogged about some ideas I had for the town centers a few days ago; how can ideas like that make it from pipe dream to reality?
Planning Board and Board of Selectmen Meeting on March 19
The agenda for the meeting last night between the Planning Board and Board of Selectmen was to concentrate on changes in the mix of affordable housing and zoning changes at Westwood Station. It was not to address the development agreement as a whole. What I can report about the meeting is that the Board of Selectmen did not show up. Representatives were sent in their place - Mike Jaillet, Town Administrator, and Steve Rafsky, Economic Advisory Board. I did not see any coverage in the paper today and do not feel comfortable with my knowledge of the subject to give an update on how the proposed zoning changes would impact the affordable housing. I do know that this is now the second public meeting I have attended expecting the Board of Selectmen and not getting that - the first was the 4 town traffic meeting concerning closure of Canton Street. The 3 other towns (Canton, Norwood, and Dedham) all had either their whole BOS there or part of their BOS. Westwood sent the same representatives to that meeting. I really feel this town needs to open up the lines of communication and involve the public and their boards more. Mike Jaillet stated the BOS would be having more public meetings before town meeting and would be sending a letter. However, the BOS not showing up is disrespectful to both the public and more importantly the Planning Board. The Planning Board has put in COUNTLESS hours and should be shown the respect they deserve to get their questions answered in public by the BOS. I apologize that I can not comment more on the subject of the meeting. But just another reason why residents are frustrated with this whole process.
Rental Units at Westwood Station
I understand that the market for condos is very difficult just now, but a switch from condos to rental apartments at Westwood Station is a fundamental change that has profound consequences for Westwood.
One consequence is that there may be substantially lower property tax revenues for the Town. The reason is that the property tax scheme for apartment buildings (commercial property) is fundamentally different from the property tax on condos (homes). The property tax on commercial property is related to the “income” (profit) that is generated after “costs” such as depreciation, while the property tax on homes is based on comparable sales. The “property tax” on commercial property is essentially a form of income tax.
Further, the impact on school costs will be determined by the number of children in the units. Rental apartments may attract MORE children, on average, than condos. It will be important to explore the impact of rentals on town revenues and school costs.
Additional issues: Condo owners will have more of a vested interest in the Town. They will be concerned about property values and property taxes. Apartment renters have an annual lease. They may vote on overrides but don’t pay for them. There are additional issues concerning subsidized units under rental vs. condo schemes.
renters do pay property taxes
small point, but renters do pay property taxes indirectly through their rent...so voting for an override is a vote for a rent increase...so I think, on that one issue, it's a wash.
renters do not pay property tax
Small point, renters DO NOT pay property tax. They pay rent. Renters do not deduct rent as property taxes on their taxes return . Any increase if cost dueto a tax increase may or may NOt be passed on to renter by the landlord.
Your statement is simply wrong.
Glatting Jackson Consultant's presentation
Thank you to Dave Atkins for getting the Image of the Canton/Everett/Forbes traffic mitigation presentation posted.
Does anyone know if this plan has been approved by Mass Highway and Norfolk County? Does it constitute an "alteration" to Canton Street which Westwood learned was Impossible to do without Canton/Dedham/Norwood's approval?
It looks like the $175,000 consulting fee for the study has resulted in a rotary at Partridge/Everett and a rotary at Everett/Forbes. Will there be land-takings to accomplish this? What is the "pocket park?" Is there parking at it? Are there sidewalks to get to it?
I am looking forward to seeing an Executive Summary at the April 17 meeting. There are a lot of unanswered questions about this plan.
document for discussion
I believe the purpose of the April 17 meeting is to discuss and modify the plan/document. But I think we could certainly start here...The article I posted as an "Event" is commentable--so people could make comments on that article directly where they would be easier to follow.