May 07, 2010

City of Worcester Housing Policy

This issue is going to be discussed alot in the next couple of months and I want to take a minute to set the record straight on a couple things:
  1. There has been and there is alot of good work done by the CDC's
  2. I am not against affordable housing
There are however some things I would like to see change:
  1. more emphasis on owner-occupancy to stabilize our neighborhoods. 
  2. any rental projects should limit the low-mod income ratio to no more then 15% of the total units.  Current projects (City Builders, May Street, Hadley and Piedmont Street) are near or at 100%
  3. utilize the procurement capabilities of our the City of Worcester Purchasing department to drive down the costs
  4. encourage private developers to get involved.   Why do the CDC's have to be the "preferred" developers?
I keep going back to the RKG summary and they could not have been any more right, click here.   if you have not read these two pages, take a minute and please do. 

Thanks,

Bill

3 comments:

signman said...

Bill

well said... we (the CBA) have been telling our councilor that for six years we need more home ownership in this area... how can the ZBA waive parking requirements... how can they jamb a 24 unit buildings on a 5000 square foot lot and the same board does not approve billboards and wanted no signs for six months... as they say for a breather... now they (WCG) wants to shut down a street...I am very interested in this outcome..

Bill Randell said...

The development of our city needs to be partnerships between private developers and community based development organizations. Not a us against them mentality.

Anyone who wants to invest their time and money into the City of Worcester should get "preferred" developer status.

Jahn said...

Bill one other thing..........why limit new projects to 15% when we are 40% above the state mandated minimum for low income housing.

I say a full blown moratorium on low income housing and a phase out of CDC's type organizations. Phase via starvation.......no more of our tax payer dollars for them.

Pronostications anyone on what will happen to the old firre alarm building. I have a suspicion that the city knowingly overloaded that structure by using it as a storage facility storage. Once again take a look at teh tops of brick gables. They are lag bolted to the wooden super structure b/c they got pushed by too much floor load. Thats why it needs a million $$ in what they call upgrades......the term really s/b rebild and not "upgrades"

Next up the AUD??? Does anyone think that Mass Kollege of Farmicy will be controlling what goes into teh AUD and old Boyz Club?? Would u plop down $16M plus Zillions more in makeovers and changeovers w/o knowing full well what is going to be happening across the Sq.?