- all the abutters were against this project
- nobody from the neighborhood will be present since theyare all against Little Plumley
- the cost of the project is 7,000,000 million dollars for 25 units or $270,000 per unit,
- 100% low-mod income apartments-no market rate housing!!!!!
- no worcester contractors have been hired, so much for Buy Worcester (stand corrected the plumber is local)
WRRB/Telegram District City Council Forum 10/18
-
This forum is for all district council candidates; all candidates are here
today. Format: 14 total questions, 4 questions across districts (for all
candida...
6 months ago
8 comments:
I was there.
Since point 3 (100% low-mod)is the only true statement from your post, it was the only one that was mentioned this morning.
Dan:
I stand corrected on the local contractors, there was a local constractor. What is untrue about my other comments?
Dan, assuming it is you, can you tell readers of the blog why you attended the ceremony. Are you involved in the project?
Thanks
Bill
The reason I ask is because I believe that I met with a Dan Gaulin during the planning stages. He had a company called ElmoodHomesLLC.
As their website says, (http://www.elmwoodhomesllc.com), "Dan has obtained an allocation of 9% Low Income Housing Tax Credits for a 25-unit new construction project in Worcester"
Please note I have sent Dan Gaulin an e-mail to make sure that this comment was from him.
Is there a Dan Gaulin who acts as a consultant for low income housing construction in Massachusetts communities?
I thought the South Worcester Neighborhood Improvement Center was building this project?
Do we have a case of a non profit and a for profit organization working on this project?
Didn't (or doesn't) Mason have (or had) a similar arrangement?
I am puzzled that a for profit organization would be involved building rental housing in a real estate market like we currently have, especially when one looks at how the Mason Winfield project ( which is allegedly partly owned by a for profit developer) has been on hold for over four years?
Maybe a for profit developer can explain how one spends over 250,000per unit on rental housing built in a ghetto and makes it fincially viable? One would need a rent roll of at least $2,000 per month just to break even.
I have wondered to myself how $250,000 to $300,000 per unit can be spent to construct low income housing and then the property is assessed at significantly less than what it cost to build. Just seems like fuzzy math to me.
I am going to dedicate the blog to the details of this project.
South Worcester Neighborhood Center is not the owner of the Southgate Place.
The owners are City Builders LLC, which is mainly a partnership between the South Worcester Neighborhood Association and the architects on the project.
Here's some Fuzzzy math for all you no income housing bloggers.
Re: Worc Common Grds newly built apartment complex at 9 May St.
For you SJ boys and you former Slummerville guys, that's the old piano factory with the alleged recurring sewerage back up issues.
Scuttle butt has it Worc Commmon Grd Spent $225,000 per unit on that brick fortress and I can assure you it will be more than that before the sewerage issue is put to bed. Bill, I need to ask you was it $225,000 or more like $250,000? Thats a total cost of $9.5M for you 19 year old tenth grade MCAS types. Anyway, looking at the city assessors figures the THE GOD DAM PLACE IS ASSESSED AT ONLY $1.6M. Bill, again check me on this.
So depending on who or what you can believe, the taxpayers ponied up $9.5M for an apartment complex that is valued by the city assessor at $1.6M. Lettuce henceforth call it $2M for the sake of discussion.
The way I see it, the city of Worc is leaving pantloads of tax dollars on the table b/c no way in hell can one spend $9.5M to rehab something and it's only worth $2M per the assessor and that's the valuation as of Jan 1st, 2009 when market prices were higher than they are now. That's an assessment of less than $40,000 per brand new apt. ...meanwhile local 3 deckers in average condition that are 90 to 100 years old are assessed at $70,000 per unit.
Time for a city councilor or CAYwood or Sutner to sink their teeth into this load of bovine fecal matter. Talk about a need for a PILOT payment. I mean my God !!!!!! Let's call it a "PILOUS" payment ... Payment In Lieu Of Under Assessemnt.
Then of course there is the burden this densely built low income housing places on city services, not to mention the schools at $12,000 per students.
I popped by the May Street property numerous times last week..8AM, noon, 3PM...7PM..parking lot always filled...work based housing my fat arse!
Post a Comment