chelmsford

The letter was mailed to every household in Chelmsford. About 14,000 received the message from the anti-40B group, Slow Growth Initiative, which blasts town officials for pandering to developers at the expense ...

[Oncechumpsford]

Thats total B/S, there is a ton of land on the SOUTH SIDE of Chelmsford along the river, abutting Carlisle and even over near the Westford line and down rt 27. Remember the huge parcel of land the town wanted to buy? How you all so easily forget. The problem is that the big mouths are saying, "not in my neighborhood", down on the south side of Chumpsford, THE ONCECHELMSFORD FOLKS.. They will fight it every step of the way because really, its all about their home values.

[Lance Boyle]

40B...another vehicle to allow the government to regulate your life and community.

[CONSERVE]

sure lets just build, build, build - why not? last time i looked around we're closing fire stations and laying off police and teachers because we can't keep up with costs. what's a few more neighborhoods going to do to the situation?

[Lance Boyle]

Yep...BUILD, BUILD, BUILD! God forbid towns should have some empty space.

[seymorebutts]

heck no need to worry just build them in builderica! builderica is run by the developers, i'm surprised they haven't started putting houses on stilts over the lake yet!?

[Steve M]

I understand that it must be frustrating for Chelmsford town officials because everytime they fight these projects, they end up losing because of all the regulations that DHCD has in place. But what they dont seem to realize is that each 40B unit costs money FAR above what it brings in with taxes. Just because Cohan and Even Belanski dont want to believe it, the fact is, EVERYONE knows that housing costs money, its rediculous to think otherwise!The data is there, Im not sure how they can argue against it.
To Chelmsford Town Officials: STOP THE RAPE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS! We need to grow a spine. If you were to do something drastic, say arrest anyone who tries to build a 40B, of course their conviction would be overturned immediately, but it would send a message. Lets "grow a pair" as a town and stop these things. Its not right. If we need affordable housing, lets build it, but dont let these people come in and ruin our beautiful town.

[Steve M]

Gee, I wonder what you do for a living?

Oncechumpsford wrote:

Thats total B/S, there is a ton of land on the SOUTH SIDE of Chelmsford along the river, abutting Carlisle and even over near the Westford line and down rt 27. Remember the huge parcel of land the town wanted to buy? How you all so easily forget. The problem is that the big mouths are saying, "not in my neighborhood", down on the south side of Chumpsford, THE ONCECHELMSFORD FOLKS.. They will fight it every step of the way because really, its all about their home values.

[Schools Are Better Too]

seymorebutts wrote:

heck no need to worry just build them in builderica! builderica is run by the developers, i'm surprised they haven't started putting houses on stilts over the lake yet!?

Not sure why you picked Billerica as an example. Are you aware that town residents participating in an audit committee found that one of the 40B developers owed the town a couple of million dollars? I don't see Chelmsford residents doing that. Of course, our town administrators and selectmen buried the report as fast as possible "under legal review" for over a year. But the fact is that developers know that they are being watched in Billerica. An even bigger report will hit soon, just wait and see.

[Renee]

I grew up in Chelmsford, but I don't live there and apparently if I did my husband and four children would be destroying the place. I find the Initiative to be disturbing and hostile, the only character issue I see is NIMBYism. Nothing pretty about that.

The issue with Chelmsford is its location, as two major highways intersect within its boundaries. Route 3 and I-495, so I guess we can blame President Eisenhower for a part of Chelmford's growth over the past forty years. The state also spent millions of dollars to widen Route 3 primarily through Chelmsford (noting a complete redesign of the Drum Hill Rotary), and now the local residents are pushing for conservation of open space?

We need to make towns, more developed near the existing highways. The more dense the population, the more the viability for better forms of public transportation and less dependency on private vehicles. If we restict growth you are only going to push people further out and create more sprawl which then put more need on private vehicles (more traffic) going through places and then using up open space in other towns farther from the highway.

This initiative is about hogging up the resources, not conserving them. Reading the Slow Initiative site, it is unclear what they really want. One moment they say they want more homes for young families, but they don't want to build or have the population grow.

[Mark]

Of course people are worried about this affecting their home prices. If you lived on a quiet street would you want a giant condo complex put next door? The 40B laws only benefit developers and crooked politicians. Of course since this is Massachusetts nothing will change. This is what happens when there is a one-party monopoly.

Oncechumpsford wrote:

Thats total B/S, there is a ton of land on the SOUTH SIDE of Chelmsford along the river, abutting Carlisle and even over near the Westford line and down rt 27. Remember the huge parcel of land the town wanted to buy? How you all so easily forget. The problem is that the big mouths are saying, "not in my neighborhood", down on the south side of Chumpsford, THE ONCECHELMSFORD FOLKS.. They will fight it every step of the way because really, its all about their home values.

[Ron S]

I disagree. From what I get when I read the info, it is about changing conventional wisdom from promoting new construction to promoting redevelopment of existing buildings to provide new homes without changing the footprint of a town.

I have to say, it is fairly obvious when someone is being NIMBY - this is not an example, there is too much thoughtful environmental and financial logic behind it. There appears to be Slow Growth movements popping up in any place around the country with severe development pressures.

Renee wrote:

I find the Initiative to be disturbing and hostile, the only character issue I see is NIMBYism. This initiative is about hogging up the resources, not conserving them. Reading the Slow Initiative site, it is unclear what they really want. One moment they say they want more homes for young families, but they don't want to build or have the population grow.

[refuse the state]

We should just not authorize the construction (or work with the developer as it is stated in the article). Chelmsford already has 10% affordable but those snobs in the state don't believe the mobile homes should count because they aren't grand enough for the state. We have plenty of obstacles we can use to prevent or hurt the developer from day one that doesn't cost a dime, believe me you put up enough obstacles they will chose a different location, if not this time, next time. Street fight, instead of the oh so professional it's the law routine. Wasn't Riverneck Road the location of the endangered ivory-billed woodpecker, we should stop that 40B at least temporarily before we damage a natural habitat.

[refuse the state]

Renee wrote:

I grew up in Chelmsford, but I don't live there and apparently if I did my husband and four children would be destroying the place. I find the Initiative to be disturbing and hostile, the only character issue I see is NIMBYism. Nothing pretty about that.
The issue with Chelmsford is its location, as two major highways intersect within its boundaries. Route 3 and I-495, so I guess we can blame President Eisenhower for a part of Chelmford's growth over the past forty years. The state also spent millions of dollars to widen Route 3 primarily through Chelmsford (noting a complete redesign of the Drum Hill Rotary), and now the local residents are pushing for conservation of open space?
We need to make towns, more developed near the existing highways. The more dense the population, the more the viability for better forms of public transportation and less dependency on private vehicles. If we restict growth you are only going to push people further out and create more sprawl which then put more need on private vehicles (more traffic) going through places and then using up open space in other towns farther from the highway.
This initiative is about hogging up the resources, not conserving them. Reading the Slow Initiative site, it is unclear what they really want. One moment they say they want more homes for young families, but they don't want to build or have the population grow.

Three issues with your comments. 1. Chelmsford is the least represented and funded community in the area, so we are least able to pick up the cost of these developments. 2. 40B does nothing to add units to the 10% required, if you do the math we come out even, and at times it adds extra unit requirements to the total, I know the state can not do math. 3. The congestion between the 495 off ramp and Drum Hill exit was not corrected, and because of the lack of planning and thought for Chelmsfords area by the state this is backed up constantly, I never go into the Drum Hill area unless I positively have to, I actually will drive to NH Walmart or Market Basket its faster. Chelmsford does not want to be a City.

[Renee]

Exactly "Who is Chelmsford?"

The NIMBYs are basically saying,'no vacancy' and pushing people out like it's their own freakish compound. Just because you already live in Chelmsford, doesn't mean you can dictate who can and how many people can live there.

Really you can't.

[Mink]

Two comments:

1) "Chemsford" is already the welfare hotel capital of the Merrimack Valley
2) Push the 40B's on the towns not approaching the 10%- Concord, Carlyle, Westford, et al

The real problem is the town is represented by weak, incumbent legislators from elsewhere who treat the town as the redheaded stepchild!

That's it

[artcar]

A lot of complaints and misguided, drifting, wandering comments.

What is the solutuion????

Without going on and on and on.

[Westford is building MORE]

Westford is approving a 300+ rental development, a 160 plus homeownership development and recently approved another 100+ units. Chelmsford can continue to cry all it wants. Westford has it worse. But we do get more Chapter 70 money....... Maybe if you built more your enrollments would not be declining. Maybe if you built more you would have an increase in your tax base. No, let every existing homeowner have to pay the additional taxes to cover the insurance for the Town employees. Slow Growth just spreads mis information.

[Confused at the Library]

Renee wrote:

Exactly "Who is Chelmsford?"
The NIMBYs are basically saying,'no vacancy' and pushing people out like it's their own freakish compound. Just because you already live in Chelmsford, doesn't mean you can dictate who can and how many people can live there.
Really you can't.

You can live in Chelmsford. Buy a house here, your welcome.

[environmentalist]

you couldn't be more wrong - I challenge you to find a study that shows tax revenue exceeds costs and post it here. you won't be able to because every study shows that cities and towns spend about $.25 out of each dollar on open space and about $1.30 for every new home built. I'm frankly shocked that people are happy to keep calling others NIMBY but remain satisfied with unchecked growth that contributes to sprawl, pollution, congestion, overpopulation and a general decline in our wellbeing!

[QUOTE who="Maybe if you built more you would have an increase in your tax base.[/QUOTE]

[Renee]

My parents live in Chelmsford, maybe they will give me the house when they downsize, but not sure if too many people would complain about my four children in the school system or cry I'm over populating the town. All my life growing up in Chelmsford all people talked about was their property values with neighbors like the Slow Growth Initiative, no thanks.

The Slow Growth Initiative treats town government, like its a board of a private country club and taxpayers are members. Chelmsford already has the infrastructure with its highways, it makes sense to utilize it with more growth denser neighborhoods making public
transportation a more viable option. We can be environmentalist and still have population growth, we just need to conserve land in other places. Slow growth initiatives actually create more sprawl. You really are heading for a Demographic Winter as someone mentioned regarding the health insurance problem with town employees.

Back last year February 2007, there was interesting post on Blue Mass Group...

" Bottom line: MA is losing ("net migration") our prime-age workforce to other states at an alarming rate, 2nd worse in the country. This workforce is being replaced mostly by low-wage immigrants.
This trend has been happening since 2002.
What can we do to reverse this?"

"I'll tell you exactly why it is imperative to create more housing supply (or increase demand in low-demand areas): If we don't, we increase economic segregation, and the whole system gets out of whack.
As one community's real estate prices skyrocket, people either move out of that community or can't buy into it. That happens along income/wealth lines. That itself becomes a selling point -- a feedback loop -- where exclusivity breeds even more exclusivity.
Poor people can't afford to buy a home in an exclusive community, so they buy where they can afford it. They become concentrated. Their problems overwhelm local service providers. The schools groan under the weight of higher percentages of kids who don't learn that easily.
Pretty soon the people in the wealthy communities say "hey, why am I paying so much in taxes but my town isn't getting anything back". They revolt and cut off funding to poor communities who can't pay for the services that they need."

There you have it.