I am responding to Dan Moriarty’s article entitled “Land taking approved, transfer pushed off” that appeared in Thursday’s Westfield News.
Near the end of the article, Mr. Moriarty referred to a heated debate that took place between Councilor Figy and myself at Tuesday evening’s Legislative & Ordinance Committee during the discussion about the Ponders Hollow Road land transfer.
First, I’d like to say I think respectful heated debates based upon different opinions are good for the citizens of Westfield. If all of the elected representatives had one viewpoint or just rubber-stamped everything that came their way, we’d be in worse shape than we are.
In this case, there was a good reason for the argument. Mr. Figy claimed that I want to kill the Ashley Street school project, and that I am sacrificing the education of our youngsters for political reasons. He, along with several others, are now spinning the new school decision using the “educational equity” argument. Basically they are saying that the children who attend Abner Gibbs and Franklin Avenue Schools are getting a substandard education, and that it’s only fair that they receive the same quality education that kids in the
other schools are getting. I believe this is an inaccurate and
insulating presumption. We have great teachers at Abner Gibbs and Franklin Avenue Schools. The kids are getting a fine education, and they are well prepared for Middle School, High School, and beyond.
There are some demographic and societal challenges with the
neighborhoods these schools serve (higher percentage of English as second language, higher percentage of free or reduced lunch, higher turnover rates, etc..). These challenges are reflected in the MCAS results – as they are in other gateway cities. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that a new building will miraculously improve education. I’m sure somebody could analyze the students who moved from Mosely to Papermill Road School. I don’t think they’d find dramatic increases in MCAS performance that could be attributed to attending the newer Papermill Road School.
I also happen to know many families whose children attend, or
attended, Abner Gibbs School. I believe the mayor and his brother, the former state rep and senator, went there. They turned out OK. I know several young men who were involved in Boy Scouts and who attended Abner Gibbs. Off the top of my head, I know several that were in the top ten percent at
Westfield High, National Honor Society members, and who were accepted and attended high quality very competitive colleges such as Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Bentley, and UMASS Amherst.
The article said that I lived in Ward 5, and implied that my kids attended a more modern school, and therefore were getting a better education than kids who live near Abner Gibbs. This is inaccurate in a couple of ways. First, I live in Ward 6 near Papermill Road School. My older son attended St. Mary’s Elementary School – a school that is very similar in age and facilities as Abner Gibbs. He, and his peers, got a great education. My younger son attended Papermill. I know many
of his friends who attend, or attended, other schools in the city.
They all are getting a decent education. Yes, some of the facilities have challenges, and yes there are some differences in the staff, programs, and methods. But, in general, the kids across the city are getting very similar educations.
By the way, the topic before L&O wasn’t the new school – it was the Ponders Hollow land transfer. As you may know, the mayor is trying to build a “recreational facility” at the end of Ponders Hollow Road (down the road from Amelia Park past the warehouses and DPW) so that he can make-up for the facilities that were destroyed on Cross Street.
I think the Ponders Hollow Road is a horrible location for a
“recreational facility” and I spent about 15 minutes discussing this with the L&O Committee. Besides the commonsense location, security, and property concerns, I had several legal issues that I thought should be reviewed.
First, the Ponders Hollow property is in an Industrial Zone.
Industrial Zones can only have certain types of “uses” by right. The zoning ordinance lists all of the allowed uses and says “and no others”. Recreational facilities are not one of the approved uses.
All of the other parks and recreational spaces in the City are in Residential Zones, and the zoning ordinances for those areas
specifically allow recreational spaces.
Second, there is a “trump card” zoning clause that lets the City put governmental facilities in any zone. However, there are several hoops that have to be jumped through to make that happen. None of those hoops have been jumped through yet.
Third, there is a dike that runs diagonally through the property, and the “recreational facilities” are planned for the area between the dike and the river. Use of this space requires review by other boards or commissions, special permits, and potentially permission and/or involvement from State or Federal Agencies (due to the use of wetlands, flood plain, proximity to active river, etc…). None of this has been done yet. There is no firm plan, no budget, no timeline, no nothing.
Fourth, the law requires that the replacement land be of equal-to or greater value than the original land. The city provided appraisals that showed the 1.3 acres at Cross Street was valued at a little less than the 3+ acres on Ponders Hollow (approximately $65,000). I know the reputation of the appraiser, and he’s one of the best around.
However, there are a few issues that I discovered that I think should be reviewed. The appraisal for Cross Street valued the 1.3 acres at about $65,000. A factor in the appraisal was that he believed the 1.3 acres couldn’t be subdivided into smaller lots. However, there was a zoning ordinance change in 2011 that allows the development of small lots in neighborhoods where smaller lots are common (it’s called an “infill” ordinance). Lots in the Cross Street neighborhood only require 50 feet
of frontage. The appraised lot has 183 of frontage. So, in “best-case highest-value scenario” at least 3 lots could be built there and satisfy the current zoning laws. I presented a detailed summary of the property assessments for the Cross Street neighborhood showing that the average quarter acre (or so – some were 0.17 acres) lot was valued at about $75,000. Therefore, three building lots would be worth about $225,000.
The property valuation data was extracted Tuesday from the City’s GIS mapping system. Since then, I have reviewed several properties using the Assessor’s database, and I did find that this year’s valuations were slightly lower than what is shown on the GIS system. However, three lots would still be valued at over $200,000. This is critical because the Ponders Hollow property is only worth $65,000 according to the appraiser.
In my opinion, all of these legal issues should be resolved, and real funded plans should be developed before we consider approving the land swap.
Have a wonderful weekend. Please attend the Memorial Day events to honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our Country.
Regards,
Dave Flaherty
City Councilor
[email protected]
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not the staff, editor, or publisher of this publication.
