The needs of our community
I am against all affordable units to be at 80 percent on the proposal at 170 Cottage St. They should be broken down to 30 percent, 50 percent and 80 percent. The reason behind this is being that 80 percent does not help our residents that make less than $50,000 to $60,000, which is what would be required to live in those units. They are not addressing the needs of our community.
Leo Robinson
Councillor-at-large
170 Cottage Street Project
I was so disappointed to hear the Planning Board approved the 170 Cottage St. project. Granted this seems to be a dumping ground/site, as well as a place for prostitutes to hang out and take care of their business, but I believe this site could be used for something more substantial for Chelsea residents.
This development calls for 13 to 14 reserved affordable units, but what they didn’t tell you is that the medium income for these units is 80 percent.
So, for someone to be able to afford these units at 80 percent your annual income would have to be between $50,000 – $60,000 to live there.
The 80 percent for low income does not meet the need for our Chelsea residents and if that is the case, then why are some of my fellow councillors on board with this project when they are the first ones to say we are forcing people out of Chelsea due to the high rents and housing costs.
How many low income residents do you know that make this amount of money that can afford these units? And on top of that, each unit is supposed to provide one and a half parking spaces per unit and we are already short nine spaces. But realistically, what is one and a half spaces per unit.
Oh I know, it’s one car and one moped for grandma, and does the parking come with a free price tag with each unit?
I’m just not buying it. Yes, I do believe we could use more affordable housing, but is this the right way to go about it?
Unless the Parking Commission does something about the residential parking program, which I have been trying to change since the former City Manager Jay Ash put this into effect, then I think a better solution for this property would be a parking garage, not 66 units that are only helping out the developer, not the residents of Chelsea.
The next step is the final approval from the Zoning Board, which I urge anyone who feels this is not right for you, the Chelsea residents, to speak out against this project.
Joe Perlatonda
District 3 City Councilor