The Land's Value: Tax assessor's cards

 

 I have been amazed by the escalating value of 101A-B since the park project got under way which, according to CPPC Chair Leino, happened in 2012.  The park/path will be located within 101A (BCF) and 101B (MBTA) as it runs along Channing Rd.  On the Pleasant St side (west of the train station), the path will make use of 726R (MBTA) which is equivalent to 101B on the Channing side.

 There are many things I don’t understand:

According to the tax assessor, the land was sold in 1983 for $10,000 but the Registry of Deeds says $1000.  Typo?

The land is listed by the tax assessor as being “101A Channing Road” but during the sale to the BCF the address is changed to “Concord Ave” which strikes me as odd.  Also, Roy Epstein, Selectman and member of the CPPC, pointed out to me that the tax assessor should have set the value of the land to $0 instead of  $232K!

Interesting things happen to the land values for 2012 and 2013 even taking into account lot size:

101A (BCF)     up ~$100K    

101B (MBTA)    up $540K    

101C,167, 726R (MBTA)    up $20-22K   
   

 

 

726R and 101B have similar location North of the tracks.  However, 726R's value did not escalate at the same rate as 101B but instead at the rate of 101C/167, the land strips which sit on the South side of the tracks. Is it because 101B sits next to 101A that makes it ~3xs more valuable than 726R?

  

 

 

Other questions that are raised by these tax assessor's cards:

Why 101A's value was not adjusted from $52K to the sold price of $77K in 2008.  Our homes get adjusted to the sold value.  Why not this land?

Why some of these lands  are described as having a sidewalk, as not landlocked and as having gas?  Is it because you can walk it's length and come out at Alexander Ave. or Brighton Rd or Clark St?Is it because you can see the sidewalk in the distance? As to having gas ... I am flummoxed!

Why is my property described as having "excessive traffic due to railroad tracks" unlike these land strips that run closer to the RR?

Why this year the land in back of my home has been devalued  between ~$8-60K while my home's value has gone up ~$10K?

 -------------------

First, you will see this year's 101A card followed by the 2017 card so you can see the value of 101A (BCF) land back to 1991.  Then you will find the cards for 101B-C and 726R.

Anyone can access this information at NETR


 


















Popular posts from this blog

The Miracle of the Sketchily Scheduled Public Hearing

I've been on hiatus fron this blog after Nitsch's submission of the 25% design plan at the end of 2021.  All that time, I've continued to observe the CPPC meetings; they have been as interesting as watching paint dry. Nitsch's Michalak seemed to avoid the CPPC but, a few times, the CPPC succeeded in having Michalak show up to give a report of ... non-progress. This was confirmed by someone with knowledge of the project within the MBTA who complained to me of how Nitsch was not delivering the necessary engineering plan although 1 year had lapsed since the request made in 2022. Engineering plan vs design sketch  My MBTA interlocutor explained that an engineering plan is different from the design plan. The latter is a sketch; the former is plan that shows location of items and structures in the subsurface and surface of the project area.  The subsurface items include pipes and cables because you don't want to start digging - for example - to build a wall and then fin...
Read more

A Tangled Web

  Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive " Abutters have asked for the engineering plan for the 25% design submittal or what Stanton called the "revised" 25% design.  Since, on January 10, Michalak (PE or Project Engineer) announced that the Public Hearing had been scheduled then this revised plan had to exist at that date.  JS requested it from MassDOT Public Records on Februaru 23 and waited and waited.  Finally around March 14-15, JS received documents: the original, unrevised 25% design submission from November 2021, ROW papers, and the bridge worksheet with a submission date of January 24. (It's a tunnel or underpass but technically it becomes a bridge).   Note that it is the original 25% not the revised design so it still has a figure indicating that the tunnel will be "jacked".   The other fun part is that the bridge worksheet was submitted on January 24th not by December 21, 2023 as Michalak had said at the Dec...
Read more

Sept 15 - CPPC: A Fog of Words

Image
 Michalak and Clancy attended.   Michalak reported. 7 Channing Rd: Jammal scheduled a site meeting and, at the last minute, cancelled.  Clancy, Michalak will schedule again. Later on, Michalak said that submitting the 25% design did not depend on meeting Jammal: "that connection/spur is in the plan”.   All they wanted is Jammal’s approval of the spur/path planned for the side of the Chase building.  But Michalak conceded that the only thing he can see changing in the 25% are the access points such as the spur.  [My guess  is that they are likely to back down when it comes to the spur.] Soil borings 1.  Borings that required Keolis/MBTA were completed last week (week of Sept 6).   2.  Two other borings to be completed by the end of this week (week of Sept 13th).  These Pleasant St borings moved away from the ROW "to reduce cost and easier access”.* *Via FOIA request, I received Nitsch-GZA-Clancy emails .  This ROW issu...
Read more