On my other blog this morning, I published a description of a writing topic I'd like to pursue in more detail than a blog can really cover. I will keep WestwoodBlog more a community resource here, but I plan to research and write more about the urban planning and economic development implications of Westwood Station on my other blog, and if my writing proposal is accepted, in other media.

This provocative article in the Globe today uses Medfield as an example of a town where the costs to the town of additional children (education services > property tax revenue share) are making for tough planning choices. While no one is seriously out to discourage families from moving to towns, some argue there are greater benefits to having older, childless residents buy property. Certainly the numbers add up in the short-term--adding kids to the schools costs more than the taxes their parents will likely pay. But in the long run, how the town is perceived affects its real estate marketability and economic development opportunities.

Consider Needham. Why do homes in Needham continue to hold their value? One reason is that the town is seen as the the ultimate family-friendly suburb. Parents desparately want to move there because they perceive the town has a great school system and it is a convenient location to get to jobs in the city.

A fundamental component of Westwood's brand is "excellent school system." But it is a tough balance...if too many kids come to town, the school will be unable to handle the load and expenses will rise, and ultimately quality will suffer. But if the town were to be seen as less family-friendly--I think all property values would drop like a stone. We could become an exclusive suburb for rich kids, I suppose, but I don't think we want to be that kind of town either.

Over at my other blog, DaveWrites, I comment on several news articles I've read recently about how high gas prices are making suburbia unaffordable. I don't think Westwood is true suburbia--we are a New England town--but I'd be curious if others share my sense that we have almost the best of both worlds living here. I think that as people realize living out past 495 is not tenable, they will want to move to towns like Westwood even more.

Today, Governor Deval Patrick will announce a broad (and expensive) infrastructure and economic development program at a speech at MIT.The plan will propose spending billions to fix bridges and will create economic development zones to help communities deal with the coming economic challenges of the national downturn. Questions for Westwood: Is the East Street Bridge on the list? What impact on the lesser known economic development projects around town such as the Glacier Drive area? Are there opportunities for regional (e.g. Dedham, Canton, Norwood) cooperation in economic development and infrastructure activities beyond Westwood Station?

The Boston Globe mentioned Westwood in an article a couple weeks ago about the increasing development south of Boston. I've blogged about the Westwood Station process and reported on the special town meeting held a few months ago.

In the Globe article, John Harding, president of the town's Everett Forbes Neighborhood Association says, "People move to a Westwood because they don't want to be near a downtown Boston, and Westwood will have an urban feel to it. I don't think it will be the same town at all." I don't agree. I moved to Westwood because it is close enough to Boston that I can work in Boston and enjoy the relative proximity to an urban center, yet have access to great schools and neighborhoods.

I think a well-managed, smartly-planned Westwood station can bring the advantages of urbanism to Westwood while still preserving the rural and neighborhood character of the town. I do agree, having two toddlers now, that I don't want to be living in a condo in downtown Boston and feeling that I have to put my kids in private school. But I also don't want to live in a town that becomes an anonymous, bedroom community of retired people slowly being displaced by commuters who can afford to live here and pay increasing taxes, but have no involvement or connection to the town. I think we need to create our own growth-oriented identity. Yes, the character of the town will change, but it will change for the worse if we simply allow things to happen without creating a positive vision of the future.