Wellesley Developments

[FK4]

Apparently theres a reservation directly next to it

View attachment 69854

They always say shit like that. There is absolutely no justification for development of completely open space when the issue at hand is a lack of proper use of the land that exists: and saying that changing land use policy is hopeless so let’s just bulldoze woods instead is not a justification at all.

Honestly, I think it’s disgusting that the state would offer up this land for development. It’s cowardly, and it goes to show that the state would rather bulldoze unspoiled natural land before they actually take these towns to task and force them to do meaningful development. Don’t say the MBTA law is a great example of them taking action, either. The voters approved that, and the state is upholding it, true, but it’s a drop in the bucket.

Wellesley is a town with multiple commuter rail stations and easily drivable to the end of the Green Line.

Open space is like railroad rights of way—it should be preserved at all cost because it is never, ever coming back once it’s destroyed.

 

[Equilibria]

Per the Globe the state is now claiming they only want to build on the parking lot itself.

The state wants to build housing on a parking lot in Wellesley. Residents are up in arms. - The Boston Globe

A proposal to build apartments near MassBay Community College has sparked a local backlash, illustrating how building housing can be immensely complicated in Massachusetts.

www.bostonglobe.com

The article frames opposition as NIMBYism and fears about building on the forest as overwrought, but honestly, that's what it clearly looked like they intended to do. If they never did, then they really failed to communicate their intentions, at the cost of a huge amount of public trust in the community.

 

[Stlin]

Per the Globe the state is now claiming they only want to build on the parking lot itself.

The state wants to build housing on a parking lot in Wellesley. Residents are up in arms. - The Boston Globe

A proposal to build apartments near MassBay Community College has sparked a local backlash, illustrating how building housing can be immensely complicated in Massachusetts.

www.bostonglobe.com

The article frames opposition as NIMBYism and fears about building on the forest as overwrought, but honestly, that's what it clearly looked like they intended to do. If they never did, then they really failed to communicate their intentions, at the cost of a huge amount of public trust in the community.

If you listen to the meeting from September, I don't think anyone is necessarily wrong - I just think the state went public way too early in an unforced error.

They went to community meeting 8 days after MassBay declared it surplus. MassBay itself only began that process that June, And I admit that I don't see why massbay would bother subdividing the parcel before doing it - the forest too is still surplus to their needs. They went to the meeting with a map, and said the state wants to build multifamily housing here that is, by law, a minimum of this dense. We don't have an actual proposal for you to react to, we want to hear from you what you want, or don't want, to see here process prior to an RFP proposal for this 45 acres.

What they heard, very loudly, that Wellesley doesn't want the forest touched or included. What Wellesley didn't hear was any semblance of a concept for the RFP, and that naturally leads to the worst case scenario of clear cutting it all. - sure, local consternation was probably brewing - it had become known that MassBay was going to be selling the land via this pathway - but going up there without any actual plans beyond "the state is going to plan to build housing on this site" is just asking for the public to overreact. Looking at the boards they set, they clearly expected this to be a super blank slate "community visioning" meeting ‐ instead they got a room full of folks who had gotten whipped up into the idea that they're planning to clear cut the forest.

 

[Equilibria]

If you listen to the meeting from September, I don't think anyone is necessarily wrong - I just think the state went public way too early in an unforced error.

They went to community meeting 8 days after MassBay declared it surplus. MassBay itself only began that process that June, And I admit that I don't see why massbay would bother subdividing the parcel before doing it - the forest too is still surplus to their needs. They went to the meeting with a map, and said the state wants to build multifamily housing here that is, by law, a minimum of this dense. We don't have an actual proposal for you to react to, we want to hear from you what you want, or don't want, to see here process prior to an RFP proposal for this 45 acres.

What they heard, very loudly, that Wellesley doesn't want the forest touched or included. What Wellesley didn't hear was any semblance of a concept for the RFP, and that naturally leads to the worst case scenario of clear cutting it all. - sure, local consternation was probably brewing - it had become known that MassBay was going to be selling the land via this pathway - but going up there without any actual plans beyond "the state is going to plan to build housing on this site" is just asking for the public to overreact. Looking at the boards they set, they clearly expected this to be a super blank slate "community visioning" meeting ‐ instead they got a room full of folks who had gotten whipped up into the idea that they're planning to clear cut the forest.

Maybe, but as recorded in this thread even the Town employees didn't know what was planned, and that contributed heavily to the sense of panic around losing the forest.

They should subdivide the lot and either sell/give the wooded portion to the Town or transfer it within the Commonwealth to DCR. It's only surplus to MBCC.

 

[Scott]

In Wellesley, a determined effort to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

What’s unfolding in the wealthy Boston suburb is not that different from other situations across the state when communities and leaders with the best of intentions lose their resolve.

commonwealthbeacon.org

The unflattering tale of the wealthy saying hurray for us and fuck the community college

 

[Jeremi]

The woods should be demolished as a punishment to the community.

 

[Scott]

Or Wellesley could just cut the college a check for it's fair market value and then decide what they want to do with it. Winners all around.

 

[Equilibria]

In Wellesley, a determined effort to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

What’s unfolding in the wealthy Boston suburb is not that different from other situations across the state when communities and leaders with the best of intentions lose their resolve.

commonwealthbeacon.org

The unflattering tale of the wealthy saying hurray for us and fuck the community college

The leaders in this case blew the messaging. One need only go back a single page in this thread to see our reactions, which were no different than the neighbors'.

This is some deeply disingenuous language:

After pushing a false narrative that the state planned to bulldoze the woods in the Brookside area of Wellesley, opponents say they’ve collected 3,300 signatures demanding that the land be remove from the state’s surplus property inventory. Friends of Brookside boasts having more than 700 “Save MassBay Forest” signs on Wellesley lawns.

.

They didn't know it was false when they pushed it - it looked for all the world like the Commonwealth was going to clear-cut the forest. They've now sheepishly admitted they screwed up and don't want to do that, but the cat is out of the bag. Most of the people with these signs either (a) don't follow this closely enough to know the truth or (b) put up the sign a month ago (the piece makes no consideration of when the yard signs went up) when it was a very reasonable sentiment.

The idea that the forest was under threat isn't absurd - it's exactly how it has played out in Newton: https://bcheights.com/224677/metro/...ittee-pushes-vote-on-dudley-road-development/. The author of the piece should know that, because he's been deeply involved (on the pro-developer side) in Newton community discussion boards, where I've agreed with him more often than not.

I want the housing on the parking lot to happen, but since we still live in a democracy at the local level getting there is going to take a lot of effort rebuilding trust with the Town and the residents. Snarky op-eds dismissing them as NIMBY hypocrites will make it worse.

 

[Scott]

The leaders in this case blew the messaging. One need only go back a single page in this thread to see our reactions, which were no different than the neighbors'.

This is some deeply disingenuous language:

.

They didn't know it was false when they pushed it - it looked for all the world like the Commonwealth was going to clear-cut the forest. They've now sheepishly admitted they screwed up and don't want to do that, but the cat is out of the bag. Most of the people with these signs either (a) don't follow this closely enough to know the truth or (b) put up the sign a month ago (the piece makes no consideration of when the yard signs went up) when it was a very reasonable sentiment.

The idea that the forest was under threat isn't absurd - it's exactly how it has played out in Newton: https://bcheights.com/224677/metro/...ittee-pushes-vote-on-dudley-road-development/. The author of the piece should know that, because he's been deeply involved (on the pro-developer side) in Newton community discussion boards, where I've agreed with him more often than not.

I want the housing on the parking lot to happen, but since we still live in a democracy at the local level getting there is going to take a lot of effort rebuilding trust with the Town and the residents. Snarky op-eds dismissing them as NIMBY hypocrites will make it worse.

Isn't the whole point to fund a community college? Their outrage seems a distraction

 

[Equilibria]

Isn't the whole point to fund a community college? Their outrage seems a distraction

I'm not sure I believe this was terribly well thought-through as to how this funds the community college. If they partnered with a developer to put apartments and needed space on the parking lot while maintaining the forest in a conserved state, and presented that whole plan to the neighbors, I think it would have gone over differently. They announced they were surplussing this land like they were going to sell it to Biff Tannen and who the hell cares what happens.

The "surplus" language also makes it sound like they don't think this open space is important, when I think it's very important that areas in the inner core that are wooded stay that way. Same goes for the one on American Legion Highway, and the one by Newton South. At least this time the intervention succeeded.

There's also the part where MBCC is just a part of the Commonwealth, not an independent institution. Land that is surplus to them is not surplus to the whole state government, and I'm not sure they should be selling land to fund themselves like a struggling junior college. If sufficient public money is not being provided to keep them open, that's a broader discussion than just divesting property.

 

[stick n move]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2029591551483998705

 

[stick n move]

Office Building in Wellesley Proposed for 28-Unit Condo Conversion​

“A proposal has been filed to convert an existing 40,000-square-foot office building at 16 Laurel Ave. in Wellesley, Massachusetts into a residential condominium development. The plan calls for the renovation and partial addition to the current structure to create 28 condo units, consisting of a mix of two- and three-bedroom homes. The project would repurpose the underutilized office property into new housing while maintaining portions of the existing building as part of the redevelopment.”

Office Building in Wellesley Proposed for 28-Unit Condo Conversion

Office Building in Wellesley Proposed for 28-Unit Condo Conversion

www.bldup.com