The Wellesley Planning Board and the public on Monday will hear about the latest proposal for a three-story condo development at the intersection of Rte. 9 west and Cliff Road. The online meeting starts at 6:30pm, and the update on the 489 Worcester St., project is #4 on the agenda (see presentation and addendums embedded below).
The developer has launched a new 489 Worcester Street website with project updates and a timeline, as well as a frequently asked questions section and an option to sign up for updates on the multifamily residential plan. The project has been promoted as one that might appeal to both empty nesters and young families, both of which are challenged to find housing in Wellesley.
The proposed project on several adjacent properties purchased by the developers has been morphing since public discussion began in the spring, with it initially envisioned as having 69 units and marketed as 8 Cliff. The developers from the start have stressed the proximity of the project to Rte. 9 as well as to the Wellesley Hills commuter rail station, and the early thinking pointed toward building this project under the residential incentive overlay (RIO) district zoning bylaw.
But the latest presentation indicates a shift by the project team toward a smaller development with 45 units in a manor house-style building, including a handful deemed affordable according to a state formula. The plan now calls for ditching previously planned townhouses facing Cliff Road, and retains a couple of single-family homes at 4 and 14 Cliff Road.
Also, the developers are now looking at using 40R zoning, a smart growth approach that is more streamlined than RIO and can reward the town with attractive chunks of change from the state. Developer Victor Sheen also told us during a recent phone interview that 40R involves state approvals that might help to smooth the project approval process. “Given that there’s a lot of emotion around the site selection, we feel like having [the state] make a determination outside of local politics might be helpful,” he said.
The project has met with resistance from some neighbors who cite traffic, safety, and environmental concerns. A group called Neighbors for Better Planning has emerged to urge the town to develop a more strategic development plan, and Town Meeting members have been hit up recently with a survey related to the proposed 489 Worcester St. development.
The developers have attempted to address concerns raised, including environmental ones. Its latest plan points to no blasting within the buffer zone, and a new conservation easement.
The updated presentation by the 498 Worcester St., team includes a transportation impact assessment (more thorough than the preliminary one from April), municipal systems impact analysis, wetlands report, and trash management plan. As we’ve seen with traffic impact assessments from Vanasse on past projects in town (Terrazza, Fieldstone Way, for example), it finds the 489 Worcester St. project isn’t expected to increase traffic delays or queuing. Its recommendations include traffic signaling changes that could actually improve traffic flow at Cliff/Seaward/Rte. 16.
It’s unclear from our reading of the study whether the traffic projections are based strictly on the additional vehicles from those who will live at the facility, or also takes into account visitors, employees, and delivery vehicles (we reached out to Vanasse to clarify). Vanasse indicates in its study that it has taken a conservative approach in its assumptions about what modes of transportation will be used in trips generated by the project—it assumes 86% will use automobiles (this would seem to make sense given the dangerousness of cycling in the area and the likelihood that commuter rail usage will be limited regardless of its proximity due to the poor performance of the public transportation system and its deficient schedule).
The 489 Worcester St. team has met with numerous parties within Wellesley’s town government, including the Housing Development Corporation and Select Board. It is now in the midst of a series of Planning Board meetings that began in July.
The Boston Globe recently reported a goal of the part of the state to build nearly 2,000 new multi family units in Wellesley based on the recent state legislation. Wellesley has about 6,000 housing units currently and the state wants us to add 33% more housing units. Of course these units are incredibly profitable to the greedy developers because it costs much less to build a condo unit than it does a single family home (lower land costs, common walls, etc.) and ironically condos sell for significantly more per square foot than single family homes. All the developer has to do is buy two or three continuous homes in YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD and they can build 50 plus units next door to you. IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT????
IT IS HIGH TIME FOR THE TOWN OF WELLESLEY AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES TO RISE UP AND DEFY THE STATE – ALL WE HAVE TO LOSE IS A RELATIVELY SMALL AMOUNT OF STATE AID BUT THE RESULT IS PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF OUR WELLESLEY.
A couple points of clarification, Frank.
First of all, the 489 Worcester proposed project has nothing to do with the MBTA Communities law or other state mandates. Wellesley hasn’t approved an MBTA Communities overlay district or rezoning yet, and likely won’t for another year or so. My understanding of the current thinking in Town Hall is that we can use commercial districts (Wellesley has several names for these – Wellesley Square Commercial District, Lower Falls Village Commercial District, Industrial Districts, Business Districts, etc.) to fulfill the MBTA Communities requirements. 489 Worcester is currently not in any of those districts.
Second of all, Wellesley had 9,282 housing units according to the 2020 Census (see https://data.census.gov/profile/Wellesley_town,_Norfolk_County,_Massachusetts?g=060XX00US2502174175), and between The Nines, Terrazza, and The Bristol, it’s probably more like 9,700 by now. The required additional multi-family zoning capacity for Wellesley under the MBTA Communities legislation is 1,392 units (see https://www.wellesleyma.gov/2114/MBTA-Community-Zoning), 15% of the 2020 Census figure.
Moreover, these units are likely going to be built over the course of decades, not all at once, and the MBTA Communities law is not a production mandate. It takes time for properties to turn over, and there are plenty of barriers to multi-family development these days (chiefly among them, financing) besides the local zoning laws the state is trying to circumvent. Consider that it is legal to build two-family homes in Wellesley’s General Residence zoning district, which has existed since at least 1975, but many homes in that district are still single-family.
As for the “greedy developers” comment, one important reason why condos are selling more per square foot than single-family homes right now is that there’s a huge pent-up demand for them in Greater Boston, a problem that the MBTA Communities legislation is trying to alleviate. Also, it’s very misleading to say that “all the developer has to do is buy two or three continuous homes and they can build 50 plus units next door to you.” It’s true that nothing is stopping a developer from PROPOSING a project in a residential area, but that was true before MBTA Communities. Meanwhile, there’s a lengthy and rigorous approvals process for development in Wellesley that gives neighbors a lot of say in project outcomes. It took 5 years of negotiations to actually build Terrazza and The Bristol after they were first proposed. And under the Town’s current plan for complying with MBTA Communities, this rigorous approvals process will not change for developments proposed in existing residential areas, so saying developers can just automatically build 50+ units “next door to you” is, again, very misleading.
Lastly, the grant funding the state would withhold if Wellesley failed to comply with the MBTA Communities law is not the only stick here. The state could also take us to court or hold us liable under state and federal fair housing laws (see https://www.mass.gov/news/ag-campbell-issues-advisory-on-requirements-of-mbta-communities-zoning-law).
MBTA Communities is certainly challenging the status quo in Wellesley. But frankly, it seems like most of your arguments for “rising up and defying the state” are misinformed. I’d prefer to see a more thoughtful and balanced approach to implementing MBTA Communities in Wellesley. Preserving Wellesley’s present charm and adding more multi-family housing really shouldn’t be mutually exclusive.
I applaud development of more affordable housing in our area. However, I would like to bring attention the fact that when developers and towns allow Affordable rental units to be priced solely based on 80% of Area Medium Income, this is based on affordability for households making about $100,000/year. For single parent households in particular, this is not even close to actual affordability. I don’t believe that we have any Affordable/40B units in town that are affordable to households making $30,000 to $60,000/year – just above poverty line but not enough to afford a 2 BR in the Metrowest area. I hope we can address this gap in Wellesley going forward.
That’s a good point, Diana. Unfortunately, it usually takes either especially large projects or several different sources of subsidies for such deeply affordable housing to pencil out in new construction. There might be an opportunity to do this when the Wellesley Office Park builds “Phase 2” of their redevelopment, but they probably won’t move forward on that until interest rates start coming down again.
Andrew, you are clearly an advocate of the multi family developers. It appears from your LinkedIn that you work for the city of Malden. Why are you working to ruin Wellesley’s single family neighborhoods? It appears that you have one of selectmen under your influence. Why don’t you leave our town alone and overrun Malden with multi family units? What is “Building a Better Wellesley” that you seem to be associated with? Is it supported financially by developers. Does the city of Malden know you are associated with this organization? Why do you spend so much time and effort advocating for over running Wellesley’s neighborhoods with multi family housing? Is there a financial element in this for you personally? Why don’t you focus your efforts on Malden where you work?