To the editor:
As the community engagement process for Wellesley’s new Strategic Housing Plan continues this fall, it’s not lost on me that the biggest housing issue for many town residents is the continued rash of teardown-rebuilds of single-family homes. However, I rarely hear an acknowledgement of the fundamental economics of the situation. When the land itself is worth more than $2 million per acre (which, in Wellesley, it is), it simply makes no sense to put one modest-sized home on a large lot. No developer is going to find it financially viable to do so, and few home buyers who can afford to buy land at $2 million per acre are going to be satisfied with a small, aging home.
The existing bureaucratic processes we have in Wellesley for scrutinizing mansionization cannot overcome the economics. Whether led by developers or owner-occupants, there’s too much money in teardown-rebuilds in Wellesley for the Demolition Review bylaw to significantly deter most property owners. Meanwhile, the Large House Review bylaw was never intended to disincentivize teardowns at all, but rather to reduce the negative impacts of the new, larger homes.
A more effective method of preserving the scale and facade of existing homes in Wellesley requires giving property owners additional redevelopment options that are more appealing to them than the teardown-rebuild model.
For this reason, Wellesley should legalize single-family to multi-family conversions in older buildings if the property owner agrees to subsequently place a preservation restriction on the property. This approach could not only aid in historic preservation, but also improve housing affordability and availability for downsizing seniors and small families. The alternative is to continue to try to use lengthy and punitive review processes to discourage teardown-rebuilds, which needless to say is not working.
Andrew Mikula
Wellesley resident
