Wellesley Select Board gets legal opinions on state’s proposed MassBay land sale, housing development

October 21, 2025

The Wellesley Select Board lawyered up for its Oct. 16 sessions regarding the state’s plans to sell 45 acres of land to allow for housing development and to support new MassBay Community College projects. Town counsel took part in something of a live FAQ session during the public portion of the meeting (see Wellesley Media recording about an hour and four minutes into the meeting), then the board went into executive session behind closed doors “to discuss strategy with respect to potential litigation with Department of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM),” known as the state’s real estate arm.

The state’s intended disposition of land, including 40 acres of forest, has been the subject of town government meetings and MassBay forums over the past two months. The state legislators who represent Wellesley have also briefed the Select Board with their take on the DCAMM and MassBay situation.

Some are celebrating the opportunity for more housing units under the state’s Affordable Homes Act to address the local and regional shortage and possible significant upgrades at MassBay. Others fear destruction of open space adjacent to Centennial Reservation and worsening traffic in the area.

During its Oct. 16 meeting, which drew a standing-room only crowd to Town Hall, Select Board Chair Marjorie Freiman stressed that the housing initiative is state driven, not introduced by the town. She shared that the town has written to the head of the Commonwealth’s Executive Office of Energy & Environmental Affairs (EEA) requesting an environmental impact review. She also said board and town leadership met with DCAMM reps, and that the state plans to wait to release its request for proposals for a project after the town has a chance to conduct a study to consolidate its feedback and share that with DCAMM by early next year (an interactive townwide visioning session is planned for December at a date to be announced). Select Board members went back and forth a bit on how urgently the town needs to act, as the state’s timeline remains murky. “We are looking at every way to approach this project, keeping the town’s interests in mind,” Freiman said.

Meanwhile, a parking study is underway at MassBay to figure out where vehicles for students and staff will go if the current parking lot across the street becomes the site of a housing complex.

Town counsel (Eric Reustle and Christopher Heep of the firm Harrington Heep) attended the meeting to largely read prepared answers to more than a dozen legal questions raised about the proposal. A recap of questions and answers has been posted on the town website.

Questions covered topics such as “What if the state sold the land to the town? Or to investors? Could the purchasers do whatever they wanted?” (Nope, needs to be for housing) and “Can this be considered Article 97 land (aka, protected open space) because it abuts Article 97 land?” (We’ll see: the town has reached out to the EEA and town counsel is conducting a review). Also addressed were the fact that development can take place on wetlands and that the town is readying for Massachusetts Department of Transportation discussions to address potential traffic management.

Town counsel also addressed the extent to which the town can control what sort of project is built, and confirmed that “unit size can be indirectly regulated through reasonable regulations on other dimensional requirements,” though a developer by right can build a minimum of four units per acre under the state law. Age restricted housing might be allowed, but probably not continuing care, town counsel said.

Following the legal briefing, members of the public had a chance to weigh in. They were urged not to repeat things they may have already said at previous meetings (Give your input on the 40 Oakland St. proposal by emailing DCAMM at realestate.dcamm@mass.gov ; Separately, a petition has been launched to urge state and MassBay leaders to save the forest.) One theme was encouragement to the board to push back on the state despite the Commonwealth’s upper hand in any negotiations.

Among those speaking was MassBay neighbor John Richardson, who asked why the state would choose to dispose of forest land rather than repurpose old prisons or state hospitals to achieve its housing goals. He said the plan would be hypocritical given the Commonwealth’s stated biodiversity goals; Separately a Wellesley Conservation Land Trust rep spoke to the benefits of building housing on the parking lot but saving the forest.

Neighbor Paul White, who has spoken at previous meetings, proposed that if the state is going to get its way, the town should play hardball with MassBay by letting it know approvals for campus redevelopment won’t be easy to come by (a town official and town counsel said because MassBay is a state educational institution it won’t go through a town regulatory process). Another speaker, Jennifer Beachell, asked to town to work with the state to conduct a financial analysis of what the cost impact of any project will be to Wellesley and its taxpayers.

Neighbor Leslie Hanrahan gave a brief slide presentation to help people visualize just how large a 180-unit development (that number comes from a minimum of 4 units x 45 available acres) would look on just the 5-acre parking lot site. We could be talking 10 or more stories, she said. A less dense option might be something like the Fieldstone development on Rte. 135 near the dump that also involved destroying forest. Hanrahan urged the town to start with a vision for 20 units on the 5 acres.

Wellesley Strategic Housing Plan update

While the state is doing some of Wellesley’s housing planning for it, the town itself has hired a consultant to create a Strategic Housing Plan, which has been completed. (See also: Select Board picks up Strategic Housing Plan discussion)

The Select Board and Planning Board are slated to review and accept the plan at a joint meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 28 at 6:30 p.m. at Town Hall.