To the Editor:
In taking the time to better understand Article 16 and given the impact it could have on surrounding neighborhoods, I’ve been struck by how quickly the perspectives of abutters are dismissed, often reduced to labels like self-interested or NIMBY. But every one of us either has been, is, or may one day be an abutter. And that perspective brings something essential: abutters are the people who understand a place most intimately — how it works, how it feels, and what changes actually mean in daily life. That’s not bias, it’s insight, and it deserves to be taken seriously.
25 Holiday Road has been described as “undeveloped,” “unutilized,” and “fallow.” But that assumes land only has value if it’s “converted.” In reality, some spaces are valuable precisely because they’ve been left alone. Time doesn’t create an obligation to change something — sometimes it’s the reason to protect it.
The town suggests development will generate revenue, but the answer can’t automatically be to develop every remaining undeveloped parcel. Moreover, development is not always a net positive — new costs, services, and long-term obligations can outweigh projected gains. Before making an irreversible decision about the largest remaining parcel of town-owned, forested land in Wayland, we should ask whether development truly delivers a sustainable net benefit for our town.
We’re told this is “just a study.” But that’s precisely why now is the time to pause and reset — before spending taxpayer dollars.
Jennifer James-Young
Orchard Lane
