Proposed Indoor Sports Facility in Medfield Needs Your Support

Local developer has a proposal to build an indoor sports facility in town near the Kingsbury Club which would increase tax revenue for the town.

Hello Medfield Patch Readers -

There is an article being proposed at the town meeting on Monday that needs your support.  The article, #21, would grant the Board of Selectman permission to lease a piece of land behind the Kingsbury Club to a private developer.

The proposed facility would be privately funded with no town financial support.

A local developer, Bob Borelli, has developed a proposal for this piece of property to build an 120,000 sq. ft. indoor sports facility featuring 4 soccer fields and 4 multipurpose courts for basketball and other activities.  The soccer fields could also be used to support lacrosse, baseball and softball teams.

The benefits for having a business such as this in town are clear:

  • Increased tax revenue for the town.
  • Access to indoor facilities for our teams.  As of now we have 29 soccer teams playing at Forekicks, lacrosse teams renting a baseball facility and basketball teams renting space in Dover and Norfolk.
  • Added business for other local businesses.  Other businesses such as Honey's, Noon Hill Grill etc would benefit from added traffic as well.

The local Park and Recreation Committee is also trying to gain control of the land for two fields to be built as a later date.   The town already has playing fields at the Junior and Senior High School, Dale St., McCarthy Park, Metacomet, the Hospital, Wheelock and the PFAFF.   Does the town really need more fields?  Or do we need closer facilities for our kids to use when the weather turns cold?

As a long time Medfield resident, I truly believe it is the best interest of the town to enable other businesses to come to town to increase our tax base.

Please come support Article 21 at the Town Meeting on Monday, April 29th.  Please visit www.medfieldsports.com to learn more.

Thank you

John Thompson


This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Medfield Watchdog April 26, 2013 at 02:08 PM
There is critical information left out of this letter. Article 21, if passed would grant the town permission to lease the land for private development, any private development! The town would have to go through an RFP process for any sale or lease of town land. Mr. Borelli would have to submit his proposal along with ANYONE else who might be interested in developing the land for their use. This article would not grant Mr. Borelli or any other developer sole right to pursue development on that land. I would encourage Mr. Borelli and his supporters to be more transparent if they wish to conjure support and not leave out these very important details.
John April 26, 2013 at 02:42 PM
Medfield Watchdog, this is absolutely true. I stated above " would grant the Board of Selectman permission to lease a piece of land behind the Kingsbury Club to a private developer". I would suggest that any private development of the land in question would add to our tax revenue. Be it a sports facility or assisted living facility or whatever. Lets make Medfield more business friendly rather then add yet more fields to our town.
Medfield Resident April 26, 2013 at 02:49 PM
I would support athletic fields, but I would REALLY like to see an indoor swimming pool. Also, Medfield needs more family friendly, full service restaurants. Our community would really benefit from more dining venues.
taxpayer02052 April 26, 2013 at 03:30 PM
There is obviously not enough of a demand for an indoor pool or the Kingsbury Club would've built it by now. I think they're in a tough spot. If there was a pool, more people would entertain the thought of a membership, but without the influx of members there's probably not the cashflow to finance the pool.
Medfield Watchdog April 26, 2013 at 05:19 PM
To: John RE: your quote "I would suggest that any private development of the land in question would add to our tax revenue." That would be the case, but at what cost? Medfield is facing an influx of development already in the next few years such as a new Starbucks, a new Dunkin Donuts and whatever becomes of the former Lord's as well as some future development of the Hospital property. Further depletion of town owned and controlled property for what would amount to a small increase in tax revenue and further commercializing the town seems penny-wise and pound foolish to me. Private developers will promise a lot to get a project built. However, their interest is in making profit, not in providing additional tax revenue to the town. Without a split tax-rate, the concept that somehow privatizing development on this site would be some panacea for tax relief to town residents is just wrong. Private development on that land would likely produce less than $100,000 in additional taxes to the town where the operating budget is approximately $50 million (0.2 % increase in revenue) There's a place for private development and other privately owned parcels in Medfield that could accommodate a similar facility. There is no reason why this needs to be placed on Town property. At the least, there needs to be further discussion amongst residents and leadership of the town to review the best use of the land. To my knowledge, that has not occurred broadly.
taxpayer02052 April 26, 2013 at 05:47 PM
I understand we lost some commercial-industrial space with the 40B housing complex that will be built off West Street, what other privately owned land is available for this type of development within the town?
John April 26, 2013 at 06:51 PM
Watch Dog, I am not saying this is the fix to our tax rate, I am saying it will help. With pending projects like the garage, public safety and park and rec building potentially in the future we need all we can get. The things you mentioned as new development are not really new, those are just new businesses replacing old businesses. Dunkins for Friendly's, Starbucks for Mobil and whatever for Lords. Also there is no other commercially zoned land in Medfield which could fit a facility like this. It needs to go on this property as it is the only place it will fit. We don't need more fields.
My .02 April 26, 2013 at 07:36 PM
John are you personally involved in the project!
John April 26, 2013 at 08:00 PM
I am not an investor if that is your question, nor would I be benefiting in any way from this project besides usage of the facility. I am a long time Medfield resident who has played soccer for a long time and continue to do so. I also have two young children who play soccer in town and I think the facility would be great. I am friends with the builder in question, Bob Borelli who is also a long time Medfield resident.
My .02 April 26, 2013 at 09:48 PM
John I too am along time resident as well and have kids that have played in youth town sports. Town land should be used for town use its that simple. The tax gain is a moot point. I have had my kids use Fore Kick's for years and the additional 5 or 6 miles to get there have not been that inconvenient. All this reallydoes is shorten a commute I make once a week or so for two months. I would rather see this land developed for youth and community use. Just my .02.
John April 26, 2013 at 09:55 PM
We agree to disagree it is all good. I would not call the potential impact from both a tax basis and the positive impact having all the users fo the new facility visit other local businesses as moot but that is fine. The town has already set the precedent of using town land for private development with the Kingsbury Club so this is just a continuation of that program if it passes.
John April 27, 2013 at 02:03 AM
Mr. .02 and Watchdog, I would love to know if you had any vested interest in a positive outcome for Park and Rec. My name and intentions are clearly out there, while yours are not.
Will E April 27, 2013 at 12:09 PM
As long as this doesn't turn into a park & rec project. The town does not run these types of facilities or operations efficiently.
GM April 28, 2013 at 07:03 PM
Will E, I'm curious about the basis of your statement that Park & Rec doesn't run these types of facilities or operations efficiently. When has Park & Rec run a facility like this here in town? Are you talking about Hinckley Pond? Are you referring to the Pfaff Center? I haven't heard people complain about the programs that Park & Rec runs. Your observation seems to suggest that there has been something in the past that wasn't handled well and I'm wondering about what it was as you see it. To be clear, the Park & Rec article calls for the land to be used for athletic fields, not a facility. To also be clear, the town originally bought the land in 1995 with the idea of using it to attract commercial development to town. To date, we have a commercial enterprise on one of the three lots that has not yet been able to implement the full vision it described when it first leased the property from the town, and a second lot that is the site for the Center at Medfield (a town-owned facility). From a revenue standpoint, it is likely that Park & Rec would be able to rent the fields once they are established, so there would be a new source of revenue to the town there. But, a commercial enterprise would be paying both property taxes and lease payments for use of the land, and that would undoubtedly involved a higher total amount of revenue to the town, similar to the case for the Kingsbury Club.
Richard Rogers April 28, 2013 at 11:15 PM
How can the Park and Rec take care of another parcel of land or building. This dept has taken over all the town owned land, Town Hall, Baxter Park, Library, Fire and Police and there own building. These parcels have never looked this bad. Why are we paying the Park and Rec director to go around town trying to do maintenance when his job is director of Park and Rec not laborer. I think any of the DPW laborers would love to get his salary and not have to come in to plow snow.
Mel Seibolt April 29, 2013 at 02:58 AM
Mr. Rogers, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the history of the Park and Rec's maintanance of Town Hall, Baxter Park, Library, Dwight Derby House, Meetinghose Pond, Police and Fire. These properties were at one time maintained by the DPW. We were given the responsibility of maintaining these properties without additional personnel or budget. It was not our choice. The reason the Director is helping to maintain these properties is because the work has to be done! Park and Rec has a staff off three (3). This include the director. Feel free to visit the Pfaff Center. We'll be happy to address your many misconceptions of how the Park and Rec functions. Mel Seibolt Medfield Park and Recreation Commission
Bill Finn April 29, 2013 at 01:46 PM
I think the idea of this much needed sports facility tucked away on Ice Hill road would make a great addition to what is already located down there. It is out of the way and compliments the athletic structure already in place. A PLACE FOR MEDFIELD TALENTED ATHLETES in Medfield !!! I am certain the Park and Rec could obtain more fields to maintain at the State Hospital Site when that development is torn down. There is a ton of acreage in this area. I realize it is state owned, but would they really deny Medfield a few acres.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »