The Swellesley Report

Since 2005: More than you really want to know about Wellesley, Mass.

Wellesley kicks off Affordable Housing Trust 5-year action plan process

by Leave a Comment

The Wellesley Affordable Housing Trust—previously the Wellesley Housing Development Corp.—this past week held a public meeting with a consultancy that will work with the town to create a 5-year strategic action plan for affordable housing (see Wellesley Media recording of April 10 meeting).

The plan—not to be confused with the complementary Strategic Housing Plan or Unified Plan (at some point to be replaced by a Comprehensive Plan)—costs $30k and is being paid for from the trust’s existing funds. The trust’s mission is “to provide for the creation and preservation of affordable housing in Wellesley for the benefit of low- and moderate-income households” (Annual Town Meeting approved the trust’s creation last year).

Consulting firm JM Goldson started off by doing consultancy things, asking members of the now full Affordable Housing Trust board to introduce themselves and share a word or phrase about housing here (“complicated,” “important,” etc.). JM Goldson, led by Jenn Goldson, previously worked with the town on its Housing Production Plan.

Board members were earlier asked to fill out a questionnaire to help guide the plan’s direction, and cited a desire for a focused plan, and one that syncs with the Wellesley Housing Authority, which manages public housing properties on Barton Road and elsewhere. The Housing Authority has gone through a period of instability, and is in the midst of arranging a management agreement with the Cambridge Housing Authority.

A past feasibility study looking at possible redevelopment of the 16-plus-acre Barton Road public housing property proved to be largely a bust, but was cited as a resource for JM Goldson to at least look at as the town takes a possible fresh look at how to maximize this large property with just 88 units on it. Trust board chair Micah O’Neil noted that the organization needs to proceed somewhat cautiously, as this Lower Falls area of town is ripe for all sorts of other development with key commercial properties changing hands. “How do we smartly develop Barton Road but also keep in mind what else is happening in that part of town?” he said.

Wellesley currently meets the state’s guidance for having at least 10% of housing stock deemed affordable, though the town keeps a sharp eye on that percentage in the face of any possible new multi-family housing developments that could lack an affordable component. The state’s Affordable Homes Act, curiously, doesn’t include an affordable unit requirement… so possible development on the MassBay property designated as surplus by the Commonwealth could skew Wellesley’s affordable housing percentage. This MassBay situation “will hang over everything for the moment” in terms of development in that part of town, said Kenny Largess, the Select Board’s liaison to the trust, though he also said the Barton Road property provides the greatest opportunity for consensus on affordable housing development in town and could offer “the biggest bang for the buck.”

Goldson raised the issue of how to proceed with the trust’s action plan given the town is also awaiting its start on a broader comprehensive plan (Annual Town Meeting voted against funding yet another pricey study for now, with some portion of Town Meeting looking for Wellesley to first hire a new planning director). Executive Director Meghan Jop said “If anything, this plan I would argue is going to inform the Comprehensive Plan in terms of some of the goals and strategies for affordable housing.”

The questionnaire brought to light possible obstacles to affordable housing plans in town, including state funding rules that limit redevelopment and resident fatigue around multi-family housing discussions despite a general acknowledgement that Wellesley needs more housing diversity.

affordable housing

Thinking creatively will be required to come up with new affordable housing opportunities in town. One idea would be to create a land trust that will enable developers to seek more types of funding for projects.

A working session involving the consultancy and members of Wellesley boards/committees/staff with a say on housing matters is slated for May. From there, the consulting firm would come up with a draft plan in June and a final product in July.

 

 

     

Advertisements

black & blue, Wellesley
Olive Tree Medical, Wellesley
taste of wellesley gif

A marathon session for Public Works at Wellesley Annual Town Meeting night #3

by Leave a Comment

Wellesley Department of Public Works Director Dave Cohen drew a comparison early during night #3 of Wellesley Annual Town Meeting on April 6 between the upcoming Boston Marathon and his planned presentations, as the race courses through eight communities—including Wellesley—and he had eight presentations lined up. As far as Town Meeting sessions go, a bit over three hours was nothing out of the ordinary, though that would be a solid marathon time. (See Wellesley Media recording to view the meeting and the Town Meeting scorecard to track voting)

Fittingly, a version of Heartbreak Hill popped up more than halfway through the session when a fire curtain started to descend, interrupting a presentation on Article 20 regarding a proposed feasibility study for a possible DPW campus overhaul. Fortunately, the issue was addressed and the meeting was able to continue.

Speaking of running, mice scurrying across the stage also threatened to disrupt proceedings. But their antics only resulted in a sort of point of order raised to call attention to this “disorderly conduct.” It was later suggested by a Town Meeting member that the mice may have jumped ship from a dilapidated DPW building and made their way to Wellesley High… (Our theory is that the mice might have been there for a shot at some of the cake trotted out for the town’s 145th birthday.)

Public Works marathon

DPW Director Cohen began his night running uphill with Article 11, which asked Town Meeting to approve $14.4m in funding for the Water Enterprise Fund’s operating and capital expenses (including upgrades to a water distribution system that in some places is more than 100 years old). Water would be a theme early on during this night for several articles.

While Wellesley offers competitive water rates, the Board of Public Works anticipate customer bills rising by up to 20% for FY27, with PFAS treatment and projects a significant cost driver (PFAS refers to the “forever chemicals” that Wellesley and other communities seek to filter out of their public water supplies). The current drought conditions also portend lower-than-usual water usage in town, due to restrictions, and less water usage means less revenue for the town.

water town meeting

Before Town Meeting passed the motion under Article 11 unanimously by voice vote, Cohen fielded questions, including about capacity in the face of increased housing development in town (“plenty of capacity”) and how much PFAS settlement money might help reduce rates (it’s a drop in the bucket, so to speak).

From there it was on to Article 13, regarding about $3m in funding of the Enterprise Stormwater Fund, for which the town started collecting fees in FY25. The most common fee is $225 per year.

You don’t hear something like this every day in town, but the rates for Wellesley are holding steady, and Cohen said he anticipates that remaining so for the foreseeable future. Enterprise funds are set up to pay for themselves via the fees paid by customers, so each fund is run as a separate but related business within the DPW. For stormwater management, fees are based on a property owner’s amount of impervious area, and municipal properties are excluded.

This motion passed unanimously by voice vote.

Cohen got a brief respite during the presentation of motion 2 under Article 15, calling for the use of $750k in Community Preservation Fund money to partially fund the roughly $1.5m dredging of Duck Pond (0.8-acre body of water at Town Hall, and last dredged in 1986 and 2006) and Reeds Pond (1.9-acre body of water north of Rte. 9 not far from the Natick line, last dredged in 1998).

Though Cohen didn’t present, the DPW is a funding partner on this, along with the Natural Resources Commission. And in fact, NRC Director Brandon Schmitt presented on the motion. Dredging is a key strategy for ensuring the health of the town’s bodies of water within its open space. The revelation by Schmitt that Reeds Pond contains notable levels of arsenic got Town Meeting’s attention, and he said that like with PFAS, it’s unclear exactly what the source of the arsenic is (though agricultural pesticides are suspected). The motion passed unanimously by voice vote.

While dredging might not pull on Town Meeting members’ heartstrings, playground upgrades do. Motion 3 under Article 15 sought approval of $450k in funding for improvements at Perrin Park, the Hunnewell Field tot lot, and the Sprague playgrounds. The town’s in its third and final year of an effort to improve 18 playgrounds across school and NRC property, including upgrades to support accessibility. Funding for work at Fiske, Ouellet, Upham was approved last year, and work is slated for this year (there’s some hesitation to go full bore on the Upham upgrades until there’s more clarity on what might become of that property after the school closed in 2024). Town Meeting approved the latest funding request.

Next up was Article 16, under which a motion sought a half million dollar appropriation from free cash to replace and reconstruct the 40-plus-year-old Hunnewell Field irrigation system over the summer. Cohen was back again on this article, and shared this fund fact: the irrigation system is fed by stormwater and groundwater from the nearby aqueduct, not from town drinking water supplies. Design funding was previously approved, and construction was delayed in favor of other projects. Town Meeting approved the funds to complete this project.

The seemingly tireless Cohen returned for Article 19, under which $600k was sought for design of improvements to the Linden Street/Weston Road intersection. The design will include adding a left-hand turn from southbound on Weston Road to Linden Street, and full signalization to protect motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. Questions were raised about whether improvements at this intersection could muck things up further at Weston Road and Rte. 135, though Cohen said improvements to that nearby intersection will be part of the broader Wellesley Square redevelopment project, and that the work on the two intersections will be synced up. Town Meeting approved the funding.

DPW campus project feasibility study & sticker shock

A few more Public Works motions would end the night, but the star of the show—taking up about an hour—was Article 20 regarding a proposed DPW Campus/Municipal Service Building Feasibility Study. Cohen returned to the podium for this article, though Facilities Director Joe McDonough did the heavy lifting on this presentation. Their work paid off in Town Meeting vote of 142/38/1 to approve spending $858,000 from free cash for this study.

Board of Public Works Chair Jeff Wechsler—no doubt one of the happiest Town Meeting members after all BPW motions were approved AND the University of Michigan Wolverines won the men’s NCAA basketball title that night—introduced Article 20. He prefaced remarks by Cohen and McDonough by describing the proposed study as being about “thoughtful, careful planning” about capital spending that should take place in the near and long terms.

Jeff Wechsler ATM
Jeff Wechsler definitely wanted to be at Town Meeting instead of watching the Big Game

 

Cohen followed by providing context for the latest ask, which following a master planning process started post-pandemic to see how the Municipal Way campus might best be used to address the outdatedness of a mishmash of facilities (including a 78-year old Park & Highway building) and best accommodate DPW, Municipal Light Plant, and perhaps other land use departments in town currently housed in leased property on Rte. 9 that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Considerations people might not think about are that there aren’t sufficient facilities to house and clean those pricey town trucks that kids and adults love to touch during Wellesley Wonderful Weekend—and that having such facilities could extend the vehicles’ useful lives. The master planning also looked at issues like safety related to members of the public visiting the area.

McDonough described the DPW campus effort as one of the anchor projects to be considered under the Wellesley’s new Town-Wide Capital Planning Committee that’s designed to think broadly about potential upcoming and expensive capital projects.

“Many of you have heard about the $100m project—that was a very early concept number that was the full all-in build-out,” McDonough said, noting that a reason for doing the feasibility study is to figure out how to go forward with a project in “manageable bites.” He displayed some possible phased approaches to the proposed project.

feasibility study

The feasibility study would provide comprehensive assessment from the start, with the idea of containing design and construction costs deeper into whatever project or projects are undertaken. “Feasibility is a very small fraction of the total project cost,” he said, and should be good for five-plus years even if the project gets delayed.

The Advisory Committee voted favorable action by a 10-2 vote, though there were concerns about the timing of the proposed study and some “sticker shock” at the cost. Such sticker shock was echoed by several Town Meeting members in their comments following McDonough’s presentation, with references to the impact this will have on already escalating property taxes.

Though some who have visited the DPW campus also confirmed the horrible condition of some of the current buildings in question, and backed funding the feasibility study. One Town Meeting member advocated for the feasibility study as a way to come up with a “coherent facility,” as was done when building the high school itself where Town Meeting was taking place.

It was clear from some Town Meeting members’ questions and comments that there’s study fatigue as well in Wellesley stemming from the seemingly endless feasibility, design, construction and you-name-it consulting contracts handed out by the town. A query was made about the potential for doing some of the study with in-house resources, for example.

Proposed RIO amendment to highlight final night of Annual Town Meeting

Town Meeting is expected to wrap up on April 7, with a proposed zoning amendment under Article 32 potentially providing some final fireworks. The Planning Board seeks to amend the Zoning Bylaws to eliminate Residential Incentive Overlay (RIO) designations in all single residence zoning districts (and some other districts), while keeping the RIO option available for zoning districts of other classifications. This housing-related topic has been a hot button issue at other Town Meetings in Wellesley of late.

Our earlier Annual Town Meeting coverage:

Thousands turn to The Swellesley Report daily to keep current on Wellesley:

Page Waterman, Wellesley
London Harness, Wellesley
Paul Macrina Electric
History

Reflecting on the Wellesley Inn’s demolition 20 years ago

by 8 Comments

Wellesley Inn (Wellesley Historical Society Photograph Collection)
Wellesley Inn (Wellesley Historical Society Photograph Collection)

The first room to the left in the Wellesley Inn housed a large, ornate fireplace, a central part of the living room where residents would meet up to chat or solve jigsaw puzzles over tea and corn muffins. The room was adorned with dark and moody wooden accents, and community members would gather in one of the Inn’s three unique dining rooms, or by the rocking chairs on the front porch looking out over Washington Street. It was a place to eat, a place to meet, and a place to simply get together with friends and family. 

But that was 20 years ago. 

Now, in its stead, stands a luxury condo development with over 20 housing units above the businesses on the lower level. Gone are the days of the historic community gathering hub that held that lot for over a century, now home to a modern monolith, and to some, a shadow over the town. 

Long-time Wellesley residents, like Beth Hinchliffe, mourn the loss of the Inn and what it stood for. Originally the Wellesley Tea Room, it was established in 1897 and remained the focal point of the town until it was sold to developers and demolished in 2006. 

“It was really important in the life of the town, because it had grown up with the town,” Hinchliffe said. “It had a graciousness about it, and an awareness of history, of where we came from. It was a connection with all the generations that have come before.”

Hinchliffe said she attended all sorts of events at the Inn throughout the years, from baby showers to wedding receptions to graduation and birthday parties. But above all, she said, it was a place for the community to come together, and one that hasn’t been replicated since. With three different restaurants — a tavern, a ballroom, and the original tea room — there was something for every occasion. 

“It led to losing the sense of a town center, a community center, because it really was our community gathering place,” Hinchliffe said. “It was so much a part of all your life.” 

Wellesley Inn (Wellesley Historical Society Photograph Collection)
Inside the Wellesley Inn (Wellesley Historical Society Photograph Collection)

She recalled going there after graduation to celebrate and how her parents went out to dinner there every year for Mothers’ Day. There was caroling in the winter, Easter egg hunts in the spring, and it was where everyone gathered after the annual Wellesley Veterans Parade. Her favorite memories, however, were sitting by the fireplace in the living room with friends and family, drinking tea and solving puzzles in the warmth of the flame.  

“That room was like a big embrace,” she said. “I remember times I’d been out shopping with friends and we would just go in to get our tea in front of the fireplace.”

Katherine “Gig” Babson has lived in the same house in Wellesley for almost 79 years and remembers the Inn as “a glorious structure,” with the columns and stairs providing an intense visual impact in the heart of town. In her 50 years of involvement in local politics, she served as a Select Board member for nine years and was on the committee when the building was torn down. 

Babson said she has “very strong feelings” about the Inn being demolished instead of purchased by Wellesley College. 

“My unfiltered view is that Wellesley College had a great opportunity to purchase it and make it into a boutique hotel for the benefit of Wellesley College students,” she said. “I think it’s a missed opportunity.” 

At the time, there were movements from local residents to see if there was any way to preserve some part of the original building, but most people understood that it was incredibly expensive and would have been far too large of an undertaking to be feasible. 

Wellesley Inn (Wellesley Historical Society Photograph Collection)
Wellesley Inn (Wellesley Historical Society Photograph Collection)

Tory DeFazio, a resident of almost 89 years and a Town Meeting member for over 50, said that the Inn originated as a family home and eventually expanded to serve the parents of the students at Wellesley College looking for somewhere to stay. Since then, those families and anyone else visiting Wellesley have had to stay in nearby towns like Needham or Newton, he said. 

“When we had family weddings, the guests would stay there at the Wellesley Inn, and you could sit out on the front porch in a rocker and look at the traffic going by,” he said. “It was just a lovely environment, and they were always very gracious.” 

It has been 20 years since the demolition itself, which fell exactly on Wellesley’s 125th birthday on April 6, 2006. That decision, though likely unintentional, was a blow to many who were already devastated by the loss of the historic building, with Babson referring to the choice as “a huge booboo.” 

“If you’re going to take down something that a lot of people have strong feelings about, maybe you shouldn’t take it down on the town’s birthday,” she said. “They could have been more sensitive.”

Hinchliffe remembered the day itself, noting that while people knew the demolition was imminent, nobody expected them to pick that day to tear it down. Friends called to her to avoid the “heartache” of the demolition, and “the town really got riled up when they tore it down on exactly the 125th birthday.” 

“It was shocking to a lot of people,” DeFazio said. “It was gone before you knew it.” 

While there are some visual similarities between the Wellesley Inn and The Belclare, the new development that took its place, they serve vastly different functions.

“The columns are the only thing that remind me of the old Inn,” DeFazio said. “But there’s no porch, no rockers.” 

The Belclare
The Belclare (photo by Emma Mullay)

On the ground level of the development, there are a number of shops that are rented out, although there has been a significant amount of turnover with them, DeFazio said. Above them are the luxury condos, selling for up to $3 million. 

Lois Lee and Young Jo Kim, Wellesley residents of 22 years, didn’t live in town during the Inn’s prime and don’t remember it when “it was really being used.” 

“It’s nice for having the option of a luxury condo right in the center of town,” Lee said. “They did a beautiful job with the building, and it is nice to have the retail on the first floor.”

But while these condos provide a new life for the lot, others, like Hinchliffe, still deeply mourn that place it used to be. 

“I just loved it, and I miss it,” she said. “I think everybody misses it.” 

This story is part of a partnership between the Swellesley Report and the Boston University Department of Journalism.

Advertisements

Longfellow, Wellesley
Wellesley Wonderful Weekend
Wellesley Symphony Orchestra, 2026

Wellesley has an MBTA Communities zoning taker on Laurel Avenue

by

16 Laurel Ave, The Laurel, Babson House
16 Laurel Ave.

The one-time multi-tenant office building at 16 Laurel Ave. in Wellesley Hills has been cordoned off with fencing, ready for its planned transition into a 28-unit condo complex within one of the town’s MBTA Communities Law zones.

This four-story project would be the first new development in town to take advantage of the state law designed to encourage more housing near public transportation, in this case the Wellesley Hills commuter rail station. Wellesley complied with that law in 2024. Laurel Avenue is on the opposite site of Washington Street from the commuter rail station, near Le Petit Four Bakery.

A three-story high-end condo development at 592 Washington St. next to The Belclare condo complex could have qualified for MBTA Communities zoning relief but the developer chose to go a different route—via the Project of Significant Impact process—to a gain greater project density of 19 units.

Whether the Laurel Avenue project (shown as “The Laurel” in one rendering submitted to the town by the applicant) produces true “missing middle housing” envisioned by MBTA Community architects remains to be seen, once prices are revealed. But some housing advocates argue that pretty much any increase in supply will help with efforts to address the area housing shortage, with the possibility of projects like this freeing up single-family homes for young families.

Rendering of The Laurel by Christopher Russ Architects

The 16 Laurel Ave. proposal is slated to go before the Wellesley Zoning Board of Appeals for a public hearing for site plan approval starting on April 16. The approvals process may naturally be less visible to the public than other recent multi-family housing proposals in that the project will go through a less involved permitting process.

Documents for the project have been submitted to the town by Jeff Birnbaum (Babson House, LLC, Pioneer Construction). These include the construction plan (work from 7am-5pm weekdays, 8am-4pm Saturdays), trip generation analysis, stormwater report, and more.

Wellesley Executive Director Meghan Jop says, “They have been evaluating this site for some time to convert to residential units. It is a good location and I think the developers have a thoughtful design. There will be a number of considerations to review during site plan.”

In a follow-up interview in late March with Birnbaum, he said six of the 28 units will be affordable (as defined by a state formula). The property was acquired from Jumbo Capital, which earlier had bought it from Haynes.

The hope by the developer is to start digging on the project over the summer, and the estimate is that it would take 18 months to complete.

According to a real estate listing, the structure at 16 Laurel Ave. was constructed in the early 1900s by Roger Babson, founder of Babson College, and renovated in 2001. Birnbaum says the original building’s exterior will remain, with some upgrades to meet sustainability requirements, etc.

Some are tracking MBTA Communities projects, so 16 Laurel Ave. may soon get added to the map.

(Article updated on 3/31/26.)

 

Sign up for Swellesley’s free weekday email newsletter

Wellesley Kitchen and Home Tour
Housing

Revised RIO zoning reform proposal to make way to Wellesley Town Meeting

by

The Wellesley Planning Board this week voted 3-1 to approve revised motion language for an Annual Town Meeting article that aims to modify the Residential Incentive Overlay (RIO) zoning bylaw that has been such a hot housing-related topic in recent years (see Wellesley Media recording of the Feb. 23 meeting at about the 2-hour, 15-minute mark for this discussion and vote).

The motion, which proposes eliminating single residence districts from the RIO bylaw, is set to be presented under Article 32 at Town Meeting, slated to begin on March 30.

The Select Board earlier this month heard and discussed recommendations from the Planning Board’s RIO Task Force, a group formed in the wake of last spring’s Annual Town Meeting. That segment of the Feb. 10 Select Board meeting (see Wellesley Media recording) grew tense at times, as the Board pushed back on a recommendation regarding the proposed addition of a development agreement requirement to the project approval section of the RIO bylaw.

The RIO Task Force reconvened on Feb. 23 as part of a public hearing and joint meeting with the Planning Board to reconsider its Article 32 motion language, with the development agreement piece clearly off the table at this point.

Doing something about RIO

Opposition to proposed uses of the RIO bylaw, which went on the books in 1998, came to a head in October, 2024, when a pair of proposed multifamily housing developments got shot down at Special Town Meeting. RIOs were also front and center at Annual Town Meeting last April because of a citizen petition that sought to return the RIO bylaw to its original state. As the proponent explained during presentations, the focus of RIOs would again be on allowing multi-unit residential development in commercial areas but not in single residence and general residence districts.

The RIO Task Force was then formed, and has held or been involved in more than a dozen meetings since its first in June.

The Task Force on Feb. 23 over the span of about two hours mulled how to approach the motion language for Article 32 after receiving the Select Board’s feedback. The Task Force members considered removing all zones from the RIO bylaw, essentially making the already infrequently used bylaw no longer an option. They also considered limiting their recommendation to removing only single residence and a few other districts from the bylaw. And finally, they weighed whether to just scrap the whole thing, and go back to work on a proposal that might stand a better chance of passing Select Board and Town Meeting approvals.

Among those supporting the approach of not moving forward with an article at Town Meeting at this time was Peter Welburn, the resident whose citizen petition at Annual Town Meeting last year recommended returning the RIO bylaw to its original state. Welburn said he felt more time was needed to discuss issues with the Select Board, the Planning Board, other stakeholders, and amongst themselves. He said the Task Force might be better off getting something ready for a Special Town Meeting in the fall.

Task Force member Paul Criswell said he’s supportive of doing away with RIOs in single family residence zones. He could come around to getting ridding of RIOs, but would want to know more first about alternatives, such as single-site zoning options.

Task Force member and Precinct D (Lower Falls) representative Kara Reinhardt Block, who was active in discussions about the proposed RIO projects that met their fate at Special Town Meeting in 2024, shared a few number-filled slides during the Feb. 23 meeting to help illustrate her thoughts regarding the Article 32 decision. She’s a proponent of getting rid of the RIO bylaw altogether. She showed that just removing RIO from single residence districts might open Precinct D, with its ample commercially-zoned property abutting single-family homes, to a disproportionate amount of RIO development (especially with many commercial properties changing hands). “There’s a profound inequity in that,” she said, citing the municipal infrastructure and other impacts of new development.

Most members supported either removing all districts or at least single residence districts from the bylaw.

Overall, Task Force members said they’ve learned a lot through the process, which has brought together a group of people with many different views on the subject.

When the Planning Board reconvened, it voted 3-1 on Article 32 motion language that would eliminate single residence zones from the RIO bylaw. Patty Mallett said she wanted to keep the RIO itself around for now, just in case a developer of senior housing might want to use it, so voted in favor of just eliminating the single residence zone from it. Tom Taylor said he saw that option as a straightforward one that would improve the bylaw, so voted that way, too.  Outgoing Planning Board member Kathleen Woodward too supported just eliminating single residence from the bylaw, to relieve some resident stress, but keeping the bylaw on the books as an available tool. Planning Chair Marc Charney wasn’t necessarily opposed to that approach, but voted “no,” to express his preference for removing all zones from the RIO bylaw. That, he said, would keep the bylaw on the books but neuter it. Charney said he just doesn’t see the RIO bylaw getting used as it is in part because there has been so much negative discussion surrounding RIOs in recent years.

Sign up for Swellesley’s free weekday email newsletter

Rotary Club, Taste of Wellesley
Housing

Wellesley RIO Task Force readies proposed zoning amendments for Town Meeting

by

Residential Incentive Overlays (RIOs) have been a huge topic of discussion in Wellesley town government over the past few years, so much so that a RIO Task Force was formed by the Planning Board in the wake of Annual Town Meeting last spring.

The RIO Task Force has been busy since its first meeting in June, and as discussed at its most recent meeting on Feb. 2 (see Wellesley Media recording), the body has been readying motion language for an article on the warrant for this year’s Annual Town Meeting.

Opposition to proposed uses of the RIO bylaw, which went on the books in 1998, came to a head in October, 2024, when a pair of proposed multifamily housing developments got shot down at Special Town Meeting. RIOs were also front and center at Annual Town Meeting last April because of a citizen petition that sought to return the RIO bylaw to its original state. As the proponent explained during presentations, the focus of RIOs would again be on allowing multi-unit residential development in commercial areas but not in single residence and general residence districts.

A rare RIO project that has made it through town approvals: The Bellwether

The author of that citizen petition, Peter Welburn, is now among the RIO Task Force members whose efforts will be making their way to Annual Town Meeting, set to begin on March 30 at Wellesley High School. He said during the Feb. 2 Task Force meeting that he was encouraged by consensus that has been building around possible changes, and looks forward to further discussion with the Select Board during its Feb. 10 meeting at which Planning Board and RIO Task Force members will be present.

Here’s Annual Town Meeting Article 32, the proposed RIO bylaw amendment sponsored by the Planning Board:

To see if the Town will vote to amend Sections 3.2 and 3.2.A of the Zoning Bylaw, relating to the Residential Incentive Overlay (RIO) zoning district, to identify in Section 3.2.B the land that may be included in the RIO by future zoning map changes as defined by its underlying base zoning classification, and to provide that an applicant for the special permit required by Section 3.2.O must execute a development agreement with the Select Board prior to making application to the Planning Board; or take any other action in relation thereto. (Planning Board)

The RIO Task Force has been working on motion language under this article. Motions are what Town Meeting members actually vote on.

The motions under discussion focus on prohibition of RIOs in residential (and some other) districts and the expectation for a development agreement between builders and the town via the Select Board that would hold developers to their initial plans, such as on unit density and public/private amenities. Marc Charney, Planning Board chair and a member of the task force, said changes are designed to strengthen the bylaw and encourage its use in more projects and its support by the town.

Wellesley Executive Director Meghan Jop called in with thoughts during the Feb. 2 Task Force meeting about whether the discussed development agreement language is appropriate given that the Planning Board already has discretionary authority at its disposal in approving special permits for projects. She even pondered whether RIOs have “run their course.”

Task Force and Planning Board member Tom Taylor, who ran the meeting, did raise the issue of how necessary a development agreement might really be, but that having such agreements addressed in the bylaw might ease public concerns about the zoning tool. Welburn said having development agreements in place ahead of zoning amendment pitches at Town Meeting might increase the chances of projects getting approved, as a couple of developers on the task force had suggested.

Wording around development agreements in bylaw amendments needs to be handled carefully, as the bylaw language can’t be updated to require an applicant to have a development agreement signed ahead of a potential bylaw amendment in response to a requested zoning change. “Clearly, we haven’t wrestled this development agreement concept to the ground,” Taylor said, based on the information shared by Jop and in light of upcoming discussions, including with the Select Board.

During its Feb. 2 meeting the task force also discussed updating the bylaw’s purpose statement, which currently reads: “To provide a residential reuse incentive for a parcel or parcels greater than one acre located in close proximity to the Town’s Commercial Districts and public transportation.” A longer proposed statement was discussed with the intention of clarifying the point of RIOs, and to address topics such as housing affordability, diversity, scale, and aesthetics. For now, however, the group is sticking with the current statement.

If this is a topic of interest to you, look for continued discussion at the Select Board meeting on Feb. 10, Advisory Committee meeting on Feb. 18, and Planning Board public hearing on Feb. 23. We post meeting previews at the start of each week and you can also consult the town website for details.

A brief RIO Task Force meeting may be slotted in ahead of the Feb. 18 Advisory Committee meeting, possibly on Feb. 12.

More: Wellesley multi-family housing developments in the works

Thousands turn to The Swellesley Report daily to keep current on Wellesley:

Town of Wellesley has 37 legal questions (to start) for Commonwealth over MassBay property plans

by

Wellesley town leaders have been meeting behind closed doors in recent months “to discuss  strategy with respect to potential litigation with the Commonwealth regarding the disposition of surplus MassBay Community College land.” On Jan. 9, the town sent a letter to Edward Augustus, secretary of the state’s Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, posing 37 questions—and another dozen-plus questions within those questions—ranging from the basics of how the 45 acres in question came to be deemed “surplus real property” to the zoning and other implications that might result from housing being developed on a portion of the site.

In the letter’s intro, the town affirms that “[w]hile it supports the underlying purpose of the AHA [Affordable Homes Act] to promote housing and housing affordability, the Town and its citizen constituents have serious concerns about the Project at the Property and many questions on the meaning, effect, application, implementation, and enforcement of the AHA in relation to the Project. The Town, therefore, sees this letter as the opportunity for stakeholders to clarify, refine and, ultimately, reach a mutual understanding of the AHA, the Project, and how the Project might be an appropriate use of the property within the Wellesley community…”

State officials have indicated a willingness to protect the 40 acres of forest within the 45-acres of MassBay property designated as surplus, but the town and many of its residents seek further assurances. The citizen speak section of Select Board meetings is now regularly populated by those urging the town to press the state to protect the MassBay forest, which abuts Centennial Reservation. Local organizations such as the Wellesley Conservation Land Trust and Friends of Brookside have been advocating for saving the MassBay forest.

The town’s concerns about the state’s plans go beyond protecting the forest. Its questions also address potential traffic and infrastructure issues that would result from a housing development in this already busy part of town.

The Affordable Homes Act is designed to help address the state’s housing shortage, and Wellesley itself is dealing with housing concerns in town in part through a recently completed Strategic Housing Plan. In the case of the MassBay situation, funds raised from selling the property to a developer empowered to build at least 180 units would serve the dual purpose of supporting significant campus updates.

Some local housing advocates see the state’s MassBay plan as a possible way to both save the forest and produce needed housing. Building a Better Wellesley on Jan. 25 (just as the AFC Championship game of possible local interest kicks off at 3pm…) is hosting an online discussion regarding what’s next for the MassBay property. The outfit has posted a letter on its website to help frame the discussion.

The Wellesley Select Board at its Jan. 13 meeting lists an agenda item about an update on the MassBay/DCAMM Land Disposition Project that will presumably highlight the town’s letter sent to the state.

Swellesley welcomes letters to the editors on matters related to Wellesley

More Wellesley luxury condos on the way: 592 Washington St. project planned

by

Developer Dean Behrend has plans to build a three-story, 19-unit high end condo project at 592 Washington St. in Wellesley, where a funeral home once stood in a structure built in 1911. The renovation and addition to this structure would be located next to the current Belclare luxury condo complex that stands where the Wellesley Inn once operated.

The project would involve demolishing the rear buildings formerly home to an art gallery and various offices. According to architectural plans submitted to the town, the project would have underground parking (materials describe both 19 and 36 spaces, with 36 in the latest). As always, a transportation analysis done on behalf of the proponent shows there will be little traffic impact; the project would be located within reasonable walking distance of the Wellesley Square commuter rail station.

We reached out recently through Behrend’s website to ask about the 50,000 sq. ft. project but didn’t hear back.

Now information is trickling out via the town’s website, including notice of a Jan. 26 public hearing regarding a request for a special permit from the Planning Board for a project of significant impact.

592 washington rendering
592 Washington St. project rendering submitted to the town

Also, the applicant is set to go before the Design Review Board on Jan. 7.

According to Behrend’s pitch to the town: “This project has been carefully designed to fit seamlessly within the surrounding neighborhood. The building’s architecture, scale, and materials were selected to complement nearby homes, while underground parking eliminates the need for expansive surface lots and significantly reduces visual and traffic impact. The units will be high-quality, for-sale residences that meet the growing demand for well-designed, low-maintenance living options in Wellesley…”

We’ve seen no mention of affordable units in the materials submitted.

Behrend recently built a 40-unit apartment complex for those age 62+ on Union Street in Natick, and that does include eight affordable units.

The Swellesley Report welcomes paid public notices to help ensure broader reach.

 

Wellesley in Bloom starts May 2!

Wellesley in Bloom starts May 2!