The Swellesley Report

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

136 Worcester St. headed back into play for multi-family housing?

by 6 Comments

The property at 136 Worcester St., once among a slew of sites proposed for 40B multi-family housing projects during a time when Wellesley was beneath the state’s 10% threshold for affordable housing, could still be developed for such a purpose.

Wellesley Interim Planning Director Brad Downey, during a brief May 4 Planning Board agenda item on possible Fall Special Town Meeting articles, gave the board a heads up about a potential application related to 136 Worcester St. He said that Dean Behrend, a developer already working to bring a 19-unit, 3-story condo complex to the edge of Wellesley Square, called about a possible Project of Significant Impact at that site. (See Wellesley Media recording of May 4 meeting, about 35 minutes in.)

Downey noted that the property, on the eastbound side of Rte. 9 in Wellesley near the Sun Life complex, is in a Single Residence 15 (SR-15) district, so would require a zoning change approval. It’s possible Behrend would be invited to come to a Planning Board meeting to discuss his idea, but would eventually need to seek Town Meeting approval (we reached out to Behrend Construction for comment).

The previous development envisioned at this site, Wellesley Crossing, was a four-plus story, 40-unit apartment building. This proposal was denied site eligibility.

If a proposal were to go forward at this property it would be just the latest of numerous multi-family housing developments in the works in Wellesley, either being built or on the drawing board, and adding well over 100 units to the town’s supply. New projects include the Bellwether on Rte. 9/Cedar St. (34 units), a 28-unit development at 16 Laurel Ave. near the Wellesley Hills train station, and 49 Walnut St. (28 units).

Plus a new 8-townhome project is being pitched alongside the railroad line at Wellesley Square, and then of course there is the big one, 180 possible state-mandated units at 40 Oakland St. across from the MassBay Community College campus.

Expand your reach by advertising your real estate project on Swellesley

     

Advertisements

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

Wellesley Lower Falls area to get a study of its own

by

The Wellesley Planning Board earlier this month discussed commissioning a visioning study of the Lower Falls Village area, which is ripe for redevelopment in light of large properties changing hands already or expected to before long (see Wellesley Media recording of the April 13 Planning Board meeting, about 10 minutes in). It’s also a challenging area in that it is nearby major highways and plagued by traffic.

This study would be separate, but related to, recent studies like the Strategic Housing Plan and future ones, like a new Comprehensive Plan. A draft request for proposals (RFP) is in the works, and served as a jumping off point for the April 13 discussion (the study could cost up to $50k). A study of this area was conducted in the 1990s.

Brad Downey, interim planning director, said in a follow-up email exchange that “The genesis of this particular study is the result of a few factors: increased activity and involvement from neighbors on future development in the Lower Falls area following the two RIOs proposed at Fall 2024 Town Meeting, as well as the pending sale of many of the Haynes Management properties in that area, which are to be sold to another property owner, likely for redevelopment. The increased neighborhood interest as well as increased likelihood of future development were the two key factors the Planning Board had in mind when considering this study.”

It remains to be seen how soon the RFP will be finalized and issued. Asked about a timeline for issuing the RFP, Downey said at the meeting that “I don’t think there is a particular rush.”)

It can be challenging to keep track of what’s coming up at Wellesley town government meetings. We try to help by posting an agenda preview each week that highlights items we think might be of interest, as we did with this study (See: “Wellesley town government meetings for week of April 13, 2026: Town Meeting debriefs; Lower Falls Area Study Discussion”). Sign up for our free weekday email newsletter to stay plugged in.

The funding for this project comes from the Planning Department operating budget, which typically includes $50,000 each year for retaining professional services, such as planning consulting services to conduct studies.

Toward the beginning of the Planning Board’s discussion, member Jim Roberti shared a map of the Lower Falls area (to be defined as part of the RFP process) to illustrate the hodgepodge of zoning districts within this part of town. There’s business, industrial, Lower Falls Village, Residential Incentive Overlay (RIO), and other zoning in the area covering Walnut, River, and Washington Streets.

Lower falls zoning
Lower Falls zoning map

 
This section of Wellesley has been at the epicenter of discussions at Town Meeting and beyond in recent years about RIOs due to proposed multi-family housing projects that many neighbors opposed for density, traffic, and other reasons. Also, arguments were made that efforts to eliminate RIOs from some parts of town might unfairly burden other parts, namely Lower Falls (Annual Town Meeting recently voted to eliminate RIOs from all districts, not including the four previously approved RIO projects).

In discussing the proposed Lower Falls study, Roberti said “I guess the question’s going to come: Why are we doing this? Are we doing it to restrict this area so less things can be developed? Or are we doing it to regulate what’s going to be built or are we going to encourage more to be built?” Roberti said he’d also been asked about whether Planning envisions doing traffic studies, and he wondered about whether funding would even be available for that.

Board member Ed Chazen asked how this study might fit with a broader Comprehensive Plan the town plans to undertake (it failed to get funding at Annual Town Meeting, but proponents will be back with another request). The Comprehensive Plan would succeed the dated Unified Plan, a long-range vision for future land use, development, and growth across town. The Planning Board’s Tom Taylor said he’d see the Lower Falls plan as being more detailed, getting into issues like traffic flow and parking (maybe turning parking lanes into traffic lanes during certain hours, like in Wellesley Hills, or decking the municipal parking lot on River Street).

“The elephant in the room is the Haynes property that sits right through the middle of this,” Taylor said. “We can have all sorts of great ideas and they can just say forget it, I’m going to build by right…”

Chazen urged that the town get into conversations with the big property owners in the area sooner than later to help ensure that this gateway into town is developed thoughtfully. While many properties are owned by Haynes, or have been sold by Haynes to others, there are also other established property owners in the area (such as at 1 Washington St. along the Charles River) that would need to be looped in.

Roberti pointed out that this a “commercial/business/industrial area that butts right up to a residential area…and I think one of the problems with the RIO is that there wasn’t enough buffer between the improved or changed use and the current residential.”

The board talked as well about needing to get neighborhood input in advance of issuing the RFP and/or as part of the study.

This study would roll out even as new developments proceed in Lower Falls, including a multi-family housing complex at 49 Walnut St., and a First Citizens Bank branch at 26 Washington St. where Taylor Rental used to be.

Page Waterman, Natick
London Harness, Wellesley
Wonder Run, Wellesley

New Wellesley housing development proposed: 8 townhomes just off Linden Street near train station

by

10 Railroad Street housing
10 Railroad St. townhouse rendering by MGD+ (shown from Linden Street and from above)

Plans for eight attached townhomes, including two affordable units, are being aired before the Wellesley Design Review Board later this month for 10 Railroad St.

The three-story development, if approved, would rise at the current parking lot off of Linden Street alongside the railroad tracks near the Wellesley Square train station. This is located behind the Takara restaurant and Goddard School, and just east of the 35-unit Terrazza condo complex across the street.

The 10 Railroad St. property, along with the 151-159 Linden Street commercial property, was sold for $9m by B. Cullen Realty to Dinosaur Linden LLC last summer.

The development at 10 Railroad St. would be the second proposed housing plan in town under the MBTA Communities Law, which Wellesley complied with in 2024 and allows by right development to encourage new housing near public transportation. The first such project proposed is on Laurel Avenue across from the Wellesley Hills train station.

Wellesley is seeing an influx of multi-tenant and other housing developments, both spurred by state actions like the MBTA Communities Law and Affordable Homes Act, and as a result of oodles of office properties changing hands or going on the market. The town also commissioned a strategic housing plan designed to help it strategize for more diverse housing.

The 10 Railroad St. project, to feature varied brick veneer facing Railroad St., is located within the Industrial A Zoning District and the MBTA Overlay District. The applicant intends to file for Site Plan Review, which would meaning going through the Zoning Board of Appeals (it does not need to go through the Planning Board as part of the MBTA Communities process).

According to the applicant, each three-bedroom unit will have its own outdoor space surrounded by an 6-foot fence, to create separation from the railroad tracks. Units will have their own garages in the basement (room for two vehicles in market rate units, one vehicle in affordable ones). The development will be fully electric, and include support for possible solar panels. Units boast about 3,800 sq. ft. of space; the affordable units lack a third floor deck found in the other units.

Pricing has not been revealed.

Do you keep learning new things by reading Swellesley? Please consider making a tax-deductible donation to support our work.

Advertisements

Longfellow, Wellesley
Haskins Automotive, Wellesley

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

by

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.

 

 

Hunnewell Fun Fair 2026
Mass Cultural Council

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

by

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:

Rotary Club, Taste of Wellesley
History

Reflecting on the Wellesley Inn’s demolition 20 years ago

by

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.

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

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