16 Williams Street: Brookline’s Affordable Housing Decision

When a single-room occupancy building changes hands in Coolidge Corner, it rarely makes headlines—but the Town of Brookline’s decision to assign its right of first refusal for 16 Williams Street to Victory Programs, Inc. signals how affluent suburbs may increasingly navigate affordable housing obligations. This 4,680-square-foot, three-story building containing ten residential units sits seven minutes from the Green Line and represents a preservation challenge that touches on zoning, nonprofit capacity, and neighborhood resistance to supportive housing models.

The Property and the Town’s Right of First Refusal

Brookline’s involvement stems from a 2010 investment using Community Development Block Grant funds, which secured a contractual right of first refusal should the property ever be sold. According to public documents, the town issued a Request for Information seeking qualified nonprofits willing to acquire and operate the property with affordability restrictions. The compressed timeline reflected urgency around preserving existing affordable stock rather than attempting new construction in a high-cost market.

The RFI required that at least fifty percent of units be deed-restricted to households earning no more than eighty percent of area median income in perpetuity. Victory Programs proposed deed-restricting one hundred percent of units at or below that level, immediately achieving the highest evaluation classification. The organization’s plan expands its Portis Family Home program—serving women and families reuniting after periods of homelessness or residential treatment—from eight families in Jamaica Plain to eighteen families total.

For Investors and Buyers Buyers targeting Brookline transit corridors, particularly near the Green Line, face a market where municipal affordability mandates increasingly prioritize preservation over market-rate development. This trend signals limited inventory expansion in these walkable pockets. Furthermore, condo investors and those targeting small multifamily properties (especially under $5 million) in neighborhoods like Coolidge Corner must compete with nonprofits funded by federal earmarks. Since these mission-driven buyers aggressively target buildings with existing affordability components, private investors should underwrite deals to account for this competition. To find value-add opportunities, it is advisable to expand search parameters to neighborhoods with fewer historical public subsidies and properties lacking SRO configurations.

For Sellers and Multifamily Owners Sellers and owners of multifamily properties must be vigilant regarding historical public subsidies. Properties that previously received Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) investments, HOME funds, or density bonuses often carry dormant municipal rights of first refusal. These restrictions can surface unexpectedly during the sale process, potentially limiting the buyer pool to qualified nonprofits and extending transaction timelines. To avoid these constraints constraining future sale options, owners should conduct a thorough title review to identify any dormant affordability restrictions or subsidy history before listing or engaging brokers.

For Residential Buyers Single-family buyers considering homes near preserved affordable housing should recognize that well-managed transitional housing typically has no meaningful impact on property values. While some buyers may attempt to use proximity as a negotiating point during inspections, the data often does not support a price reduction. To navigate this, buyers should request a comparative market analysis (comps) that specifically shows value trends near similar facilities to make informed decisions.

Financing Structure and Nonprofit Capacity

Victory Programs distinguished itself through demonstrated access to capital: federal appropriations, acquisition loans from mission-driven lenders, and potential Housing Innovation Funds from the Commonwealth. This financing architecture—combining federal appropriations, mission-driven lending, and state grants—represents a model increasingly common in affordable housing preservation but difficult for smaller nonprofits to replicate.

The Brookline Select Board voted unanimously to assign the right of first refusal to Victory Programs despite organized neighborhood opposition. A Change.org petition framed the decision as threatening neighborhood character, reflecting familiar NIMBY dynamics around supportive housing for populations in recovery.

What This Means for Brookline Real Estate

The 16 Williams Street case illustrates how Brookline may increasingly leverage contractual rights and nonprofit partnerships to preserve affordable housing without deploying significant municipal funds—a strategy that tends to favor organizations with federal earmarks and established lending relationships over market participants.

Source: Source