Planning Board
Presentation and public discussion of a proposed MBTA Communities overlay and a conceptual multi-family 'Golden Triangle' development on Elm St. — two continued public hearings (2 Merrimac St. and 13 Merrimac St.) were formally closed, and the Board nominated David Frick as its Disposition Committee representative.
The Board received an extended presentation on the MBTA Communities zoning requirements and a conceptual development proposal for the Golden Triangle (parcels along Elm St.). Consultants and the developer described a two‑neighborhood residential plan on roughly 25 developable acres with a northern neighborhood (~274 units) and a southern neighborhood (~91 units), a mix of townhouses, duplexes, stacked units and corridor buildings, shared greenspace, trails and an amenity program. Presenters explained the MBTA overlay schedule and compliance requirements (including a 15 units/acre gross density target), discussed connections to nearby districts and the riverwalk, and noted the city may amend its existing 40R Gateway Village district to meet unit targets. Board members and the public raised traffic, multi-modal access (sidewalks and bike accommodations), potential mixed‑use frontage, trail connections, basements, and project timeline questions; presenters said sidewalks on both sides are planned, bike accommodations would be shared (not dedicated lanes), traffic impacts will be studied, and the zoning amendment filing to City Council was expected in April with State review concurrent, aiming to complete the process well before the statutory year-end deadline.
The meeting also included two procedural but consequential motions: the Board formally closed the continued public hearings for 2 Merrimac St. and 13 Merrimac St. (applications had previously been withdrawn), and the Board nominated David Frick to serve as the Planning Board representative on the Disposition Committee (motion passed unanimously). Administrative items (14 S Hunt Rd., covenants/bonds, contracts/bills) required no action. A member of the public asked about requirements for MBTA ridership, state infrastructure mitigation, and energy standards for MBTA district projects; presenters responded there are no requirements forcing MBTA usage or higher energy standards in the MBTA overlay and that infrastructure improvements would generally be addressed by projects and potential state grants.