Consultants, town and state launch four‑month 'sprint' to study MCI Concord site

Consultants, town staff and state officials on Feb. 25 formally began a four‑month study of the MCI Concord prison site, launching a rapid “sprint” of assessments, community engagement and scenario work intended to produce concept options and an initial market analysis for the property.

The kickoff meeting, convened by the MCI advisory board and led by Agency Landscape and Planning, set a project schedule that the consultant team said will run through late March into June and include four tasks: discover (document and site review), listen (public engagement), envision (scenario development) and analyze (economics and performance). Rhiannon Sinclair, a planner with Agency Landscape and Planning, described the schedule as accelerated: “This project is going to be quite quick,” she said, and noted the team will combine public engagement with technical work to meet milestones.

Why it matters: the MCI site is large and touches multiple town and state systems — from MassDOT plans around the rotary to wastewater, historic resources and neighborhood connections. The kickoff defined who will do what during the sprint and set immediate next steps, including a consultant data request to the town and an on‑site tour following the meeting.

Consultants described the work program and near‑term timetable. Justina Chang, project manager for Agency, said the team will assemble a data request and cross‑reference publicly available material, aiming for an early milestone in late March and a follow‑up delivery by the end of the engagement window. The process is intended to generate an existing‑conditions report, a market report and scenario concepts grounded by cost and infrastructure analysis.

The meeting also clarified roles. The consultant team will lead engagement and prepare the assessments and recommendations; the town’s core project team will serve as the primary point of coordination; the advisory board will review and be accountable for providing feedback; other town committees were described as consulted parties; and the broader public will be informed through the project website and engagement events. Dan Gainsborough, co‑chair of the advisory board, and other members discussed the advisory board’s level of involvement in the more detailed analysis phase and asked to be counted as accountable where capacity permits.

State agency participation and disposition responsibilities were visible throughout the discussion. Paul LeBlahoggan, senior project manager with the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAM), and Abby Vladeck, DCAM director of development asset management, explained DCAM’s role in managing state property disposition and coordinating with the town on next steps.

Next steps: consultants will send the formal data request to the town by the end of the week, then conduct the scheduled site visit. The consultant team said it will meet internally after the tour to consolidate observations and return to the advisory board with a mapping and assessment update.

The meeting closed with a site tour of the portion of the property inside the prison fence followed by additional viewing of external parcels; the consultants said they will incorporate what they observe into the discover and listen tasks.