Developer seeks 752 apartments at former Armstrong site; planning board continues hearing amid traffic, river-access concerns

The Town of Braintree Planning Board on Aug. 12 heard a detailed presentation from Trammell Crow Residential proposing a two‑phase, 752‑unit apartment development at 10 Plains Street, the former Armstrong factory site, and continued the public hearing to Sept. 9 for further review and peer comments.

The applicant described the project as a by‑right redevelopment under the town’s MBTA Communities multifamily overlay. Frank Marinelli, attorney for the applicant, said the proposal would create “752 luxury class a apartment homes with 58% open space and substantial amenities,” demolish existing industrial buildings, and add walking connections to the recently completed boardwalk and fish ladder on the Manatequid River.

The developer’s submission shows two phases: Phase 1 would build 427 units in five four‑story buildings and surface parking; Phase 2 would add 325 units in a four‑story building with an integrated parking garage. The site team described about 58% open space (roughly double the local minimum), roughly 1,129 parking spaces proposed (1.5 per unit zoning requirement noted in materials), electric‑vehicle charging capacity and staged “EV‑ready” spaces, and multiple stormwater infiltration systems designed to treat runoff that now flows untreated to the river.

Why it matters: the site is large (about 30.55 acres in the presentation), sits adjacent to the newly restored river and public boardwalk, and the proposed scale would materially change traffic patterns, municipal service demand and the character of the riverfront. The applicant’s fiscal analysis filed with the board estimates total assessed value at completion near $291 million, gross annual property tax at about $3 million and net annual revenue to the town in the range of $1.2 million to $1.9 million; one‑time building permit fees were estimated near $3 million and water and sewer connection fees near $1 million.

Supporting details presented by the development team included architecture and landscape material, a wetlands delineation and a stormwater plan. Nick Delacaba, the project civil engineer, said the proposal uses decentralized infiltration systems and five underground infiltration chambers where feasible and that the plan meets the town’s and state stormwater performance standards. Wetlands scientist Andrew Thibault said the team’s updated delineation showed substantial reductions of impervious cover within the regulated 200‑foot riverfront area — about 2.4 acres of net reduction overall, with roughly 2.1 acres of that inside the 200‑foot jurisdictional area.

Traffic consultant Robert Michaud told the board the team’s analysis — prepared using standard Institute of Transportation Engineers trip rates and peer‑reviewed data — finds the full build will generate daily trips roughly comparable to current commercial uses on the site. Michaud said the evening peak is similar to current conditions; the morning peak would rise modestly (about 178 more trips by his estimate) and that signal retiming and optimization at the Plain Street/Hancock Street corridor could mitigate localized delays. He also said the study took a conservative approach and did not take credit for public‑transit or telework patterns observed in census data.

Public comment was extensive. Several residents and town officials raised concerns about traffic, water and sewer capacity, school‑age children projections and the project’s scale. Pat Mulkerin, business agent for Plumbers Local 12 and president of the Quincy‑South Shore Building Trades, said he opposed the project as presented, citing past complaints about developer practices and urging binding labor, accessibility and environmental commitments. Resident speakers cited noise from the adjacent rail line, the adequacy of pedestrian connections to South Braintree Square and whether the boardwalk would become effectively private in appearance despite the existing easement.

Councilor Meredith Bridal (District 5) said the MBTA Communities zoning is intended to create housing but argued the town should secure “community benefits that meaningfully and substantively measure up to the goals of the MBTA Communities Act,” including improved street‑scapes and pedestrian safety leading to South Braintree Square. “This new neighborhood is less than half a mile from South Braintree Square, yet the proposal offers no ideas or plans to improve walkability outside the property lines,” she said.

Developer representatives, including Mark Baranski of Trammell Crow, emphasized the company’s experience building large multifamily projects and said the plan is by right under zoning. The team told the board it will respond to peer reviews: traffic, stormwater and fiscal reports are scheduled for independent peer review by town‑engaged consultants.

The planning board received written correspondence and saw dozens of public speakers during the hearing. After questions from board members and acknowledgement that peer reviews are outstanding, the board voted to continue the public hearing to Sept. 9 so reports and responses can be reviewed and further refinements offered. No formal land‑use approvals were granted that night.

Looking ahead: the board will accept peer‑review comments and revised plans before further votes. The developer told the board it is amenable to more frequent, topic‑focused meetings while peer review is underway.

Provenance: The public notice and applicant presentation begin in the record when the board read the legal notice and the applicant started the presentation (see transcript excerpt from the legal notice and Frank Marinelli’s opening remarks). The board’s continuance motion and vote are recorded later in the transcript. The board scheduled the next continued hearing for Sept. 9, 2025.

Ending: The application remains under review: peer reviews on traffic, stormwater and fiscal impacts are pending and the board reserved further comment and possible conditions for the next hearing on Sept. 9.