Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the MBTA Communities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Concord board debates adding MCI Concord to MBTA-community overlay, cautious on timing amid state litigation
Summary
Planning staff outlined options to amend Concord's MBTA Communities overlay to include MCI Concord, noting tradeoffs in station-area calculations and urging caution because state guidance and litigation (Town of Milton/AG) could change compliance rules.
Planning staff told the board on Oct. 29 that they are close to circulating draft site-plan rules for Concord's MBTA Communities compliance work and that adding MCI Concord to Subdistrict 4 is technically feasible but carries tradeoffs.
Staff described three compliance metrics (unit count, contiguous acreage and the percentage of acreage within the required station-area) and said adding the full MCI parcel raises acreage outside the half-mile station radius, which can reduce the percentage counted as "within the station area." Staff noted alternatives such as only adding nearer parcels to the district to improve the station-area percentage.
"We're getting close," the planning staff said, describing work with the consultant on rules and regs and a possible public-hearing timeline: a draft at the board's next meeting, a pre-adoption public hearing Dec. 3 and possible adoption ahead of Dec. 31 so the town can submit a district compliance application. Staff cautioned that ongoing litigation (Town of Milton v. AG) and prospective state guidance from the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities could alter compliance interpretations.
Board members expressed reluctance to bring a warrant article to town meeting until the state-level picture and formal compliance comments are clearer. Members cited the heavy public effort required for a town meeting article and the risk of having to rework zoning again if state guidance or the AG's office issues adverse findings.
Staff said FEMA and technical GIS issues are largely handled but legal questions (for example, whether MBTA protections preempt certain local special-permit requirements such as for flood-plain or aquifer bylaws) remain in flux. The board asked staff to continue refining the mapping approach, seek town-council feedback, and monitor state litigation before advancing a town-meeting zoning change.
Next steps: staff will circulate the draft rules and maps to the board and try to coordinate with town counsel and the select board on messaging and timing before any formal warrant drafting.
