Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Mu2 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge study of MU‑2 zoning density as Leominster hearing is continued
Summary
At a Leominster City Legal Affairs public hearing, residents raised concerns about MU‑2 zoning density, traffic and buffer reductions; councilors agreed to continue petition 9‑26 and ask planning staff and MRPC representatives to return with analysis on Nov. 10.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Mu2 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leominster City’s Legal Affairs Committee heard public concern over proposed changes to MU‑2 zoning at a public hearing on petition 9‑26 and agreed to continue the hearing to Nov. 10 so planners can answer detailed questions.
Haley Bridal of 200 Harvard Street told the committee the recent zoning changes increased permitted density in ways that residents did not expect, saying the parcel at issue (about 17.95 acres) could theoretically allow “408 units” if the land were fully developable and buffers are reduced. Bridal said wetlands and other site constraints make that theoretical density misleading but urged councilors to ‘really look into’ the cumulative effect of the ordinance changes across roughly 66 additional acres now subject to the same rules.
Al Wenning of 194 Ridgewood Drive urged councilors to consider traffic impacts near Route 2 and Harvard Street, saying existing congestion around the U‑Haul and nearby retail creates safety and access problems that new development could worsen.
Councilors and the chair repeatedly said the planning board’s review was still pending and that technical staff should be brought to the council for questions. Multiple councilors requested the Montachusett Regional Planning Commission representative (Joe Boyle) and the city planning director to appear. The committee’s recommendation was to continue the public hearing to Nov. 10 at 6:00 p.m.
The chair invited written questions to be sent in advance so the planning officials could prepare answers for the Nov. 10 hearing. No vote on the zoning amendment was taken at the meeting; the hearing remains open.

