Developer proposes two multifamily complexes at Route 9 corridor; board continues hearing

Post Road Realty LLC and its project team presented designs and technical analyses Dec. 2 to the Westborough Planning Board for two multifamily developments on parcels at the corners of Route 9 and Milk Street. Attorney Brian Falk said the sites are in the Highway Business zoning district and require special permits and site-plan review.

Tom Montelli, partner at Post Road Residential, described the proposal as two phased projects: the north parcel would be developed first (about 206 units) followed by the south parcel (about 182 units). Montelli said construction on the north parcel would likely begin in 2026 and finish in 2028, with the south parcel under construction as that phase finishes and full occupancy by the combined projects expected around 2030. He said the developer plans to reserve 15% of units as affordable across different AMI levels and to include sustainable-design measures and on-site amenities.

The project team sought multiple waivers under the Highway Business District rules: a reduction in minimum open space (from 60% to 30% under the district's point-allocation system), an increase in allowed building height from four to five stories, and a reduced parking minimum (proposed 1.4 spaces per unit rather than two). For the north parcel the team is also seeking zoning relief to allow a right-in from Route 9 and a reduced minimum curb distance from 20 to 10 feet. Attorney Brian Falk told the board the applicants believe the required legal findings can be made if the board is satisfied with the supporting materials.

Technical consultants presented engineering, traffic and landscape analyses. Hancock Associates' civil engineer Joe Paznola identified the north site as about 5.73 acres and the south site as about 4.4 acres, described grading and retaining-wall work to accommodate 10'12-foot grade changes from Milk Street into the sites, and said the project would tie into an existing 8-inch sewer and 12-inch water main on Milk Street. Paznola also said post-development stormwater would be managed with subsurface infiltration systems and outlets tied into the municipal system; he said the drainage design will be subject to third-party peer review.

MDM Transportation's Robert Michaud summarized a transportation assessment that used Institute of Transportation Engineers trip rates and video-based field counts. Michaud said the combined sites would generate on the order of roughly 116'119 net vehicle trips in peak hours (about 1,500 vehicle trips per day) and that most trips would be oriented to Route 9 and the regional employment market. He said MassDOT has generally concurred with the approach but that the Route 9 driveway will require further coordination and may be shifted to entrance-only per MassDOT preference.

Board members pressed the team on traffic, parking demand, school generation and sewer/water capacity. On schools, Montelli said the developer used student-yield data from a comparable Post Road project in Marlborough and estimated roughly 19'20 school-age children would come from the combined development; he noted demographic trends and the property's smaller unit sizes as reasons for a lower school yield than older multifamily complexes. Civil engineers and the applicant also told the board that, per AECOM's sewer-capacity work for the town, the project's expected flows are already incorporated into the town's planning analyses and that the development would represent a minority share of available capacity.

Public commenters voiced both support and concerns. Michael Ossing, president of the Marlborough City Council, praised Post Road Residential's track record in Marlborough and encouraged Westborough to seek MassWorks and other grants to leverage infrastructure improvements. Local resident Thomas Johnston said the project looked well designed but called the developer's estimate of ~20 schoolchildren "disingenuous," warned of larger school and utility impacts, and urged the board to scrutinize fiscal and resource consequences.

The board acknowledged outstanding technical items and the need for independent peer review. Because the third-party engineering review was not yet complete, the board voted to continue the Post Road hearing to Dec. 16, 2025 (roll-call recorded 4'0 yes, Hazel absent). The application will return with peer-review comments, refined engineering plans, and responses to questions about traffic operations, school impacts, parking demand, stormwater, and MassDOT access approvals.

Next procedural steps: the application will be revised through the peer-review process, the Planning Board will solicit further information and public comment at the continued hearing, and final decisions on special permits, waivers and site-plan approvals will follow future deliberations.