Westborough Planning Board pauses Post Road Residential hearing, asks developer for more data

On Jan. 6, the Westborough Planning Board continued the public hearing for the Post Road Residential project at 50 Flanders Road after hearing a developer presentation and public comment.

Brian Falk, an attorney with Myrick representing Post Road Realty LLC, told the board the applicant had received comment letters, peer‑review reports and had completed a site visit with town officials. "Since that continued public hearing, we had several comment letters come in from town committees and officials," Falk said, adding the project team would respond in a memo and return with updated plans.

Engineer Joe Paznola of Hancock Associates summarized peer‑review and additional on‑site testing related to stormwater and ground conditions. Paznola said the south site’s stormwater-management approach would not change materially, while testing on the north site required some drainage‑system adjustments. He told the board he expected a full response to the town’s peer‑review engineer by the end of the week.

Board members pressed the applicant on several technical items. One member asked whether a DPW‑identified sewer section in disrepair would prevent the project from connecting; Paznola said DPW has acknowledged portions of the line are old but has not yet set a repair timetable. He described two basic repair options: slip‑lining the existing pipe (the less expensive approach) or full replacement, and said timing and method would be determined through further DPW study.

Members also queried open space and unit design. The applicant said overall green space was "slightly above 30," estimating 30–31.5 percent, and described the north parcel courtyard as roughly 21,000 square feet and the south parcel courtyard as about 14,000 square feet. Selen, the project architect, confirmed the building would include fully accessible units and explained the project’s approach to Type A and Type B accessible units and 36‑inch clearances for counters and doorways.

Several board members, including Planning Board member Hazel Nurse, asked for renderings showing how the four‑ and five‑story massing would appear from Route 9. Tom Montelli, a Post Road representative, said the north building was set back about 180 feet from Route 9 and that the upper floors were pulled into rooflines and dormers to reduce perceived bulk. "We set the building back a very long distance from Route 9," Montelli said, describing design moves intended to avoid a canyoning effect.

The meeting included public comment from nearby residents who questioned project scale and affordability. Kelly Barry, who said she lives a short distance from the south parcel, called the project "beautiful" but said the proposed massing would be prominent on one of the town’s highest points along Route 9 and argued the development resembled luxury Marlborough properties rather than deeply affordable housing.

On affordable‑housing negotiations, Falk said Post Road had engaged the Affordable Housing Trust for roughly five months and sent a proposal in mid‑September; he added the developer and the trust had differing views on an economic‑feasibility analysis by RKG. "We identified flaws in the data used in that study," Falk said, and reported RKG acknowledged it had not performed sensitivity testing against higher construction costs. The applicant said it would submit additional data to the board and the trust.

After questions and public comment, the board agreed to continue the public hearing to Jan. 20, 2026 to allow the applicant to provide revised plans and responses to peer‑review, DPW and Affordable Housing Trust comments.

The board did not take final action on the project at the meeting; the hearing is scheduled to resume on Jan. 20.