Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board tables 150,000‑sq‑ft South River Road site plan after debate over tenant conditions
Summary
Developers of a proposed 150,000 sq ft speculative building at 308 South River Road presented design changes — including larger setbacks, added landscaping and reduced loading bays — but the board and applicant disagreed on how tenant uses should be controlled. The board voted to table the application to Jan. 12 for staff‑applicant drafting of conditions.
The Bedford Planning Board on Dec. 1 continued review of a site plan for a 150,000‑square‑foot commercial building at 308 South River Road, asking the applicant to work with staff on clearer conditions before the board takes a final vote.
Dante Angelucci, who said he heads development and construction for Lincoln Property Company, told the board the project team had responded to prior comments by moving the building away from South River Road, adding landscaping, reducing the detention pond and installing subsurface storm treatment. "All these changes, just to give you a sense, was about $350,000," Angelucci said, citing a contractor estimate for the adjustments.
The revised plan reduces loading bays from 36 to 33 and parking from about 275 to 262 spaces, and the team showed renderings and material samples intended to break up the long façade and shield loading docks. Architect Brandon Conforti described facade articulation and form liner panels and said the design adds clerestory windows and future knockouts for glazing.
Discussion centered on what the transcript identifies as Condition 15, a provision that would require board review when the building’s eventual tenant is known. Angelucci said the structure is being built on a speculative basis "and we've designed the building for the worst condition" so requiring board review for every tenant would make financing and leasing difficult. "If I go in with something that says that I have to go back with every single tenant to get it approved, ... they're going to know that that takes ... nothing happens in 4 weeks," he said.
Planning staff and several board members countered that the town needs clear controls so that tenant operations that produce odors, emissions, excessive traffic or hazardous materials can be assessed before they start. Staff noted the performance‑zone standards vary by industrial use and that some changes of use typically require a follow‑up site plan review.
Board members and the applicant agreed to draft clearer, narrower condition language that would preserve the town’s ability to enforce performance standards while avoiding unduly burdensome tenant‑by‑tenant approvals. The board then voted to table the matter to the Jan. 12, 2026 meeting so the applicant can work with staff and the town attorney on tightened condition language. Mr. Bandasian made the motion to table; Ms. Malcolm seconded and the motion carried by voice vote.
Next steps: the applicant will meet with staff to draft revised conditions addressing the board’s concerns about change of use, nuisance controls (for example, sound, odors and hazardous storage), and any DOT‑required off‑site improvements; the board will take up the application on Jan. 12, 2026.
