Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mci Masterplan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Designers present two illustrative plans for Concord’s MCI site; public works siting and traffic emerge as top concerns
Summary
Consultants showed two walkable mixed‑use plan variants for the former MCI site in Concord — one that accommodates a relocated public works precinct and one that converts that corner to housing — and invited public feedback; residents raised questions about DPW acreage and costs, sewage‑plant buffers, traffic and zoning next steps.
Design consultants on Thursday presented two early illustrative plans for redeveloping the former MCI prison site in Concord, telling several hundred residents the master plan could support a large mixed‑use neighborhood while noting two major uncertainties: whether the state highway project is rebuilt and whether the town’s public works (DPW) relocates to the site.
The presentation, led by Jeff Speck (Spec Dempsey) with project managers from Stantec, framed the design around walkability — ‘‘useful, safe, comfortable and interesting,’’ Speck said — and delivered two consistent frameworks: one that preserves a precinct for DPW facilities at the site’s northeast corner and another that converts that corner into additional housing if DPW stays elsewhere. Both variants include a new neighborhood green, retail clustered around a town square and stronger connections to the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail and the Asabet River.
Why it matters: The property is large enough to accommodate multiple uses but not all choices are reversible. The consultants said zoning and deed restrictions will be the primary levers to lock in the community’s priorities; the parcels are state‑owned and any future sale or developer selection will be managed by the state agency (DAM) and affected by town zoning decisions.
Speck said the master plan was designed to work with or without a major state highway reconfiguration; one of the key design breakthroughs shown to the audience is a roundabout/town‑square entry that can function under either highway outcome. He also discussed block form, building heights ranging mostly from two to four stories, options for a parking structure versus surface parking, and preservation candidates that include the warden’s house and possibly the gym.
The consultants estimated the framework could accommodate up to roughly 1,000 housing units in a compact, mixed‑use scenario but stressed the figure was illustrative rather than prescriptive. ‘‘We’re not making decisions tonight,’’ Concord Select Board Chair Wendy Vlli said in opening remarks, urging continued public feedback over the summer.
Public questions focused on three practical issues. First, several residents urged that locating DPW at MCI would free acreage elsewhere for housing and avoid a larger long‑term capital cost if DPW’s current facilities must be replaced later; one attendee cited an earlier $60 million estimate for a DPW replacement that, with escalation, could rise to ‘‘90 to 100 million’’ if delayed. Second, residents asked about odors and buffers near the wastewater treatment plant; long‑time DPW leader Alan Cathkart said the project team has identified a 300‑foot buffer zone around the plant to reduce odor and aesthetics impacts and that modern mitigation measures can substantially reduce nuisance concerns. Third, traffic and connectivity drew sustained attention: attendees described peak‑hour backups on Commonwealth Avenue and pressed the team for traffic study data; Speck said the plan aims to create a network of new streets and a roundabout to distribute flows and reduce dependence on the existing two‑street funnels.
Process and next steps: Project manager Phil Schaing (Stantec) said the team will post the presentation materials and a public survey, conduct a fiscal‑impact analysis, refine a regulating plan and draft zoning over the summer and fall, and return to the community in September with a draft framework before pursuing zoning at town meeting next year. If Concord adopts zoning consistent with the regulating plan and DAM issues an RFP, the state would use deed restrictions and the RFP to require conformity with the community’s priorities.
What remains: There were no formal votes or commitments at the meeting. Key outstanding items for the town and consultants include a fiscal analysis, detailed traffic and drainage studies, and a decision about whether DPW will relocate — a choice that will materially change the site plan and the town’s inventory of developable land. The consultants and state representatives encouraged broad public participation, especially attendance at future town‑meeting votes that would determine zoning and project constraints.
