Mayor Michael P. Concannon and Planning Director John Cashel presented the City Council on May 7 with a draft approach to comply with the MBTA Communities law, explaining the state requires MBTA communities to adopt a zone where non–age-restricted multifamily housing could be built within a half‑mile of transit. "This is state law that we're dealing with," Concannon said, and the city's assigned target for the Anderson Regional Transportation Center area is 2,631 apartment units.
The presentation framed the obligation as creating an overlay zone, not an instruction to build. "Our community is not required to build any units. We're simply required to create a zone in which these units could be built," Concannon said. Planning Director John Cashel told the council he and consultants had prepared maps, a draft ordinance template and guidelines, and that Horsley Witten and the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities had supported the work. Cashel said density calculations were underway and that the team was preparing more detailed findings for the council and public.
Why it matters: the MBTA Communities law assigns numerical housing targets to municipalities with qualifying transit facilities and conditions those communities' future access to some state funding. Councilors pressed the administration on several high‑impact questions: how the overlay would affect school enrollments, police, fire and other infrastructure; whether commercial tax base could be eroded by redevelopment; what the city could require about affordability; and whether the state would fund resulting capital needs.
Councilors and staff debated specifics. Cashel said the draft identifies roughly a 55‑acre area around Anderson Station as a starting point and explained that only lots entirely within the half‑mile radius count toward the required acreage. On affordability he said statutory language does not itself set affordability levels, and that some protections from earlier state zoning programs (for example, the city's 40R-like district standards) can preserve local affordable percentages; he noted that, under some templates, 20–25% affordability is a common local target but that higher percentages require Executive Office approval.
Several councilors urged caution. "When they hear the number 2,631, that is potentially 2,631 four‑bedroom units, which, if you do the math, equals about 10,000 people," Councilor Boone said, arguing the scale could strain schools and city services. Other members asked the administration to compile a list of state funding streams the city risks losing if it does not comply.
Public comment split between concern and support. Resident Cynthia Tachi asked whether the overlay could be placed on city‑owned land; Cashel said public property and protected open space generally cannot be counted unless the owning state agency or authority agrees. Christopher Sylvia, a local resident, expressed support for building apartments and said denser, walkable neighborhoods could provide long‑term benefit: "This is the future of Woburn," he said. Several residents urged the council to concentrate density east of the tracks and to explore options such as first‑floor retail and mixed ownership types rather than uniform high‑rise rental blocks.
Next steps: after hearing public comment, the council voted to refer the matter to the Committee on Liaison to hold further public meetings and continue deliberations. Cashel said the team expected more precise density calculations within weeks and will publish the maps and draft ordinance language on the planning board website and make hard copies available at the planning board office.
What to watch: the committee on liaison will be the next formal venue for the draft overlay maps and ordinance language. The council noted Woburn's statutory deadline for compliance and members asked the administration to explore whether an extension or additional negotiations with state agencies are feasible.