Planning Board – April 7th, 2025: ​Planning Board Votes to Exclude MBTA Communities Overlay District from Annual Town Meeting Warrant

The Planning Board convened on Monday, April 7th to address board reorganization, review special permits and site plans, and consider zoning bylaw amendments related to FEMA Floodplain Compliance and potential endorsement of the MBTA Communities Overlay District for Town Meeting.

Chair Stephen Johnson called the board to order last Monday night, April 7th. All board members were present.

Karen DiFruscia was welcomed to the board. Johnson extended a thank you to Nick Lizotte, now former member, for his time on the board and his service.

Approval of minutes from March 10, 2025 was pushed for next meeting.

Committee Reports

Planning Board member Vinny Fratalia provided an update on the Community Preservation Committee (CPC), noting that the committee is scheduled to meet in June and again in September to coordinate any project submissions ahead of Town Meeting. He also shared that funds are being set aside for consultant work related to the town’s Open Space and Recreation Plan—an important step in future planning efforts.

Fratalia welcomed Nancy Reed as the CPC’s newest member, noting her addition to the committee as a positive development for its ongoing work.

Additionally, Community and Economic Development Planner Alexandra Lowder highlighted several opportunities for community involvement, pointing out current vacancies on key town committees. Open positions include seats on the Economic Development Committee, as well as a Representative role for the Northern Middlesex Council of Governments (NMCOG), and a position on the Community Preservation Committee. Residents interested in contributing to the town’s development efforts are encouraged to apply.

Town Planner’s Report

In her Town Planner’s report, Alexandra Lowder previewed the Planning Board’s upcoming meeting, noting it will include continued and previously opened hearings, along with a review of a Land Disturbance Permit for 283 Pleasant Street. She also gave mention to the Wilmington-Tewksbury Chamber of Commerce Taste of the Town event, which was held this last Tuesday.

Lowder also spotlighted several community happenings. The Greater Lowell YMCA will be hosting a recreation camp during school vacation week, running from April 21st to April 25th. The camp will be held at the Tewksbury Recreation Center on Livingston Street and is designed to provide local children with engaging and active programming during their break. Learn more here.

The town’s Annual Cleanup Day, organized by the Tewksbury Beautification Committee, is scheduled for Saturday, April 26th from 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM. Volunteers are invited to pick up cleanup supplies and drop off collected litter at the Department of Public Works, located at 999 Whipple Road. Families, corporate groups, and residents in need of community service hours—particularly high school seniors—are encouraged to participate. Those interested can contact the organizers at clean.up.tewksbury@gmail.com.

Lowder also announced a special historical commemoration marking the 250th anniversary of the American Revolutionary War. A reenactment event will take place on Sunday, May 4th at 1:30 PM on the Town Common. Attendees will retrace the historic line of march to the Tewksbury Public Library, where light refreshments will be served. The Tewksbury Historical Society is involved in organizing the event.

The Annual Town Meeting is set to take place on Monday, May 5th at 7:30 PM, with a continuation scheduled for Wednesday, May 7th at the same time. Special Town Meetings will precede both sessions at 7:00 PM. All meetings will be held at Tewksbury Memorial High School, located at 320 Pleasant Street. The Finance Committee will also be hosting a public hearing on Monday, April 28th to review all articles on the Town Meeting warrant.

Rounding out her report, Lowder congratulated Advisors Living Real Estate, a Tewksbury-based company recently featured in The Boston Globe’s list of New England’s 50 fastest-growing companies. Ranked number 24, the company has over 221 employees throughout the region and is headquartered locally at 725 Main Street. Senior Vice President Michelle Oates and her team have actively contributed to the Tewksbury community, including co-hosting educational events on wetland protection bylaws and accessory dwelling unit (ADU) regulations with the Town.

Lowder extended her congratulations to the Advisors Living team for their achievements and ongoing community involvement.

Board Reorganization

The board moved forward with nominations for reorganization.

James Duffy nominated Stephen Johnson for the role of Chair, with a second from Jonathan Ciampa. Duffy also put forward Vinny Fratalia for Vice Chair, supported by a second from Karen DiFruscia. In turn, Ciampa nominated DiFruscia for the position of Town Clerk, with Fratalia offering the second.

All nominations were approved by unanimous vote, solidifying the board’s leadership team for the coming year.

100 Florida Road: Family Suite Special Permit

John Hunt and Thomas Craig appeared before the board to present a proposal for a Family Suite addition to Craig’s longtime residence. Hunt explained, “We’re going to take 175 [sq feet] from the existing house to make a total of 831 square feet.”

Fratalia confirmed that the proposed suite would be connected to the town sewer system. The board voiced unanimous support for the project, and the motion to approve the permit passed without opposition.

485 Main Street: Site Plan Review

The petitioner requested a continuance, and the hearing was rescheduled to the Planning Board’s April 28th meeting at 7:05 PM.

611 Main Street: Eco Auto on behalf of Sterling Capital, LLC: Modification to Site Plan Approval

Al Salas, CEO of Eco Auto, and Justin LeClair of McCarty Engineering appeared before the board to present proposed revisions to their site plan, including changes to the building footprint and parking configuration.

LeClair explained that the team plans to reduce the building size to allow for additional parking spaces. “Originally, there was forty-six on this site. We’re now up to fifty-three,” he noted. The changes will also allow for improved placement of handicap-accessible spaces and relocation of electric vehicle charging stations, keeping them away from neighboring homes.

The team conducted a site walk with a conservation agent from the Conservation Commission to ensure that adjustments would result in a “net zero” impact on buffer green space. The project is scheduled to go before the Conservation Commission next week.

Ciampa confirmed there were no changes to the height or elevation of the buildings. Fratalia inquired about outstanding comments from the town’s traffic consultant, TEC. LeClair responded that as part of the Parcel 623 reconfiguration, they are moving curbs and adding landscape islands, increasing paved surface by approximately 700 square feet. He added that the revised layout closely resembles a previously approved plan and no major issues with TEC are anticipated.

Fratalia also addressed the current use of the Rogers Street side of the property, noting that while it is intended for future parking, “it’s not a parking lot yet,” and expressed concern over cars being parked on grass. Salas assured the board that this has already been corrected, and that only registered, plated vehicles are now being parked in that area.

Additionally, Salas mentioned that the existing house on the site is approximately 120 years old and will require asbestos mitigation prior to demolition—an issue that impacts both the timeline and project budget.

Duffy confirmed there was no change to the elevation of the solar canopy.

DiFruscia had no questions.

Johnson opened up to questions from the audience. Several residents from Rogers Street voiced concerns about delivery truck traffic affecting their neighborhood.

Andrea Chase, a resident of Rogers Street, asked whether a plan was in place to manage vehicle deliveries, noting that trucks are currently stopping directly in front of her home. In response, Salas explained that Eco Auto is working to widen the entrances to the building to allow delivery trucks to enter the facility for unloading. While he acknowledged that the issue may not be entirely eliminated, he said the team is adjusting curb sizes and adding signage to better facilitate on-site deliveries. He also clarified that using Route 38 as an access point was not a viable option due to safety and traffic flow concerns.

Chair Johnson expressed strong concerns in response. “If it’s a two-car trailer, then there’s absolutely no reason why it’s not being brought into your site right now,” he said. Johnson emphasized that unloading vehicles on Rogers Street is unacceptable, especially considering the site has been designed to accommodate large emergency vehicles. “If fire engines can make the turn, delivery drivers should be able to as well,” he added, calling out the safety risks of trucks parked on the wrong side of Rogers Street during deliveries.

Fratalia echoed these concerns, noting that Rogers Street is narrow and that delivery trucks parked on the road pose a clear hazard to drivers and pedestrians.

Another resident, Mike Ackerly, also of Rogers Street, addressed the board and Eco Auto directly. He shared concerns for the safety of his children, citing a recent snowstorm during which he witnessed delivery trucks operating unsafely in the neighborhood.

In light of the ongoing concerns—particularly regarding site logistics, safety, and outstanding feedback from TEC—the board voted to continue the hearing to its next meeting. Eco Auto is expected to return with updates addressing both board and community feedback.

Zoning Bylaw Amendments: Annual Town Meeting

FEMA Floodplain Compliance

Lowder introduced the first article explaining that the proposed amendment seeks to revise Sections 24.2 and 5.5 of the zoning bylaw. These updates are necessary to incorporate FEMA’s newly issued flood maps, which will take effect in June 2025.

“FEMA began its flood map study back in 2021,” Lowder noted, “and we received the preliminary maps in 2023. Now that FEMA plans to finalize them this June, we are required to formally integrate these changes into our zoning bylaws.”

Lowder emphasized that failure to adopt the updated maps by the deadline would jeopardize Tewksbury’s participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)—a vital resource for homeowners in designated flood-prone areas. The last time the town adopted updated FEMA maps was in 2016.

Board member Ciampa confirmed during the discussion that no new properties will be added to the floodplain as a result of this amendment; the update simply reflects changes in FEMA’s mapping and language standards.

Motion for adoption of the article and the Floodplain Map was passed unanimously.

MBTA Communities Article brought back to Town Meeting

The second set of articles—concerning the MBTA Communities Overlay District—includes both a language change and a proposed zoning map change. Unlike the floodplain article, which the Planning Board recommended as a matter of routine, this article requires a formal positive endorsement from the Planning Board in order to be added to the Town Meeting warrant. Under Mass General Law Chapter 40A, Section 5, a zoning bylaw that has been previously rejected by Town Meeting cannot be reconsidered within two years unless the Planning Board includes it in its final report with a recommendation.

DiFruscia, who initially declined to comment, later voiced firm opposition to reconsidering the issue at Town Meeting. She referenced the outcome of the previous vote by residents, stating the voters already made their decision, and the board shouldn’t “make them have to come back out and reiterate exactly what they said before.” DiFruscia criticized the legislation as a “cookie-cutter” law, arguing it lacks sensitivity to individual community needs, and pushed back against what she described as “scare tactics” related to potential funding consequences for non-compliance.

Fratalia echoed those sentiments, pointing to significant community opposition. “There’s been a lot of discussion through social media and so forth about this issue. I think it’s very well addressed by the residents prior to this, and I think we should follow what the residents say.”

Ciampa addressed, “it is now considered an unfunded mandate, and the towns have the ability to seek to be reimbursed for the impact of any state legislation that impacts the community.” He also added he believed the state to be disingenuous, and criticized the state for not addressing their plans for the state hospital.

Johnson corrected Ciampa, stating that while the state auditor has suggested the law may constitute an unfunded mandate, no such determination has been made legally. “The only place it can be found to be an unfunded mandate is in the courts,” he said. “Each town must seek exemption individually unless a blanket ruling is made.” Johnson added that the legal case has been consolidated and is still pending.

In support of sending the article to Town Meeting, Duffy cautioned against non-compliance, reminding the board that the town faces a compliance deadline in July. He argued that Tewksbury would be in a stronger legal position if it complies with the law during the process. “I believe non-compliance is going to cost the town people,” he said. Duffy also clarified that the Planning Board does not have final authority over the article — it can only vote on whether or not to send it to Town Meeting for consideration.

Johnson reiterated that he did not think it was a good law and joked, “it is like it was written by the summer interns at the State House.” Despite acknowledging that he did not believe the law was well-crafted, Johnson made it clear that as elected officials, it was their responsibility to uphold the laws of the Commonwealth, including the MBTA Communities Act, which has been deemed constitutional.

“There are consequences to this that we didn’t fully grasp the last time this was discussed,” Johnson noted. He highlighted that millions of dollars in discretionary funding—beyond the previously mentioned grants—are now at risk, making the situation much more critical than it was during the last Town Meeting.

“To not at least give this back to the voters in the entire town and have that decision made only here … is really no better than what we’ve heard the people complaining about our state representatives doing – not listening to what the town wants,” Johnson said, emphasizing the importance of letting Town Meeting weigh in on such a consequential issue. He added, “If they have to say it clearly twice, I really don’t think that’s an onerous ask,” pointing out that Town Meeting members would already be attending to vote on other articles.

Finally, he stressed that it was not the Select Board’s role, but rather that of the legislative body (the Town Meeting), to make the final decision, especially given the financial stakes involved. If the town ultimately chose not to comply with the law at Town Meeting, Johnson expressed his full support for the decision and pledged to fight for a smooth process moving forward.

In an effort to address concerns about the law’s impact, Johnson recommended an amendment to the article. The proposed amendment would state:

“This bylaw shall not take effect until both the current consolidated civil actions before the superior court, including any and all appeals, is resolved and a final ruling has been issued, determining if the MBTA Communities Act as an act is an unfunded mandate under Massachusetts law, and in the event the court rules that the MBTA Communities Act is an unfunded mandate, shall not take effect unless and until the Massachusetts legislature appropriates to the town of Tewksbury the funding necessary to implement the provisions of the MBT communities act in accordance with the ruling of the court and or letting any legal action initiated by the town of Tewksbury.”

This amendment would essentially pause the MBTA Communities Act implementation until legal challenges are resolved, allowing Tewksbury to remain in compliance with the law while protecting the town from potential financial burdens.

DiFruscia queried what specific funding the town could lose if it failed to comply. Johnson confirmed Tewksbury could lose up to 7 to 10 million in discretionary funding.

Ciampa voiced frustration with what he described as state-level hypocrisy, pointing to the Massachusetts government’s recent legal challenges against the current federal government administration for threatening funding over policy disagreements. Ciampa emphasized that was exactly what the state, the governor, and the attorney general are doing to towns like Tewksbury with the MBTA Act. He referenced bad policies enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic, asserting that some have damages still being realized.

“I’d rather take a stand and say this is a bad law,” Ciampa added, advocating for a collaborative solution that supports both Tewksbury and the state’s housing goals. However, he praised Johnson’s proposed amendment to the article as “excellent” and said he appreciated its inclusion should the article move forward.

Duffy echoed concerns about the potential financial fallout of non-compliance. “It’s a lot of responsibility to make that decision for every taxpayer in town,” he cautioned, reiterating his position that such a significant matter should be decided by Town Meeting, not solely by the board.

Ultimately, Fratalia made a motion not to adopt the article and not to send it to Town Meeting. The motion was seconded by Ciampa and supported by DiFruscia. Johnson and Duffy opposed the motion.

The article failed to advance to Town Meeting by a 3-2 vote, halting local action on the MBTA Communities Act—at least for now.

Correspondence

With no additional correspondence or business, the Planning Board adjourned the meeting. The next Planning Board meeting is scheduled for Monday, April 28th.