Danvers Citizens Push Back On MBTA Zoning Law Compliance

DANVERS, MA — Danvers residents looking to push back on downtown development and repeal the state-imposed MBTA Community Act requirements for increased multi-family zoning are hoping town meeting members will back a warrant article to rescind last year's vote to comply with the law.

The spirit of the warrant article would direct town officials to recraft zoning changes to minimize projects that could increase density of housing downtown — the exact goal of the state law designed to grow housing stock in cities and towns in proximity to public transportation amid the threat of litigation and the withholding of millions in state grants for municipalities that did not comply.

The state Supreme Judicial Court earlier this year upheld the legality of the state law mandating the zoning changes that critics say are a state government overreach and unfunded mandate that poses a threat to the character of smaller cities and towns, and puts undo stress on resources and infrastructure.

"We understand that development and progress is needed," town meeting member Joanne Ragucci told the Select Board at Tuesday's warrant review. "But it should be to preserve the character of Danvers. It should be measured in all individual communities and not some one-size-fits-all mandate that the state is pushing."

Ragucci cited the current Maple Street project as one spurring residents to fight back against the development.

"It got out of control," she said. "Now people are seeing what can happen. And they do not like it. It's a big challenge for Danvers. But we have to work together and we have to solve this. Because it's going to ruin the downtown."

Former Select Man and town meeting member Mark Zuberek, who authored a citizens' warrant petition on the repeal, called the MBTA Communities Act "illegitimate."

"This petition is a request from the residents that the Planning Department and the Select Board revisit this law and accept something that is less imposing on the congestion, and the density, and the traffic that it is going to generate," Zuberek said.

Select Board member Dee Djoku said that while he agrees the development should be contained, he would not be in favor of falling out of compliance with a state law — especially with the potential penalty of $1 million or more in grant funding loss.

He was among three Select Board members to vote for an "unfavorable" recommendation on the article — joining Chair Daniel Bennett and member David Mills.

"A lot of the cities and towns that are fighting the state over this law are not in compliance yet," Djoku said. "They don't want to comply. But we are in compliance. We would be asking our staff to work to violate the law. I am a little uncomfortable with that. I can understand finding ways to revisit the law and go back to the legislature to advocate so that it changes because it is definitely not working for us.

"But to repeal it would be a concern."

Select Board members Maureen Bernard and Michael Bean voiced support for the petition.

"I understand that we want to comply," Bean said. "This is a good starting point, though. Because we do need to push back.

"We are going to lose what Danvers is all about."

(Scott Souza is a Patch field editor covering Beverly, Danvers, Marblehead, Peabody, Salem and Swampscott. He can be reached at Scott.Souza@Patch.com. X/Twitter: @Scott_Souza.)