By DAN TOMASELLO
LYNNFIELD — The town will not be losing access to state grants or getting sued by the commonwealth after Fall Town Meeting overwhelmingly approved a multifamily overlay zoning district that complies with the MBTA Communities law on Nov. 13.
Select Board Chair Dick Dalton gave an overview of Article 4. He recalled that former Gov. Charlie Baker signed an economic development bill into law in February 2021 that amended the Zoning Act by requiring MBTA Communities to have at least one zoning district of reasonable size in which multifamily housing is permitted as of right.
“The purpose of it was to address the housing shortage,” said Dalton. “The law clearly identifies 177 communities that are subject to this law. Lynnfield was identified as an MBTA adjacent community. That designation is based on our neighboring town, Wakefield, having MBTA service.”
Dalton said the law requires Lynnfield to approve a multifamily zoning district that is 40 acres and has the capacity for 607 units. He said the MBTA Zoning Committee selected three overlay zoning subdistricts to comply with the law. He said the panel selected MarketStreet Apartments, Michael’s Landing and Lynnfield Commons because those apartment complexes are already built. Dalton said there are 200 units at Lynnfield Commons, 180 units at MarketStreet Apartments and 68 units at Michael’s Landing.
Additionally, Dalton said four other parcels located on an existing Herb Chambers dealership property and one parcel on a Kelly Automotive dealership property are included as part of the Route 1 North subdistrict that also includes Lynnfield Commons.
“The goal of these three sites was to minimize the impact on the community and, at the same time, comply with the law,” said Dalton.
If either Kelly Automotive or Herb Chambers sells the dealership parcels, Dalton said at most 159 units could be built.
“That doesn’t mean building them,” said Dalton. “That means we have zoning for it. The auto dealerships are prime commercial property. The overlay district would only allow them to build two-and-a-half story buildings. And with a density of 15 units per acre, a conversion from prime commercial to residential wouldn’t be financially feasible.”
Dalton said the town has received a number of state grants and has several large grant applications pending, including a $2 million Safe Routes To School grant application that will “make significant improvements to the sidewalks, roads and crosswalks” by all four schools. He encouraged Fall Town Meeting to approve Article 4 to make sure the town does not lose access to state grants.
“If we adopt Article 4 this evening, it positions the town to be in compliance with state law and we don’t put our grant funds at risk,” said Dalton. “It is structured in a way that dramatically reduces the possibility of apartments ever being built. It clearly is in the town’s best interest to vote ‘Yes’ on Article 4.”
While Patrice Lane resident Patricia Campbell said the MBTA Zoning Committee did “a good job” with meeting the law’s requirements, she asked for clarification about Article 4’s language.
“People have been calling me and saying they feel like something is being hidden from us because it is difficult to understand,” said Campbell.
Zoning Board of Appeals Chair Anthony Moccia, who is an attorney and served on the MBTA Zoning Committee, said Article 4 contains legal terminology because it is a Zoning Bylaw. He said the town hired a consultant with a state grant, who worked on the language with Town Counsel Tom Mullen.
“Every word was vetted,” said Moccia.
Windsor Road George Bloom asked what would be the occupancy of the new 159 units if they get built. He also asked if the new units would be “low-income housing” and whether the town would have to subsidize any renters who live there.
“Are they contributing to the tax base?” asked Bloom.
Planning and Conservation Director Emilie Cademartori said the MBTA Communities law prohibits municipalities from placing bedroom count restrictions on an apartment complex’s units. She also noted that renters who live in apartments pay property taxes, and the town would not be subsidizing them. She said “an affordability component” was added to the bylaw in order to ensure the town’s affordable housing stock remains over the 10 percent requirement under the state’s Chapter 40B law.
“We are now at 11.5 percent, so we are exempt from the 40B statute,” said Cademartori. “If someone were to build any more multifamily units, they have to include that 10 percent of the units be affordable. That keeps us exempt from future 40B projects.”
Baldwin Lane resident Michele Cole opposed approving Article 4 because she argued it would increase school enrollment. She said the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s per pupil expenditure for Lynnfield Public Schools students is just over $18,000 per student.
“That is $2.7 million a year if we have 150 students come out of the 150 units that are supposed to be suitable for families,” said Cole.
Townsend Road resident Michael Walsh, an attorney representing a group of Rockport residents challenging the legality of the MBTA Communities law, made a motion to indefinitely postpone Article 4.
Main Street resident Maria Donovan asked what would be the consequences of postponing a vote on complying with the MBTA Communities law.
Mullen said indefinitely postponing Article 4 would result in the town not being in compliance with the MBTA Communities law by the state’s Dec. 31 deadline.
Planning Board Vice Chair Kate Flaws added that the town would “face legal action from the state” if Lynnfield does not comply with the law.
“It also means uncertainty about what happens next,” said Flaws. “I think most people are aware that Milton and the commonwealth of Massachusetts are engaged in litigation. That case has been heard, but has not yet been decided. Based on a lot of the questions that the justices asked at the trial, this isn’t going away. We are still going to have to comply with this. If we choose not to vote on this, we think the biggest risk is the state will force us to hire a special master who is probably a judge who will then come in and decide where this zoning should be.”
Flaws said the town’s plan for complying with the MBTA Communities law is “probably not going to result in any new housing.”
“I actually voted against this proposal for that reason on the MBTA Zoning Committee, but I support the passage of this because it is in the town’s best interest,” said Flaws.
Wing Road resident Bob Priestley asked if the multifamily overlay zoning district could be repealed if the Supreme Judicial Court overturns the law.
“The Supreme Judicial Court has this under advisement and we are not going to know for some time the answer to the questions that were raised,” said Mullen. “The questions that were raised were not about the merits of the statute, but rather the enforcement mechanism. No matter what happens in the Supreme Judicial Court, I am quite confident that the state has the authority to require towns in the MBTA area to adopt something like the bylaw we have here. The question is what kind of penalties the state can impose.”
Mullen also said he shares Flaws’ concern that the state would decide where a multifamily zoning district would be located in Lynnfield if Fall Town Meeting rejected Article 4.
“Who knows what that bylaw would look like if one were imposed on Lynnfield,” said Mullen. “It would not necessarily be the carefully crafted thing that is before you. It might be something that would result in the creation of a lot more housing.”
Veterans Services Officer Bruce Siegel asked Walsh why he wanted to indefinitely postpone Article 4.
Walsh said the Supreme Judicial Court will be deciding whether “the guidelines have been properly adopted.”
“The state’s guidelines and the law are still under review,” said Walsh. “I think we should let the legal process play out and see what happens.”
If the Supreme Judicial Court rules that the State Legislature did not follow the Administrative Procedures Act when developing the law’s guidelines, Mullen said lawmakers will have to go back and “promulgate” the guidelines as “regulations.”
“It is a speed bump,” said Mullen.
After ZBA member Andy Youngren called the question, Walsh’s indefinite postponement motion failed.
Locksley Road resident Patrick Curley urged Fall Town Meeting to approve Article 4.
“Lynnfield is in a remarkably unique position where we have these three parcels where it doesn’t really make a dramatic change to how life exists in Lynnfield,” said Curley. “There are economic and other reasons why these parcels are extremely unlikely to be developed into multifamily housing where they are tearing down apartment buildings or tearing down extremely profitable car dealerships to build multifamily housing.”
Curley, an attorney, said the town will be sued by the state if Lynnfield does not comply with the MBTA Communities law.
“This commonwealth has unlimited monies to battle our little town,” said Curley. “I know there are some fighters among us, but I wish it were you alone who would be paying these bills rather than all of the taxpayers. Not all towns are in this position. There are towns taking over single-family residential districts and turning them into multifamily housing because they don’t have the luxury that Lynnfield has. I would urge the citizens of Lynnfield to approve the proposed amendment and zoning change, be in compliance with the law, avoid the costs of litigation against the state and make sure we don’t potentially lose millions of dollars in grants.”
After former Town Moderator Joe Markey called the question, Fall Town Meeting overwhelmingly approved Article 4 on a voice vote.
