Table of Contents
Get our free local reporting delivered straight to your inbox. No noise, no spam — just clear, independent coverage of Marblehead. Sign up for our once-a-week newsletter.
Marblehead’s Planning Board voted Monday to place a revised MBTA Communities zoning article on the May Town Meeting warrant after state housing officials identified six technical issues the town must address to achieve compliance with Section 3A of the Zoning Act.
The board’s decision followed discussion of a three-page Jan. 8 letter from the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities outlining concerns with the town’s December submission, which centers the required multifamily housing district on 32 acres of Tedesco Country Club rather than residential neighborhoods that generated opposition to a previous plan.
Planning Board member Marc J. Liebman, who has led the board’s work on MBTA zoning, characterized the state feedback as “overwhelmingly positive” despite the technical corrections required.
“What we achieved here was proof of concept that Tedesco will work, and there was no commentary on that,” Liebman said. “We have six small hurdles in response to a pretty challenging, I think, six-month process where we’ve been working on a daily basis. This is better than expected.”
The state letter identified compliance issues ranging from special permit requirements that conflict with as-of-right development standards to design guidelines that could be applied discretionarily. Housing officials warned the town must resolve these concerns before Marblehead can achieve compliance and regain eligibility for certain state funding programs.
The six technical issues include a town bylaw requiring special permits for exterior air conditioning equipment producing noise exceeding 60 decibels at 20 feet, which conflicts with Section 3A’s requirement that multifamily housing be allowed by right. The proposed district also restricts unit sizes in ways that could reduce capacity and conflict with state regulations.
You’re able to read this work free because 79 Marbleheaders make it possible through monthly and annual contributions — and we endeavor to reach 100 members by Jan. 31 to keep this journalism strong. Click here to become an Independent member.
State reviewers questioned whether 202-204 Tedesco Street has sufficient frontage and access on a public way in Marblehead. Planning and Community Development Director Brendan Callahan determined those parcels are part of the Glover 40R smart-growth district rather than the country club property. Liebman said the board could address the issue by reducing density on those parcels or slightly increasing density elsewhere in the district.
The parking provisions create discretion in the number of spaces required for visitor parking, which state officials said could be resolved by specifying a fixed requirement or exempting the district from the provision. A discrepancy between minimum lot size requirements in the dimensional standards table and the compliance model must be reconciled across all materials.
The state also cautioned that design standards must be objective and nondiscretionary, noting the proposal requires compliance with smart-growth district design standards approved in 2009. Housing officials warned against applying review criteria in ways inconsistent with state zoning law.
Liebman said some issues have straightforward solutions. He suggested exempting the MBTA district from the equipment noise requirement or establishing a fixed decibel limit that removes discretionary consideration. He said corrections could be made quickly, estimating the town could resubmit an amended package to state officials within seven to 10 days.
“Some of the things on here are quite simple,” Liebman said. “I think there’s actually just a typing error in what was submitted to them from our consultant that knocks one of these things off the list.”
The most complex issue involves design standards the board added in response to resident concerns about architectural quality. Liebman said the provisions addressing landscaping, grass strips between sidewalks and streets, tree-lined roads and front-yard plantings were “a last-minute add-on” that requires more specific language to avoid discretionary interpretation.
“We could easily solve that by removing it,” Liebman said. “Not that I think that’s the right option. I think we need to just be a little bit more specific with what we propose there, so that it’s not discretionary.”
Board member Barton Hyte said Liebman “done a terrific job” managing the technical review process. Board Chair Robert J. Schaeffner said the board supports Liebman continuing to represent the panel in negotiations with consultants and state officials.
Liebman said the board plans to meet Tuesday with Barrett Planning Group, the consultant assisting with the revised zoning map and capacity calculations, to determine the most effective path forward for addressing each concern.
The revised approach follows a turbulent year in which Marblehead first adopted, then repealed, MBTA zoning. Town Meeting voters approved an initial overlay May 6, 2025, by a vote of 951-759. Two months later, a citizen-initiated referendum overturned the bylaw 3,642-3,297, leaving Marblehead among a small group of MBTA communities out of compliance.
Marblehead is designated as an adjacent community with 8,965 existing housing units according to the 2020 census. The town must create a district with capacity for at least 897 multifamily units on a minimum of 27 acres at a gross density of at least 15 dwelling units per acre.
The board voted unanimously to place the updated MBTA zoning article on the warrant, with public information sessions expected in late March ahead of Town Meeting. The board also voted to include articles updating accessory dwelling unit regulations and potential housekeeping corrections to existing bylaws.
