Danvers residents press planning board to revisit zoning changes, urge master plan

The Danvers Planning Board on Aug. 12 heard about three citizens petitions presented at the town’s May 2025 town meeting asking the board and other town bodies to reconsider or study recent zoning changes tied to state MBTA-related legislation.

The petitions — according to presenters at the planning board meeting — ranged from a request to rescind the town’s MBTA-related zoning changes to a request for a study into the impacts the petitioners said residents were seeing from higher-density development. The petitions were defeated at town meeting, presenters said, and they came to the planning board to explain residents’ concerns and request follow-up.

The petitioners said their goal was to get the board’s attention on traffic, parking and density. “We talk about zoning and what do people expect from the zoning?” said Jim Moroz, a town meeting member from Precinct 3 and a lead on the petition effort. Moroz told the board he was worried that allowances such as special permits could let developments climb far above what is permitted “by right.”

Mark Zubrick and other residents who spoke described Maple Square and other recent approvals as examples they believe show the zoning regime producing projects that are “too big for the area.” Joanne Raguchi, a town meeting member from Precinct 2, summarized a vision of Danvers preserved as a 14‑square‑mile town of about 28,000 people and said some petitioners want growth “but within what Danvers is.”

Presenters said they also want a comprehensive town master plan instead of what they described as piecemeal overlay zoning for small areas such as Maple Street and High Street. “We need to define a master plan, identify the elements, and based on Mass. General Law … consider a master plan,” Zubrick said.

Board members thanked the presenters and encouraged clearer proposals if the petitioners return. Planning Board member Tim Spiddle said he welcomed citizen petitions but asked petitioners to provide more concrete proposals for the board to evaluate. Several board members suggested petitioners re-file with more specific warrant language for future town meeting consideration.

The planning board did not vote on any regulatory changes during the presentation. Board members said the board conducts an annual review of procedures and that staff and petitioners could continue the conversation about a master plan and possible next steps.