Planning board reopens mural ordinance hearing after public concern, continues review to March 26

The Woburn City Planning Board reopened debate on a proposed zoning amendment to allow murals in nonresidential zoning districts and agreed to continue its consideration at the board’s March 26 meeting after extended public comment and board questions on scope and enforcement.

Planning Director Tina Cassidy and Casey Hagerty, the city’s economic development manager, told the board the proposal grew out of a 2021 rapid recovery plan by the Woburn Redevelopment Authority and would allow murals as a permitted element in commercial districts while removing them from the sign definition in most cases. Hagerty said the amendment would require a building permit when murals were not painted directly on a wall and would give the building commissioner authority to order repair or removal of murals that fall into disrepair.

Board members focused on several issues: whether murals with moving parts or illumination should be allowed; protections for historic brick facades; whether there should be a buffer where commercial walls abut residences; and how enforcement and timelines for maintenance would work. The building commissioner’s role in determining if a mural is commercial (and thus a prohibited sign) was a recurring point.

Public comment was mixed. Rosa DiTucci, a Woburn resident, told the board she was "100 and maybe after this evening 150% opposed to this proposal," citing concerns about offensive content, the difficulty of removing paint from historic brick and long‑term upkeep. Other residents, including Mary Ann Arias, said murals can enhance downtown character but questioned who would police content and maintenance. Supporters said murals can revitalize underused walls and add visual interest.

After extended discussion, the planning board reconsidered and reopened the public hearing on the amendment, then voted to continue the matter to March 26 to allow staff and the WRA to draft additional language addressing concerns (for example, excluding buildings eligible for the state register of historic places and clarifying maintenance/enforcement language). Cassidy and Hagerty said they would attempt to incorporate board edits and check with the building commissioner about enforcement mechanisms and timing.

The city council has a related public hearing set; the planning board’s recommendation will be filed with council within the statutory review period. The board encouraged residents and business owners to engage in the next meeting’s discussion.