1. Call to Order

Chairman Raymond Shaw called the meeting to order at 7:10 P.M at the Town Hall Auditorium. Present at the meeting were Vice Chairman James Carter, Clerk Michael Sitar, Chief Al Donovan, Chief Tom Ryan, Will Lambert, George Donovan, Director of Community Development Steve Sadwick and Recording Secretary Dawn Cathcart. Doug Sears and Steve Deackoff were not present.

Mr. Shaw introduced the new members of the committee. They are Will Lambert, George Donovan and new Police Chief Al Donovan.

2. Approval of Minutes – 12/9/03

MOTION - Mr. Sitar made a motion to approve the minutes of December 9, 2003. The motion was seconded by Chief Ryan and unanimously voted 4-0. Mr. Lambert, Mr. Donovan and Chief Donovan voted not present.

3. Traffic Peer Review Part 1 – Paul Hajec

Paul Hajec appeared for a traffic peer review. Mr. Hajec stated that this is a preliminary review. However, his finding will probably not change, but he will wait until more information comes in before making a final determination to be ethically, legally, and professionally responsible. Mr. Hajec stated that there are 4 options in the I93 corridor study presented to the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission (MVPC) and one additional alternative from TEC for Mills. Mr. Hajec stated that he looked at the problem including limits of work, existing conditions and land use constraints. Mr. Hajec stated that he met with Mr. Sadwick and Mr. DeAngelo from TEC twice. The documents provided to him have been reviewed including the Route I-93 Corridor Traffic Study prepared by Vanasse, Hangen, Brustlin, Inc. (VHB), Potential Employment Growth prepared by Merrimack Valley Economic Development Council, Traffic Generation and Distribution – Tewksbury Mills Development prepared by TEC, and the Lowell Junction Interchange Study prepared by VHB.

Mr. Hajec stated that there were discussions of details including compliance to standards, operational efficiency, safety, level of service, cost, and the least impact to local roadways. Mr. Hajec stated he will compare and grade each alternative and come up with a final finding.

Mr. Hajec stated that he looked at the five designs, the Trumpet, West Alternative 1, West Alternative 2, West Alternative 3, and Loop Alternative. Mr. Hajec stated that he has met or spoke with consultants, Mr. Sadwick, TEC, MVPC, NMCOG, and VHB. Mr. Hajec stated that per the design, operation, safety, cost, and local roadway impact, Alternative #5 is the best option with or without the Mills Development. Mr. Hajec stated that he will continue to look at the numbers and information provided.

Mr. Hajec stated that the I-93 corridor study was a complete report, but it was carried out to 2025. The study had indicated more development on the Perkins property than the Mills proposal. There is no interim year analysis done. This report also assumes a four lane section of Rt. 93 was in place. It would be prudent to finalize the study area with VHB. Mr. Hajec stated that all four alternatives except the trumpet have impacts to Conservation and neighborhoods. Mr. Hajec added that all four VHB designs do not meet the ramp to ramp spacing for the Federal Highway Administration requirements. Mr. Hajec stated that the waivers would be required. This has happened, but certain things need to be in place.

Mr. Hajec stated that the loop design information only looked at weekday peak hours. This will need to be expanded because the State will require this information. The State will require peak weekend, Holiday, etc. Mr. Hajec stated that he looked at redistribution of traffic on local road and the numbers that they used were conservatively high. The impact to local streets would be minimal with the mall. If there is a residential project with no interchange, all the traffic would be on local streets. Alternative #5 meets the Federal Highway Administration requirements. This promotes economical design even without the Mall.

Mr. Lambert stated that in the mid-1970s, the Planning Board proposed a service road that ran parallel to Rt. 93 from Lowell to Wilmington. They looked at putting an interchange in Andover only. Mr. Hajec stated that is not aware of this, but will check with Beverly Wood.

Chief Ryan asked when the final traffic report would be issued. Mr. Hajec stated that he is shooting for January 27, 2004.

Chief Donovan asked what the local access numbers are based on. Mr. Hajec stated that they are based on the TEC report. The report includes diversion of traffic from other malls to this mall and town to town mall traffic. They took 50% of local traffic to be put on local roads and 50% on the highway. Mr. Hajec added that he will be doing a more detailed study.

Mr. Lambert asked for an explanation of the loop concept. Mr. Hajec described the plan as he knows it. There is one interchange that is north of Weyth and Gillette.

Brian Pendleton of TEC – Mr. Pendleton explained the loop road. Mr. Lambert asked if there would be a bridge over Rt. 93 or under. Mr. Pendleton stated that there would be two bridges over Rt. 93.

Mr. Sitar asked what could change Mr. Hajec’s position. Mr. Hajec stated that for example, he could disagree with the redistribution on local roads or an unforeseen environmental impact. Mr. Hajec added that he hasn’t seen any evidence of this.

Mr. Carter asked what the history process on receiving a waiver from the Federal Highway Administration. Mr. Hajec stated that waivers would be granted if there is an operation of expanded services to an area, such as park and ride, commuter rail, etc. Mr. Hajec added that the standard distance is one mile between interchanges. The four MVPC cannot meet this.

Mr. Shaw asked if the final report would include the mitigation for local access. Mr. Hajec replied yes.

Larry Knight of 17 David Street – Mr. Knight asked if the local road mitigation has taken into account that this is an entertainment complex. Mr. Hajec stated that the trip generation is based on SF. The equation is in the ITE traffic manual, which is where TEC based their recommendation on. Mr. Knight asked if parking spaces were part of the study. Mr. Hajec replied that they were not part of the study. Mr. Knight stated that Mills has stated that their mall is a destination, which means customers will have a longer stay and if they have a longer stay then there will be backups in traffic. Mr. Hajec stated that he wasn’t sure about that. Mr. Knight stated that Mills has not said that there is enough parking and they encourage people to stay. Mr. Hajec stated that if the lot is full, then backup will happen. The Tewksbury Zoning Bylaw covers the number of parking spaces needed based on square footage of the building. Mr. Knight stated that he cuts through Billerica to get to the Burlington Mall and he is sure that the same would happen in reverse. Mr. Hajec stated that the distribution of the trips from Billerica is included.

David Silva of 1223 Shawsheen Street – Mr. Silva stated that he has a letter from the Metro Area Planning Commission dated August 31, 2000 stating that the Mills project draws from a 40 and 100 mile radius. Mr. Silva asked if this study covers 100 miles. Mr. Hajec replied that this looks at the regional impact of 12 and 30 miles. This looks at diverting traffic that is going to the Rockingham and Burlington Malls. Mr. Silva stated that he has letters from Hingham and Rockland voicing their concerns when the Mills project was going into South Weymouth.

Susan Duffy of 67 Catamount Road – Ms. Duffy asked why only the ramp is being talked about tonight. Mr. Hajec stated that he is only looking at what was given. If this proceeds, the applicant would have to provide more information for the State and he will then review it. Ms. Duffy stated that the agenda says traffic study. Mr. Shaw stated that this committee is to make a recommendation; this is not a Site Plan Review. We are looking at preliminary information that will well exceed this committee’s authority. Ms. Duffy asked if the four designs do not meet Federal regulations, will there be an added cost. Mr. Hajec replied yes, on the four MVPC options they cannot meet the one mile requirement. Waivers could be granted but the probability is low. Ms. Duffy stated that she would like to submit the STOMP traffic review.

Mr. Shaw stated that they are in receipt of a letter from the Kelly Corporation stating that they will support the 5^th Alternative and they would deed the land for the project.

Bob Kelly of 75 Mill Street – Mr. Kelly stated that the four proposals from MVPC are to alleviate congestion in Andover and Wilmington. Mr. Kelly stated that he disagrees with the conclusion that these four proposals would not fit with the Federal guidelines, not requirements. The loop alternative doesn’t connect to local roads. Mr. Kelly stated that he thought Mr. Hajec was looking at local impacts and with this he is over stepping his bounds. Mr. Kelly asked how many mall projects has he been on. Mr. Hajec stated that he has done several proposed malls such as the Shrewsbury Mall which was 750,000 SF. This was five to six years ago. Mr. Hajec added that he has worked for the proponent and as a peer reviewer. Mr. Kelly asked if the RMD expansion is taken into account in the TEC study. Mr. Hajec stated that he did the peer review for that project and the mall wasn’t part of that project. Mr. Hajec stated that the trip generation numbers are conservative on the high side. The only year for the design study was 2025. Mr. Kelly stated that the MVPC study did not include the Mills project in their traffic study. The Federal Highway wants to mitigate traffic on Rt. 93, not create more.

Sal DeRosa of 109 Jennie’s Way – Mr. DeRosa asked if traffic on the lower South Street has been looked at. Mr. Hajec stated that will come with the next report. Mr. DeRosa asked about the access road for emergency way. Mr. Hajec will look at this as the project goes forward. Mr. Shaw stated that the Public Safety Chiefs will be presenting their reports within the next few meetings.

Sean Conley of Driftwood Drive – Mr. Conley stated that he is in favor of the mall for its convenient, added taxes and job creation.

Steve Anders of Newton Ave – Mr. Anders asked what the difference of traffic would be with a 40B vs. the mall. Mr. Hajec stated that if residential went in the impact on local streets would be greater. If there is no mall then there will be no interchange. Mr. Anders stated that the pamphlet was well put together. Mr. Anders stated that the mall will not impact the school

Mary Fishlin of 120 Jennies Way – Mrs. Fishlin stated that the pamphlet is a Mills production and not the truth. Mr. Shaw stated that the fiscal review is underway with the Town’s consultant. Mrs. Fishlin stated that we should only be talking about traffic. Mrs. Fishlin stated that the Board of Selectmen meeting she asked if the new members of this committee would be up to date on this project and that’s part of the requirement to be appointed. This loop has been discussed for hours and the new members should know this. Mr. Lambert stated that he has over 14 years experience on the Planning Board and Mr. Donovan has over 20 years experience on the Planning Board. Ms. Fishlin stated that she doesn’t doubt the qualifications and doesn’t mean any disrespect.

Brian Sanford, President of the Merrimack Valley Building Trades of Construction Workers, 40 Old Ferry Road, Lowell, MA – Mr. Sanford stated that Mills Corporation has met with the Building Trades and the mall will create new jobs at about $20-$25 Million worth of work. Mills has also said that they will maintain the mall with union contractors. Currently there are 10-15% of unemployed labor workers. This will help the tax payers of Tewksbury.

Shay Noone of 60 Foster Road – Mr. Noone stated that he is 100% behind the workers. Mr. Noonan asked if Tewksbury residents will be offered incentives for jobs.

David Silva of 1223 Shawsheen Street – Mr. Silva stated that Office/Research will also provide construction jobs and after the construction there will be low paying service jobs.

4. Discussion of Board of Selectmen’s Referral of 12/16/03

MOTION - Mr. Sitar made a motion to table Item #4. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carter and unanimously voted 7-0.

5. Review of Draft Zoning Article

Attorney Bobrowski stated that this is the framework for the Zoning Bylaw. This is not endorsing anything, this is just deciding the structure of the bylaw. The technical details are yet to be decided. We are waiting on the technical review.

The first section is Type of District. There are two options, Overlay or Regular. The Overlay is super imposed on the original district. The advantage is there is a low chance of a spot zoning challenge. There can be a timeline set and if certain milestones are not met, then the overlay is dissolved and the underlying district returns.

The second section is Concept Plan. This is not in definitive form and won’t be ready for Town Meeting. The best option is a detail plan that Town Meeting can accept the concept and zoning. The second option is a concept plan that is approved by the Planning Board. With this option, a preliminary concept should be voted on at Town Meeting. After Town Meeting, the first thing Mills will have to do is develop a detailed concept plan and the Planning Board must approve. Every step must go against the plan.

Mr. Donovan asked if this replaces the Site Plan. Attorney Bobrowski stated that this will be prior to the Site Plan Review. It is something between a preliminary and definitive review. Attorney Bobrowski stated that this is the option he recommends.

The third section is Permitting Procedures. The first option is Special Permit Required. The Site Plan could take the mall as whole or individual components of the mall. With this option the plan could be approved, approved with conditions or no. The second option is a Site Plan Review. With this option the project could be approved or approved with conditions, but not no. Tewksbury has a Site Plan Special Permit, which is a Special Permit review. The third option is Development Available As of Right. Attorney Bobrowski does not recommend this. This leaves no option for the Town to say no. The committee should decide if the mall in its entirety or individual components should be addressed.

Mr. Lambert asked if out buildings would fall under the Use variance. Attorney Bobrowski stated that will be part of the main article. This is cumbersome and not supported by the courts.

The fourth section is Use Regulations. These should be closely looked at for all the uses of the mall. The three choices are As-Right, Special Permit, and Prohibited. The table format should be used.

The fifth section is Dimension Requirements. Attorney Bobrowski made a list of what Mills have proposed and some that should be proposed. This section should be put on hold until the consultant reports have been received. There are some items that are not suitable for zoning. The development agreement should handle such items as open space, contribution, wetland mitigation, infrastructure improvements, etc.

Al Fishlin of 120 Jennies Way – Mr. Fishlin asked what controls could be put in so that housing could not be put in after. Attorney Bobrowski stated that Ch 40B developers have rights by Mass Laws but they would have to go to the ZBA. Mr. Sadwick stated that 40B developers can override zoning bylaw, but they can not override state wetlands laws and regulations. Attorney Bobrowski stated that we could add to the development agreement that no housing components are allowed.

Amarendra Bagul of 99 Jennies Way – Mr. Bagul asked about the buffer zone and stated it should be 450’ from Jennies Way, which should include parking as well as buildings. Attorney Bobrowski stated that the residents should print off the draft and review every aspect. Mr. Bagul asked if the loop and access road was part of the overlay district because there are concerns with the noise from I 93. Attorney Bobrowski stated that Mills has talked about bringing in a sound consultant. Mr. Sadwick stated that the ramp fell outside of the zoning overlay, so the mitigation will fall in the development agreement. Attorney Bobrowski stated that a good case law to look at this is Rando vs. North Attleboro. Mr. Bagul asked how this development agreement becomes binding. Attorney Bobrowski stated that the contract is recorded at the Registry of Deeds and it runs with the land. The development agreement should be voted at the same time as the zoning at Town Meeting. Mr. Shaw stated that the last time a project was proposed, the development agreement was in the warrant. The subcommittee for the zoning article is meeting on Thursday at the library. Attorney Bobrowski stated that the Board of Selectmen will have jurisdiction of the development agreement. Attorney Bobrowski added that they are meeting in 5-7 days with all the consultants to get up to speed.

6. Meeting Schedule and Peer Review

Mr. Sadwick stated that he has status for peer review vs. staff with time line completion as of January 5, 2004. The Peer Review with Judy Barrett has been pushed out past January 27, 2004. The job creation information from Communities Opportunity Group has been pushed out to February. The public safety was done by staff only. The Infrastructure impacts for water and sewer is being done by CDM and the Town Manager. This should be ready by January 27, 2004. The traffic study is being done by Mr. Hajec with the preliminary report being presented tonight. The wetlands delineation is being done by Wetlands Land Management Inc. and it should be ready by January 27, 2004. The Storm Water Management is being done by Mr. Serwatka and it should be ready by January 27, 2004. The town has received information from DEP and EPA early on regarding the contamination/super fund site. A peer review needs to be setup for this. There needs to be a consultant hired for health issues. This will take place in February. The education review is no longer needed due to the removal of the housing component. The regional land use impact is being done by Communities Opportunity Group and this should be done by February.

Attorney Bobrowski stated that the community needs to understand that the consultant reports are not endorsements. It will be up to the Town to decide whether or not the mall moves forward.

Mr. Sadwick gave the following meeting dates; January 15, 2004 – Zoning Bylaw Subcommittee, Mills discussion only, 7:00 PM at the Library, January 27, 2004 – Mills Committee Study Committee, January 29, 2004 – Zoning Bylaw Subcommittee, February 3, 2004 – Mills Committee Study Committee, and February 5, 2004 – Zoning Bylaw Subcommittee.

4. Discussion of Board of Selectmen’s Referral of 12/16/03

MOTION - Mr. Sitar made a motion to put Item #4 back on the table. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carter and unanimously voted 7-0.

Mr. Shaw stated that he is in receipt of a letter from Mills sent to him by the Board of Selectmen. Mills is asking that they rescind their motion of November 26, 2002 which stated that they do not want a ramp in that part of town.

Mr. Sadwick stated that the Master Plan Committee met on December 18, 2003. They recommended that without the ramp the open space/residential option. With a ramp there are three recommendations in no particular order, Office/Research, Commercial/Retail, and Conference/Resort. The draft recommendations have been forward to the Planning Board and the public hearing is being held on January 26, 2004.

Attorney Bobrowski stated that regarding the zoning, Items 1, 2 and 3 could be approved tonight and forwarded to the Planning Board, but Items 4 & 5 should wait for consultants report.

Mr. Shaw asked if there were any recommendations from this committee that should be forwarded to the Board of Selectmen.

MOTION - Mr. Lambert made a motion to file. The motion was seconded by Chief Donovan and unanimously voted 7-0.

Susan Duffy of 37 Catamount Rd – Ms. Duffy asked what just happened. Mr. Shaw stated that the board took no action and this will be reported back to the Board of Selectmen. Ms. Duffy stated that this committee should not make any recommendations.

David Wahr of Mills Corporation – Mr. Wahr stated that he sent the letter to the Board of Selectmen requesting that they reconsider their previous action. Mr. Wahr stated that at the MVPC public hearing, the chairman made a statement that in order to consider the 5^th Alternative they needed a letter from the Board of Selectmen stating that they rescind their previous motion and would allow the 5^th Alternative to be studied.

Richard O’Neill – Attorney O’Neill stated that MVPC needs to know that the 5^th Alternative can be considered. The first alternative provides access to South St. The second alternative has access on Salem Road. The third alternative has access on Rt. 125 and the fourth alternative provides no access to the west, but is the closest to Jennies Way. The Board of Selectmen referred this request back to this committee and after Mr. Hajec’s presentation tonight, the 5^th Alternative should be studied.

Amarendra Bagul of 99 Jennies Way – Mr. Bagul asked why the town would do a favor for Mills. Mr. Shaw responded that it shouldn’t be considered a favor because there are other uses proposed for this site and they would be affected if the 5^th Alternative is done. Mr. Bagul stated that the Selectmen made a decision to send a letter so what has changed. Mr. Shaw replied that he couldn’t answer for them.

7. Reports

Mr. Shaw stated that there no reports.

8. Residents

Mary Fishlin of 120 Jennies Way – Mrs. Fishlin stated that Mills submitted their alternative late. The MVPC is reviewing the four that were submitted on time and the town should not assist Mills.

Susan Duffy of 37 Catamount Road – Ms. Duffy asked what the date of the Board of Selectmen’s memo was. Mr. Shaw replied it is dated on November 26, 2002 with the first action taken in July 2001. Ms. Duffy stated that the Board of Selectmen should not ask for a recommendation from this committee. This committee is just supposed look at the Mills project. Ms. Duffy asked how many uses are there for the existing zoning. Mr. Shaw stated that there is the Single Family, MFD, and MFD-55, which would allow Ch. 40B projects. Ms. Duffy asked when the Special Town Meeting would be scheduled. Mr. Shaw replied that is the call of the Board of Selectmen.

Bob Kelly of 75 Mill Street – Mr. Kelly stated that there is a trumpet interchange at Commerce Way in Woburn. The only connection is on the Woburn side. Reading did not want it on their side. Andover and Wilmington created a mess and they should fix it, not Tewksbury. Mr. Kelly stated that there should be a 6^th Alternative which only has an off ramp in Andover. The Perkins property does not qualify as hardship. The Jennies Way residents were told that this property would be turned into a golf course.

Dave Silva of 1223 Shawsheen Street – Mr. Silva stated that the Master Plan looked at creating a Village district, but this can not happen if the mall goes in. Attorney Bobrowski stated that he could not give a legal opinion on that, but a mall does not equal a failed local business district. Mr. Silva stated that Ms. Barrett recommended resisting a mall.

Chief Donovan stated that based on discussions tonight and the action took by this committee, he would like to reconsider the vote to file the request from Mills. Chief Donovan added that whether you are for or against the mall, the 5^th Alternative should be considered.

MOTION - Chief Donovan made a motion to reconsider the motion to file the request from Mills. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carter and unanimously voted 7-0.

MOTION - Chief Donovan made a motion to request the Board of Selectmen to consider the 5^th Alternative and provide correspondence to the MVPC of that decision. Further, that matter presented by Mr. Hajec should be forwarded as information. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lambert and unanimously voted 7-0

Mr. George Donovan stated that since the traffic consultant will being presenting his final report on January 27, 2004, perhaps the motion could wait. Mr. Donovan added that he doesn’t have a problem either way.

Donna Pelczar of 387 Trull Road – Ms. Pelczar stated that before she can make her decision on this mall, she wants hard numbers regarding wetlands, air pollution, and taxes. Ms. Pelczar asked what happens to the $3 Million if the mall is not full. Mr. Shaw stated that they will have the numbers prior to Town Meeting.

Chief Ryan asked if the property tax can change based on the business. Mr. Shaw replied it could because the town is reassessed based on value shift between Residential and Commercial. This happens every three years. All the residents in the State felt the crunch because of the shift in commercial.

Amarendra Bagul of 99 Jennies Way – Mr. Bagul asked how peer reviews are being funded. Mr. Shaw stated that Mills put money into an escrow account and the consultants are paid from that. Attorney Bobrowski stated that the consultants are paid out of the escrow account, but they work for the town.

Tom Keating of 20 Clever Lane – Mr. Keating stated that he is in favor of the mall and it will be a good to increase tax revenues.

Steve Noone of 60 Foster Road – Mr. Noone stated that Tewksbury citizens should unite and they should bring the concerns to the State Representatives.

Larry Knight of 17 David Street – Mr. Knight stated that residential taxes will not go down. Mr. Shaw stated that the first year the mall comes online there will be in increase in revenue of $3 Million. The distribution will then be based on all property in town. The consultant is looking at these real numbers.

Anthony Savoia of 97 Whittemore Street – Mr. Savoia stated that regarding minimum wage jobs, if you don’t have a job then minimum wage is fine. This will create jobs for Tewksbury teenagers. The hockey rink is also a great option.

Colleen Grecco of 130 Jennies Way – Ms. Grecco stated that she wants clarification on the $3 Million. Her husband spoke with Mr. Shaw and Mr. Shaw said there would be no tax benefit from the mall but the car insurance will go up. Attorney Bobrowski stated that this should be referred to Ms. Barrett.

Karen Flaherty of 125 Jennies Way – Ms. Flaherty stated that there is nothing in writing from Mills stating that Tewksbury will get preferential treatment for the ice rink.

Dave Marchant of 394 Shawsheen Street – Mr. Marchant stated that he is in favor of this and it will give the kids a place to go.

Mike Baker of 256 Freeport Street Dorchester, MA, Delegate for the Merrimack Valley Central Labor Council – Mr. Baker stated that he is a Wilmington resident. This project will employ 1500 construction workers for 3-5 years. This will retain shoppers in Massachusetts. Mr. Baker stated that his son plays hockey and he hears constantly about how Tewksbury doesn’t have a rink.

Attorney Rick O’Neill – Attorney O’Neill stated that this proposal contains two rinks. The applicant has met with the Tewksbury Skating Authority. They need 40 hours a week of ice time. They have also discussed the financing of the ice time. The current rate is $175-$225 per hour. Attorney O’Neill stated that they have committed to providing 40 hours a week to TSA with a reduction in cost of 40-50%. Attorney Bobrowski stated that these are issues that could be put into the development agreement.

Larry Knight of 17 David Street – Mr. Knight stated that non-residents should not be allowed to speak under this section.

Robert Dugan of 571 Kendall Road – Mr. Dugan stated that he is glad that something is going to come into the town that will give something back.

Dave Silva of 1223 Shawsheen Street – Mr. Silva stated that the start of construction is still five to seven years away.

8. New Business

Mr. Shaw stated that there is no new business.

9. Old Business

Mr. Shaw stated that he will leave this draft outline report on the table.

10. Next Meeting

Mr. Shaw stated that the next meeting will be on January 27, 2004.

11. Adjournment

MOTION - Mr. Sitar made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carter and unanimously voted 7-0.

Approved:

Michael Sitar, Clerk