WILMINGTON — After more than a year of contentious debate in the community, the Zoning Board of Appeals Wednesday night narrowly rejected a proposed detox facility on Middlesex Avenue.
For over a year, residents have been waiting for a decision on the project proposal for a 48-bed drug and alcohol detox facility at 362 Middlesex Ave.
Top concerns among residents have been location, safety and the potential for decreasing home values. Many opposed to the development say they are sensitive to the need to address the opioid epidemic, but that the location is simply not harmonious.
The public hearing officially closed at 10:15 p.m. And the board voted shortly before 11 p.m.
The project required a four-fifths approval.
Voting in favor of the project were Chairman Daniel Veerman, Anthony Barletta and Jacquelyn Santini.
Voting against were members Raymond Lepore and Thomas Siracusa.
The hearing was continued to Wednesday night for two reasons. The Zoning Board of Appeals wanted information on how other towns with similar facilities have implemented security and also requested an outline of what the project is proposed to be in writing.
Police Chief Michael Begonis said the department reached out to a number of police chiefs in communities that currently have similar facilities. Those communities included Devens, Stoughton, Haverhill, Westminster and more. Begonis said all the communities, except for Stoughton, had a good relationship with their police departments. He said all the communities had security plans, but many of the police departments did not have direct input in those plans.
“I did not have one chief that discussed neighborhood-related crime,” Begonis said. “Everyone to that question responded, ‘no.'”
Begonis made a number of recommendations, including there be security cameras, a representative from the facility meet with the town’s Substance Abuse Coalition, admission be confined to normal business hours and more.
Representatives for the project said they were willing to accommodate all the recommendations, which Veerman said were reasonable.
Barletta requested the board be informed when and if another director is chosen for the facility and that that person meet with the board. He also requested the building design look more residential, though that is not a condition for special permit approval.
Another major condition Barletta advocated for is that the operators of the detox facility to come before the board after five years to review operational conditions.
Mark Bobrowski, the attorney representing the proposed project, said they were agreeable to those conditions, but wanted specific details on the latter one.
Bobrowski also agreed to develop a security plan in conjunction with the police chief. If the security plan isn’t agreed upon, they would have to again come before the ZBA.
Ken Mayer, executive director of the program should it be approved, said they plan to use 10 percent of revenue for treatment scholarships.
Abutter and School Committee member MJ Byrnes said there was no condition the board could impose that would guarantee the safety of herself and many others who have similar concerns.
“Vote no, vote down this proposal as it is,” Byrnes said.
State Rep. Dave Robertson spoke on the impact on the Tewksbury Police Department to the Tewksbury State Hospital site and also cited safety concerns. He, too, asked the board to deny the special permit request.
“It’s our families. We’re not willing to make them a learning experience, we’re not willing to put them on the front lines to get hurt,” said another resident Kelly Richards.
Mary Giroux, a resident who lost her son to an overdose six years ago, was unique in that she expressed her support for the development. She was the sole resident to do so and the crowd did not applaud after her remarks, as was done for most other speakers.
“You’re faced with what is in front of you, what the law is, what the zoning bylaws ask you to do,” Giroux said, “and that’s all I’m asking you to do as well.”
Bobrowski submitted a letter to the ZBA dated Dec. 8 requesting accommodation under the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act and or the Fair Housing Act. Should the special permit be denied or there are unreasonable conditions required to obtain the permit, Bobrowski said they plan to take the issue to court.
Follow Kori Tuitt on Twitter @KoriTuitt.
