MONTAGUE CENTER — A temporary restraining order has been filed to halt construction on North Street as part of the Montague Center Complete Streets project.
The civil complaint, which was filed in Franklin County Superior Court by Deborah Snow and Barbara White of North Street, argues that residents were not given notice by the town regarding proposed plans for “blocking and discontinuing” a portion of the street in front of their home as part of the revised designs from Bowman Engineering.
On Aug. 24, the plaintiffs’ attorney, John McNally, put forth an ex parte motion requesting a temporary restraining order against the town and seeking to halt any work that would occur in front of the North Street property.
The motion argues that the plaintiffs are “likely to succeed in trial,” alleging the town did not follow state law regarding Town Meeting requirements or notice to abutters, and that there could be irreparable harm as the “entire character of their home and property” could be changed. Additionally, the argument states the plaintiffs only want Montague to follow its statutory requirement under the law, and there is “minimal harm” to the town, as designs can be changed to mitigate the impact to North Street.
The town will have an opportunity to respond to the motion during a hearing slated for Tuesday, Sept. 22, at the Franklin County Justice Center in Greenfield. Town Administrator Walter Ramsey confirmed in a statement that while staging for the project has been started by contractors, no work will be done on North Street amid the court proceedings.
“The town is committed to implementing the Montague Center Complete Streets project while respecting the authority of the court in civil proceedings,” Ramsey said. “The project is a culmination of extensive public engagement and years of planning.”
According to the project overview page on the town’s website, the redesign work looks to make roadway safety improvements in Montague Center. The listed objectives state that the goal is to slow down vehicle speeds, provide safer and more attractive crosswalks for pedestrians, formalize on-street parking and make sure all improvements meet accessibility standards, among others.
The design contested in the civil case is an updated version from the original design that was presented on Sept. 5, 2024, by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB). During a public meeting where the designs were shared, North Street was noted as having a raised grass island where it meets Main Street, and a crosswalk would be added to the island for access to the common. The complaint states there was no discussion at the time about closing, blocking or discontinuing the part of North Street that abuts the plaintiffs’ property.
More than a year later, a redesign was presented on Jan. 5, 2026.
For North Street specifically, the updated designs from Bowman Engineering are highlighted in a memo to the Selectboard from Assistant Town Administrator Chris Nolan-Zeller, stating that the intersection with Main Street will be a 90-degree single connection, improving safety for cyclists and allowing for safer turns.
As alleged in the complaint, Nolan-Zeller does note the possible need for easements for people with driveways, but that those plans are “being refined,” and that the “impacts of the project on private property owners are expected to be minimal.”
Between Jan. 5 and Jan. 12, 2026, the town sought feedback from residents about these plans. The designs were discussed at the Jan. 12 Selectboard meeting, where residents offered varied feedback.
The complaint states that the need for a Town Meeting vote to approve easements of the private driveway at the plaintiffs’ property was noted during January 2026 Selectboard meetings and in meeting materials, but no discussion of the project was held until June.
Nolan-Zeller said the project would move forward during a Selectboard meeting on June 1, followed by a Notice to Proceed being signed on July 13, awarding the $492,986 contract to Taylor Davis Landscape Co. The funding comes from a nearly $500,000 Complete Streets grant the town received in early 2025 from the state Department of Transportation.
“At no point in this process of design has the town ever given the plaintiffs written notice of any public meetings relating to the project,” the complaint states.
In August, the plaintiffs received a response from the town with answers to their questions about the project, to which the town said it did not find any legal need for “property-owner approval or right-of-entry agreement,” and relied on public meetings to get information out, rather than individual written notices. However, the town acknowledged that direct outreach “would have helped identify and address” the plaintiffs’ concerns sooner.
On the issue of holding a Town Meeting vote in relation to the project, the complaint cites Massachusetts General Law in arguing that a contract being signed with a third-party vendor amounts to a discontinuance of a town way, and no Town Meeting was held on this matter. Additionally, the complaint cites another law that at least seven days before any changes to a town or private way are made, a written notice must be left at the property owners’ “usual place of abode.”
The complaint notes that the designs require a 31-foot extension of the existing driveway, along with an extension of green space in front of the plaintiffs’ home, although the town hasn’t stated who will be responsible for maintaining the added driveway and green space, who can have access to that space, whether the home will be compliant with zoning bylaws and whether the plaintiffs have a legal right to access their home.
While a motion to reschedule the preliminary injunction hearing, which was initially planned for Sept. 8, states that the plaintiffs and the town are engaged in settlement discussions, Ramsey said the town cannot comment on the nature of the discussions.
In an interview, Snow confirmed the discussions have been occurring. She said that ultimately, the concern about this project is how it would impact the character of the home that she shares with White and the property that is located in a historic area. Snow said the hope is to be able to “continue finding a solution” to this issue.
