HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-08-20 Planning Board MinutesMinutes of the Planning Board Meeting of August 20, 1984.
Chairman Rich called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. in the
Planning Board office, Room 19, 52 Sanborn Street (the Community
Center) with Board members J. Wood, D. Devine, J. Shaw and B.
Mitchel present. Also present was Attorney Carl D. Goodman, of
Kamens, Harris, Donovan, Goldman and Goodman, representing the
Planning Board as their legal counsel in the matter of Reading
Zoning Board of Appeals decision for C&C Associates, Criterion
Road violations.
Criterion Road - Litigation
Discussion centered on the Criterion Road situation and the
Selectmen's meeting scheduled for 7:30 P.M. this evening.
Attorney Goodman gave the opinion, having visited the site on the
previous Saturday, that with people residing in the houses, there
are several violations of the State's building and/or sanitary
codes.
With no agenda, nor prior knowledge of topics or stated purpose
of the Selectmen's meeting, it was decided that the best course
of action would be to listen to the presentations. It was
planned to caucus if Planning Board comments were needed. It was
also decided that, unless circumstances had changed radically,
the Planning Board would not withdraw its stand challenging the
granting of the variance by the Board of Appeals; negotiations
would be entertained in this regard, however.
The Planning Board then discontinued further discussion and
continued discussion on this item with the Board of Selectmen in
their Town Hall meeting room.
Interboard Meeting - Selectmen/Planning Board/Zoning Board of
Appeals/Building Inspector re: Criterion Road
At 7:35 P.M., the Chairman of the Selectmen, Maureen T. O'Brien,
opened the selectmen's meeting with Selectmen Russell, Dustin and
Landers present. Also in attendance besides the Planning Board
was the Building Inspector with counsel, representatives of the
Board of Appeals, Town Counsel, a representative of the Board of
Public Works/Board of Survey, the developers with counsel and
resident(s) of the houses in question with counsel, as well as
members of the public and the press.
Chairman O'Brien opened the discussion asking for a complete
review of the occurence of events on Criterion Road to clarify
the situation for all.
Mr. Charles Stamatis, Building Inspector:
Mr. Len Overon, the developer and one of the principals of
C&C Associates, intended to build three (3) houses on land
that he owned at the end of Criterion Road and wanted
building permits. There were no releases, except for a
driveway permit for lot #3 signed by Assistant
Superintendent, DPW, Ted McIntyre. Mr. Stamatis issued a
building permit for lot #3.
Selectmen John Russell:
Did you know or assume that the lot had been released?
Building Inspector:
Assumed that it was legal because it had been signed.
JR: Is this the usual practice?
BI: Yes.
Building Inspector continues:
On January 6, 1984, issued building permit for lot #3;
issued a building permit for lots #1 and 2 on February 23,
Inspected #3, it looked o.k. on the lot. I did not survey
it, but I am not a surveyor.
Two foundations and houses were installed without benefit of
inspection.
Mrs. Wood, Board of Survey:
A historical note to clarify a point on lot #3 that had a
signed driveway permit, - going back 5 or 6 years, people on
Henzie Street owned two lots on Criterion Road, that part of
which was a paper street. They combined these 2 lots into 1
lot which met the zoning requirements. Therefore, this new
single lot (present lot #3) had "approval not required"
stamp.
Lots #1 and 2 were a subdivision under special permit by the
Reading Zoning Board of Appeals 9/22/83. All lots were
released together as a development package.
Building Inspector:
The proposed plan was o.k. for all required zoning distances,
- the certified plot plan, received after construction,
showed errors. Mr. Stamatis sent a letter to the developer
refusing to issue an occupancy permit. No fines were ever
assessed.
Attorney Viegas (Counsel for Mr. Overon):
The developer agrees with the presented facts and states that
errors were made in judgment without malice... practicalities
vs. legal niceties. It was then stated that Mr. Overon had
never built houses before and made some mistakes.
Mrs. Wood (Board of Survey):
9/22/83 Special Permit from Board of Appeals
11/7/83 Board of Survey subdivision hearing for 3 lots;
approval with conditions
12/7/83 Overon signed agreement - Item #1 in the agreement
was that the road would be built before construction
of the houses. Road is still not done.
2/6/84 No release - houses up
2/13/84 Performance bond received. Lots released.
The dates of occupancy are uncertain, probably sometime in June,
rent free.
Chairman O'Brien then summarized the facts and urged that common
sense prevail in this matter, that the houses not be torn down in
order to rectify the problem. This was unrealistic and would
hurt the tenants and be costly. Her implication seemed to be for
this issue to be forgotten and not let it happen again. She
questioned what reason the Planning Board had to take this to
Court. A suggestion was made to have the lawyers meet separately
and to propose a mutually agreeable settlement.
The Planning Board caucused, and, with Mr. Goodman's concurrence,
agreed that a negotiated settlement was a possibility, and that
guidelines be given and all negotiations should be conducted in
executive session. Mr. Goodman would be the spokesman.
After rejoining the Selectmen's meeting, it was agreed by all
that the three lawyers, Mr. Carl Goodman, representing the
Planning Board, Mr. Stephen Viegas, representing C&C Associates,
and Town Counsel, representing the Zoning Board of Appeals, meet
to propose a settlement that could be acceptable to all parties
involved and that after this proposed settlement had been drafted
by the lawyers, each would bring it to his client for
ratification, changes, etc.
Planning Board Members:
J. Wood, D. Devine and Chairman Rich made statements wherein
they felt laws had not been followed as they should have
been; that regulations had been established and could not
just be ignored; that this developer was not being singularly
picked on, but rather this was a statement to all developers
that the regulations of the Town of Reading must be followed,
- they could not be ignored or brushed aside; to allow this
to happen would cause a bad precedent to be established and
the Planning Board was trying to act in behalf of and for the
benefit of the entire Town of Reading.
After the conclusion of discussion with the Selectmen, et al, the
Planning Board reconvened in their office at 9:50 P.M.
Executive Session
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously, by a
roll call vote, decided to adjourn to executive session with
Attorney Carl Goodman for the purpose of discussing items of
negotiations relative to litigation between the Planning Board,
the Reading Zoning Board of Appeals re: C&C Associates, Criterion
Road, and not to reconvene again in public session.
Respectfully submitted,
John D. Wood, Clerk