HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-08-13 Planning Board MinutesMinutes of the Meeting of August 13, 1984
.rman Rich called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. with Board members D. Devine
B. Mitchel present. Mr. Shaw and Mr. Wood appeared shortly thereafter.
Correspondence
Mail was reviewed.
Mr. Devine, as a representative of the Planning Board, will attend the meeting with
the Board of Public Works, Conservation Commission and Hazardous Waste Committee
to select a hydrological engineer to study the water problems and protection of the
Town of Reading water supply, especially as they relate to the development of the
Drinkwater/North Reading property and its affects on the groundwater contamination of
the Town's wellfields (which are immediately adjacent to the proposed development). - -
Criterion Road - Appeal by Planning Board Against Decision by Reading Board of
Appeals Granting of Variances
The Planning Board action to `appeal the granting of the variances to C&C Associates
Criterion Road development has prompted considerable action within Town government.
The Board of Selectmen scheduled a meeting for Monday, August 6, 1984, which had to
be cancelled due to scheduling problems with Town officials. The meeting is
rescheduled for tonight at 8:45 P.M. Chairman Rich has spoken with Mr. Goldman,
Counsel for the Planning Board in this action, and Mr. Goldman will not be able to
attend tonight's meeting due to a scheduled vacation. He has advised the Board to
listen to the proceedings, but not to agree to any condition, agreements or other
ions without advice of counsel. He asked if other counsel would be present at
t-ls meeting and, if so, this could present a problem as all parties involved should
have counsel present. If any counselor is absent, then all attorneys should withdraw
from any discussion on the matter. He also suggested that Chairman Rich inquire as
to which Board Town Counsel will be respresenting in these discussions.
Chairman Rich also informed the Board that there would be a meeting with the Finance
Committee tomorrow evening, August 14th to request funds to be appropriated to the
Planning Board to cover legal fees in appealing this case. Mr. Russell, Chairman of
the Law Committee, will make the presentation to FinCom with the Planning Board there
to answer any pertinent questions.
Chairman Rich then reported on a conversation held in the Planning Board office with
Mrs. Perkins, a resident in one of the houses on Criterion Road, owned by C&C
Associates. During this conversation, Mark Pillsbury (a reporter for the Reading
Chronicle) walked into the office. Chairman Rich then introduced him to Mrs. Perkins
and asked if there was any objections to Mr. Pillsbury sitting in on the
conversation. There was none. Attorney Charles Arthur, former Planning Board
member, later appeared and was also informed of the presence of the Chronicle
reporter. The conversation continued as to the reasons the Planning Board appealed
the Board of Appeals decision, the purview of the Planning Board in matters relative
to these houses, and the actions taken by the Building Inspector/Board of Selectmen
since appealing the decision. Chairman Rich also informed Mrs. Perkins to seek legal
counsel on their own behalf to determine what liability the builder has and what
actions can be taken against them by the proposed buyers /occupants of these houses.
m'-y,s conversation was later reported in the Chronicle, with portions taken out of
;text and misquoted. The article had an inflammatory tone as reported and Ms. Rich
took exception to the published article. The discussion that took place in tone and
manner was not as reported by Mr. Pillsbury. Ms. Rich will speak to Mr. Pillsbury as
the newspaper account was misleading and unprofessional.
Mr. Michael McCarron, Finance Committee member and an attorney, appeared before the
Board just before the Board was to adjourn to meet with the Selectmen. He inquired
as to what case the Board will be presenting to the Finance Committee to seek the
funds for legal counsel in this case. The Board reported that it is within the
purview of the Planning Board to see that the Town's development takes place in an
orderly and effective fashion. Because of these powers, the Planning Boarfd has the
legal right to contest any variance granted by the Board of Appeals. This board has
the duty to review the facts and decision in any Board of Appeals case and determine
if the Zoning By-laws of the Town are being upheldand properly -administered-. The
Planning Board has the duty to be sure that any decision granted by any Town
Board/Commission/Agency does not permit any illegal development within the confines
of the Town's boundaries. In this particular case, the Planning Board reviewed the
decision of the Board of Appeals and felt that the necessary 4 requirements for
granting a variance (under MGL Chapter 40A) were not meta The Board felt that the
decision to grant the variances was made because the houses were in place and would
therefore impose financial hardship on the builders and proposed new owners. The
major requirement that the conditions affect the land in question because of shape,
soil conditions, topography, etc. and development of these lot would impose undue
financial hardships on the developer because of these conditions was clearly not
met,in this Board's opinion. It is also this Board's opinion that just because a
situation exists de facto, the Town should not feel obligated to grant any variance
which does not legally meet all requirements. It is this case that the Planning
Board will present to the Finance Committee in seeking funds for legal counsel on
their behalf.
The Board then adjourned to meet with the Selectmen in Room 2 at Town Hall.
'(The Board appeared at the time and place appointed. Also present was the Board of
Selectmen, Town Counsel representing the Board of.Appeals, members of the Board of
Appeals, C&C Associates and their attorney, Mr. Stephen Veigas, BPW member Ms. Gail
Wood, and interested parties in the case.
The Planning Board had not been informed as to who would be present at this meeting.
Because of the absence of the Building Inspector and the Planning Board's counsel,
the meeting had to be postponed for one week until August 20, 1984 at 7:30 P.M.
The Selectmen asked that all attorneys be present as well as all interested parties
in this case.)
There being no further business before the Board, it was voted to adjourn t 9:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
John D. Wood, Clerk
