8/28/1996 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

He' s referring back to the 164 Deed. The Judge then references " . . .That an Agreement was executed by the Selectmen and the Developer, New Seabury Corporation, pursuant to that Town Meeting vote . So since the 1995 Agree. . .Modifying Agreement has been entered into in exactly the same manner as the 1971 agreement modifying restriction which has been judiciously approved, the 1995 Agreement was properly done. The procedure was proper. It was properly entered into by only New Seabury Corporation and the Selectmen as authorized by the Town Meeting vote. The Board of Appeals has no power to overturn the Decision of a Judge in Massachusetts . And therefore, we would respectfully ask you to affirm the decision of the Building Inspector in upholding the validity of the 1995 Modification Agreement . Uh. . . there are other issues uh. . . that have been alluded to. Uh. . . it' s not to say that uh. . . the issue of . . .of the wells is very important, uh. . .we . . .we firmly agree on that . There were long discussions between the Selectmen and the Water District. Uh. . .There was one meeting at which I was present that went on for several hours . Uh. . .The Water District asked the Selectmen uh. . . to put into this Modification Agreement, I believe it was twelve different conditions . I won' t go into all of them and uh. . .nine of them were accepted by the Selectmen and put in and. . . and some were not because they might have made the entire moving of the units unfeasible. Uh. . . the New Seabury and buyer from New Seabury and any successor to New Seabury is going to have to live with those conditions. Those conditions uh. . .are valid, they are in the agreement uh. . .moving of the units and they will have to be followed by anyone, whether it' s New Seabury or someone else. Uh. . . I don' t think it ' s proper to go into all the conditions now. If the Board wishes, I can do that. I don' t think that ' s really before you today, whether that ' s a good idea or not a good idea to have. . . The Chairman: Are you talking about the uh. . . safety factors? Attorney Fox: Correct . The Chairman: Yeah. I think we've all read that . Attorney Fox: So, I . . . I 'm not going to go into that because I don' t really think that ' s before you today. It ' s simply, was the procedure that was taken—was it valid. And I think that ' s the issue that ' s before you. we firmly believe it does . Three different Town Counsel firmly believe it does . Judge Nelson said in writing that it was okay. I . . . I don' t see how we can change that . If someone ' s upset that what Town Meeting voted in 1990, this is not the appropriate form. . . I 'm not sure there is any appropriate to o. . . o. . . overturn what the Town Meeting did. That is -9- i I