and bend over backwards for developer Robert Van Dyke in his efforts to build his proposed Planned Rural Development behind Shamrock Realty on Route #10. In April of 2008, the board granted him a conditional approval despite him not having the necessary permits or a joint use agreement from PSNH needed to comply with the town's regulations. They also ordered him to perform the required erosion controls he was to have done back in December of 2007. As most of us know, he didn't do what was asked and as a result, Route #10 and Shamrock Realty's parking lot flooded out as silt and debris from the site clogged the storm drains on the highway and across the street; which also resulted in flooding a section of an abutters property. The State had to come out and clean out the drains and yet despite not adhearing to the Planning Board's directions, no C&D order was issued and no fines were levied against Van Dyke. Why not?
In October of 2008, under the guise of finally doing the required erosion control work, Van Dyke's crew excated more area and removed more vegetation; yet they still did not perform the work they had been asked to do in the manner they had agreed; seeding exposed areas, covering the seed with straw and putting down erosion control blankets, year round, to control run off and erosion was still visible on the site as water continued to flow towards the highway until the snow fell.
He later asked and was granted a meeting to discuss the 27 conditions he was given by the board and was asked if he understood each one and if he agreed to meet them all, he replied he did; and yet at the meeting on February 2nd, he asked for waivers on several conditions he had agreed upon earlier, claiming once again that performing the necessary work and meeting the town's regulations would put undue hardship on him finacially. If he doesn't have the money to build this condo development by following the conditions set forth by the board under the Town's regulations, should the board keep waiving things until he's satified? Shouldn't the board be working in the best interest of the town and follow the rules and regulations required by the ZBA and enforce them to the letter and stop this pandering? At Monday night's meeting, despite him still not meeting the requirements he agreed to do and still not having a joint use agreement from PSNH and once again, changing his plans to get around the requirments they had set and asking for several conditions to be waived, the board, led by Margaret Sharra once again, ignored the regulations and continued to bend over backwards for him. The board's conduct is becoming unethical and this process has turned into a charade. It's quite obvious that their lack of conviction to follow the rules and regulations set forth in the Planned Rural Development section of the Town of Winchester's Zoning Board Ordinances is being driven by special interests. How else to explain the favoritism, leniency and overall pandering this board has given this applicant? How much more money will have to be spent out of the town's legal budget to defend their actions in a court of law?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Having dealt with him personally (we had to hire a lawyer to deal with him), I can say from experience that he is a shyster. Anyone that keeps a lawyer hired full time to do his bidding is someone you should be very leary of!
What is wrong with this board ? Who's the selectman's representative on this board? Why hasn't Leroy issued a cease and desist order and shut this guy down. He's made a mess out there on route 119 for years and now he's tearing up more of our mountainess property like he did in Jaffrey. no wonder those abutters are taking the town to court, I would too.
Oops! Leroy has left town and Margaret Sharra has taken his place. It must be nice to have friends in high places and be able to set your own laws. Perhaps this is why we will have to exercise our voting option and get Margaret off any electede board and out of the town office. New selectmen should be able to do the job.
Last year, on the behalf of 130 petitioned neighbors of the racetracks, I attended every Selectman's meeting in regards to the noise from the racetracks. The selectmen sent me to the Planning Board to meet with them. At the Planning Board meeting, I stood to speak and before I could present my facts, I was met with a loud and angry threatening attack by Ms. Sharra, "you're on my turf now Mr. Davis"!, she stated. She may not like me personally; but is this any way to greet someone from the community who comes before the board?
If the town's voters are so kind to elect me to represent them for the position of selectman, this and many other things I will be reminding Ms. Sharra of. As a public official her conduct was and remains disgraceful. She alone has caused more problems for the residents of Winchester as she panders to the some people in town and outsiders. If the Superior Court judge doesn't remove her, in the upcoming court case against the board, I will make it my duty to strongly suggest to the other selectmen, to have her removed for her conduct, from all of her duties for the town of Winchester.
We can not allow any elected official to put themselves above others and our own town's rules and regulation for any reason.
Post a Comment