A local attorney and a Planning Board member came to loggerheads during the November 1 meeting of the Mattapoisett Planning Board when the issue of surety in the form of subdivision lots being held was raised for consideration.
Attorney John Mathieu, representing Christian Farland, the new owner of Brandt Point Village, spoke to the possibility of the board holding lots as surety versus cash or a bond. Before Mathieu spoke, Farland said under his corporate banner Seaport Homes the beleaguered subdivision was inspected and that the septic and drainage systems were found in excellent working order.
Farland said he began his career as a civil engineer, a profession he is continuing, and as such would have designed the same type of septic system for the subdivision. He said that a punch list of items left incomplete by the former owners could and should be completed at the end of the build-out, but those would have to wait until the spring. Farland said he hoped the board would favor the option of holding six lots while he continues construction of three others presently needing foundations before the winter freeze.
The suggestion became contentious, finding Mathieu and fellow board member Janice Robbins digging their heels into differing opinions with respect to surety.
Robbins said, “This development has a tough history and is currently in default,” referring to a $1,500,000 surety being held by a lender. “Holding lots is not surety, but cash or a bond is. “I’m not judging you,” Robbins told Farland, “… but you’ve inherited a troubled project.”
Mathieu said that while Farland is not taking over the entire subdivision but instead has purchased a number of lots, he is assuming some responsibility for incomplete sites.
On the matter of the surety, which Robbins said was in default, Mathieu stated that lots were allowable, restating, “There is a lender’s surety of $1.5 million, but you’ve done nothing about it.” He said it is the responsibility of the board to call in the cash surety. He said his client is trying to improve matters. Robbins pressed on that lots are not a form of surety, and Mathieu countered that they are a safeguard that work will be completed and, if not, the town could sell them.
Planning Board Chairman Tom Tucker spoke up, saying, “I’m shutting this down.” He said that everyone was just “spinning their wheels,” that it is a legal matter and as such town counsel would be brought in to handle the question of surety.
The majority of the board was in agreement to grant Farland permission to move ahead in securing building permits for the three lots he wants to build out now, with Robbins and fellow board member Karen Field voting in the negative.
For his part, Farland said he is willing to meet with the board on a monthly basis to keep the town apprised of all matters relating to the project. On the matter of changing the name of the development from Brandt Point Village to Seaport Homes, Tucker cautioned Farland not to call it Seaport Homes One, suspecting that public sentiment would not react positively to any implication of a potential Seaport Homes Two. Farland agreed.
In other matters, the board met with Randall Lane Solar, LLC representative Beals and Thomas Inc., and while some progress was made on moving the large commercial solar array to permitting, a sticking point on the existing roadway reemerged. Agreement was reached on the amount of the decommissioning surety ($451,000) and number of replacement trees per acre (12 trees), also agreed upon was that the project no longer needs to meet certain flood-zone regulations because the project has been reduced in size.
The matter of why and how two plans for the proposed acreage show two different road widths – one at 14 feet and one at 16 feet – was discussed for nearly 30 minutes. It was finally determined that the road from the beginning of the review process has always been shown with two widths, a reflection of the pre-existing roadway condition and that width approved by the Mattapoisett Fire Department. It was determined that written approval is still needed from the fire chief. The site plan hearing was continued until November 15, and a subdivision Approval Not Required (ANR) until December 6.
Good news for Mattapoisett’s new fire station came in the form of a unanimous Planning Board vote that the project has completed site plan review and can now apply for a building occupancy permit from the Building Department.
Questions were raised regarding the new traffic signals currently under construction on Route 6. However, that is a separate contract currently under the control of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Tucker said.
The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Planning Board is scheduled for Monday, November 15, at 7:00 pm.
Mattapoisett Planning Board
By Marilou Newell