Planning Board does not support educational zone
Published on May 6th, 1998
STONEHAM, MA - Calling the move to add an educational zone to the town's bylaws a "knee-jerk reaction," the Planning Board, last Wednesday night, rejected the motion to approve article 13, on the Special Town Meeting warrant, by voting for indefinite postponement of the article which will be presented to Town Meeting voters on Thursday night.
The School Building Committee voted, last month, in favor of backing the article intended to satisfy state requirements regarding the town's $39 million school rebuilding project. According to the town's Community Development Director Steve Sadwick, in a letter to the Building Committee last month, "a letter from the Building Inspector...stating that the project meets all local zoning bylaws" is required by the state's June 1 deadline, along with volumes of other required documentation. The state's involvement in the planning process of the schools stems from its commitment to fund 63 percent of the project costs.
Sadwick advised Planning Board members on Wednesday that the creation of an educational zone, to which each school site would be changed from its current zoning, was considered by the committee as well as Town Counsel William Solomon, to be the most "comprehensive" alternative in securing the state's approval regarding zoning compliance.
The Planning Board, however, objected to the article on two levels; the first being the immediacy of the request. Board member Kevin Dolan stated that the request for Planning Board consideration for the creation of an education zone was "too comprehensive for too short a time frame," and referred to the request, with the Special Town Meeting only a week away, as "unreasonable."
Likewise, board member Frank Federico called the effort to assure satisfaction of state requirements "good-hearted," but stated that allowing so little time for the board to review such an in-depth request, "circumvents the democratic process," as well as compromises the process under which elected officials should operate.
In response to this concern, School Building Committee Chairman Daniel Hogan explained that his committee has been working hard to meet the state's requirements and deadlines so as not to jeopardize the 63 percent state reimbursement.
"We got this project in October with a June 1 deadline. Everything we've had to do has been rushed," stated Hogan.
The other issue concerning the Planning Board was the means of satisfying the state's mandate that all schools be in compliance with local zoning laws.
Federico questioned the need for creating a new zone since, under Stoneham's zoning bylaws, schools are allowed in all districts. In addition, Federico asserted that the June 1 deadline will likely still be jeopardized despite Town Meeting approval since the state Attorney General's office must subsequently approve the request.
Sadwick offered that an alternate method to reassure the state that the town's schools comply with local zoning laws would be submission of a letter from the Building Inspector based on a "reasonability test." The drawback of this method, he stated, is that it "creates the question of subjectivity" on the Building Inspector's part.
Local attorney Charles Houghton suggested that this alternative of pushing for Building Inspector approval would be an appropriate method, followed by Zoning Board of Approvals granting of necessary variances. The town could then, according to Houghton, if it deems necessary, "rewrite the bylaw in the meantime for October Town Meeting."
Hogan reiterated his concern regarding meeting the June 1 deadline for document submission. According to Hogan, once all required documents have been submitted to the state on June 1, Stoneham will be put on the state's list of projects approved for this year. Once on this lest, the town can then borrow money in anticipation of the reimbursement funds.
"I just don't want to jeopardize $40 million," stated Hogan. Article 14 on the Special Town Meeting warrant seeks to move specific school properties into the educational zone and is contingent on the passing of Article 13. The properties included in the request are the Middle School, South School, Robin Hood School, Colonial Park School, Central School, and Stoneham High School.
The Board voted for indefinite postponement of both articles. In explaining his decision, Federico stated "I'm not comfortable saying I'm in favor (of the article to create an educational zone) since there appears to be an alternative," that will likely not jeopardize the state's reimbursement of the project.
An indefinite postponement vote means that an unfavorable recommendation is given and that the article will not be able to reappear on Town Meeting warrant for two years.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!