Paid Advertisement

To Advertise Call 781-585-0037

May 11th 2008

When Hilltop AA President William O'Brien appeared before the Selectmen on December 30, he was told that his club was the only entity that had yet to sign off on the easement taking. The Observer has determined that this is simply not entirely the case. Phil Tarantino, who owns Tarantino Real Estate said he has "never signed anything. I have never been directly approached by the Selectmen and have had no contact with the Town since March of last year." Tarantino's property lies closer to the Pottle Street road layout then any of the other abutters. Widening the road along with a sidewalk would place traffic within 10-12' of his front door. Also affected would be the several tenants who share the complex. The direct impact of such a widening would virtually eliminate the approximately 10 existing parking spots.

What most people don't realize, is that each of the land owners along Pottle own their portion of the road. Their ownership runs almost to the fence that separates the road from railroad property. Although Selectmen say they are only using the eminent domain process to take easements and not land, the downside to someone like Tarantino is tantamount to a taking when he loses existing parking forever. Replacement of the spaces would have to made on one or both pieces of adjacent lots he owns on either side of his building, at his own expense. "Nobody is offering to make me whole" said Tarantino.

In the case of Brad Cushing who owns a piece of property at about the midway point in the road, the Selectmen in fact are actually intending to make it a land taking. The Observer contacted Cushing at his winter residence in Florida last week and Brad said he did agree to a land taking, believing that such an action would create a public way along his frontage. The glitch is that such a taking would be subject to town meeting approval. Cushing said "It doesn't hurt me. If it had adversely affected me then it would be different. If it ends up helping the town, fine."

Tarantino and William O'Brien say it will hurt them. The Hilltop Club would loose several parking places and would loose the use of additional land set aside for expansion parking. "My concern has to be what effect this will have on the Club long term" said O'Brien. Although Selectmen chided him that all attempts to communicate with the Club have been rebuffed, The Observer learned that as recently as October 22, the Club's attorney had communicated with Town Administrator Kevin Donovan to secure easement plans showing definitive measurements. Donovan wrote back two days later that the plans were still being drawn and that Gale Engineering would send the requested plans direct to counsel. That has yet to occur. Counsel has represented the Hilltop AA for some time and any attempts by the Selectmen to deal directly with members would be inappropriate. Selectman Chairman Olly DeMacedo told the Observer that the time for negotiations have passed, but reversed himself when it was pointed out that he publicly stated otherwise to O'Brien during last months taped Selectmen's' meeting.

Selectmen also claim that the railroad has signed off, which they haven't. Although there is correspondence that indicates cooperation with the town, there is no formal signed agreement in place. A source told the Observer that a case in Bristol County was successfully litigated whereby the town in question was assessed a fee per lost parking space per day in perpetuity for an aggrieved land owner.

The point behind this matter is that it has been known since 1998 that a new road layout would be necessary for access to the 11 playing fields. Back in those days the crew behind the big desk promised that no takings would be considered. We know that is nonsense. There is also the question as to why land easements for the Hilltop and Tarantino and a land taking for Cushing? And finally…how will the town ever get frontage for the fields should they want to build a concession stand or storage facility? Easements are used to gain access over the land. You can't double dip and also use easements for frontage, it just ain't lawful. So, why not just take the land? You can't take land for recreational purposes… municipal purposes yes, but recreational municipal purposes no. The Selectmen have made these easement takings sound like an act of benevolence. "We're going to improve the road and increase your land value" they whine. If they could take it they would, but they can't, and a whole new host of problems will emerge.

Paid Advertisement