When it comes to integrity and gumption I suppose that we really shouldn’t expect much from the Sterling Zoning Board of Appeals (Z.B.A.) because all its members are appointed by the Select Board whose two co-conspirators, Cranson and Kilcoyne, are up the A$$ of Sterling’s BIGGEST SNAKE, Simpson, who filed an illegal Earth Removal Permit Application to mine 18,000 cubic yards of sand/sand & gravel from the property at 68 Heywood Road, zoned “Rural Residential & Farming.”
Cranson and Kilcoyne thought that they were being REALLY CUTE when they proposed 2021 Sterling Annual Town Meeting Warrant Article 48– https://www.sterling-ma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif1266/f/uploads/2021_atm_final_warrant_june_7_2021_003_0.pdf — on behalf of their local developer cronies. It passed. They inserted in that Article, by way of explanation– inaccurate, as a matter of fact– this: “Article 6, Administration and Procedures, Section 6.2, [Zoning] Board of Appeals, by deleting subsection 6.2.2.2.a.4. in its entirety, thereby deleting the current requirement to obtain a use variance from the Board of Appeals for earth removal in the RR and NR zoning districts, shown in strikethrough: …” (emphasis added). Cranson and Kilcoyne THOUGHT that they were thereby favoring Simpson and other crony developers in Town.
HOWEVER, since Cranson and Kilcoyne aren’t very bright their ploy backfired. In truth and in fact, by eliminating the Sterling Protective (Zoning) By-Law “subsection 6.2.2.2.a.4.” “use variance” provision– invoked speciously as a loophole by Sterling’s crony developers over the years — Cranson and Kilcoyne OUTRIGHT PROHIBITED “Quarrying or Mining” in ALL areas of Sterling zoned “Rural Residential & Farming,” there being NO remaining “Quarrying or Mining” expressed “use variance” provision in the now-amended Sterling Protective (Zoning) By-Laws applicable to areas zoned “Rural Residential & Farming.” The legal result is that the Select Board/Earth Removal Board has NO JURISDICTION over Simpson’s BOGUS 68 Heywood Road Earth Removal Permit Application.
As a matter of law, Simpson’s intended 68 Heywood Road mining operation remains a ZONING MATTER and Simpson knows damned well that he cannot prove “hardship” or other elements required for the issuance of a valid zoning “variance” under Mass.Gen.Laws Ch. 40A, Sec. 10.
SEE: https://malegislature.gov/laws/generallaws/parti/titlevii/chapter40a/section10
Massachusetts courts have held, always, that one cannot create his own “hardship” in order to obtain a zoning “variance” and that any “hardship” must be inherent in the property. What Simpson anticipated getting from his 68 Heywood Road property is some impermissible gravy. Being denied impermissible gravy is not a “hardship” under Massachusetts Zoning Law.
BEFORE NOW, had the Sterling Zoning Board of Appeals any integrity or interest in upholding Sterling’s Protective (Zoning) By-Laws and the Rule of Law, its members would have rebuked, publicly, the Select Board’s/Earth Removal Board’s entertaining of Simpson’s illegal 68 Heywood Road Earth Removal Permit Application. HOWEVER, from the Sterling Z.B.A. what we’ve heard so far is…CRICKETS. Let us see whether, collectively, Sterling Z.B.A. members GROW A PAIR in time for the 15 December 2021 Select Board/Earth Removal Board hearing.
J.G.
STERLING, MASSACHUSETTS, OVERWATCH 