Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision Surety Cliffside topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff: Cliffside Terrace work moving toward pre-construction; staff still reconciling legacy subdivision surety accounts
Summary
City staff reported progress with the new owner of Cliffside Terrace and described why no surety is yet required until building permits are pulled. The planning director also said staff is still researching outstanding surety funds and completion status for three long‑standing subdivisions on file.
The planning director told the Woburn City Planning Board that the new owner of Cliffside Terrace is coordinating with city engineering and building inspection staff on pre-construction steps but has not pulled building permits.
Because the developer has not applied for building permits, the planning director said a city surety for the subdivision is not yet required for the board’s purposes. He explained that, under the existing process, a surety tied to the planning board’s responsibilities is normally established when a developer requests building permits; until then, the developer can construct roads and utilities without that surety in place. The director said other surety instruments may exist under different city processes and that the Department of Public Works oversees street-opening surety and related protections for existing homeowners.
Staff outlined protections the city expects during construction, including requirements that a roadway reach binder grade for the lot beyond any building permit the developer seeks, and that temporary measures preserve access for existing residences when work crosses driveways. The director said the new owner is planning a pre-construction meeting with the city engineer, building commissioner and other departments to map blasting, material removal and utility upgrades.
Separately, the director reported ongoing work to reconcile three legacy subdivisions (including one on Montville Avenue near Wood Street). He said records are incomplete and staff is still determining the amounts and rightful recipients of outstanding surety funds tied to those long‑running files. “I thought I’d have it ready for tonight, but it’s just too loose-ended,” he told the board.
No formal board action was taken; staff said it will return with surety recommendations or a chronology of the legacy files when the research is complete.
