Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer’s lawyer disputes town-counsel opinion; Select Board delays decision on 79 Bridge Street hotel
Summary
Attorney Kathleen McCormick told the Select Board the 79 Bridge Street hotel special permit remains vested and urged an attorney-to-attorney discussion with town counsel; the board voted to continue the matter to its next meeting to allow counsel to confer.
The Select Board on July 6 deferred action on the long-running 79 Bridge Street hotel matter after attorneys asked for a short follow-up between counsel. The item was continued to the board’s next meeting so town counsel and the applicant’s attorney can discuss a same-day legal opinion.
Attorney Kathleen McCormick, representing 79 Bridge Street Realty LLC, told the board she received an email opinion from town counsel the afternoon of the meeting that raised the possibility of a lapse of the special permit. McCormick said she disagreed with the opinion, characterized the permit as vested, and asked the board to authorize a brief attorney-to-attorney conversation with town counsel rather than immediately scheduling a show-cause hearing.
Board members expressed frustration over the project’s long timeline — several members referenced years of delay and added that the façade preservation requirement has driven cost increases and complexity. Town counsel’s emailed opinion recommended a show-cause hearing if the permit’s vesting were unclear; McCormick urged that additional facts not yet provided might change that view.
After discussion the board voted unanimously to continue the item to its next meeting to give town counsel and the applicant’s counsel time to confer and return with clarified legal advice. Board members said they want clarity on whether the permit has lapsed and, if it has not, to explore options for moving the project forward in a way that balances preservation and feasibility.
