Blakeman Gets Permit
For Sunset Hill Apartmentsw
By Sandy Vondrasek Cooch

After two and a half years, two permit applications, and two Environmental Court appeals, Kevin Blakeman of Sharon has finally received site plan approval for his proposed nine-unit apartment building on Randolph’s Sunset Hill Road.

The Randolph Development Review Board, which first denied Blakeman’s site plan in July of 2005 and turned down a revised plan one year ago in a 4-3 vote, last week unanimously approved the plan in a 6-0 vote.

The approved site plan came with a list of 14 conditions.

The DRB took up Blakeman’s application again last month, after the Sharon realtor successfully appealed the most recent denial to the Environmental Court.

In her ruling this August, E-Court Judge Meredith Wright came down solidly on Blakeman’s side, sending the case back to the DRB "for further proceedings consistent with this decision."

The DRB waited to act until getting legal advice from Atty. Peter Nowlan, and then reconsidered the application in deliberative (closed) session. No new evidence was taken, for this reconsideration.

The DRB’s new decision is a relatively brief document, compared to the two lengthy decisions released last November —one from the four DRB members who denied the permit and the other a dissenting opinion from the other three.

Those decisions had exhaustive rationales on why the signers felt that the Town Plan did, or did not, support Blakeman’s proposal.

The new decision eschews any rationale, other than to say that the DRB approves the permit, "based on the Environmental Court decision."

DRB members "felt the decision they issued followed instructions left to them by her (Judge Wright’s) decision," said Zoning Administrator Mardee Sanchez this week.

The permit notes that the project would especially affect residential properties to the east and south of Blakeman’s lot, and most of the appended conditions were designed to mitigate those impacts.

The project’s Sunset Hill neighbors regularly voiced opposition during various public hearings, arguing that the project would be out of character with the single-family homes on the road.

Reticent Response

Blakeman, who has been eager in the past to detail his complaints about permit denials by the DRB, was unusually reticent this week when asked about his response to the permit approval.

In a telephone answering machine message left at The Herald after business hours Tuesday, Blakeman said he "didn’t have much to say," about the approval, although that he was pleased to get it, at last.

Blakeman had noted, in an interview earlier on Tuesday that was interrupted by bad cell phone reception, that he is less than happy about the some of the conditions attached to the permit.

Those conditions forbid outside lighting on the east side of the building, even though there are back-door entryways to the apartments on that side. In this case, lighting is a safety issue, said Blakeman.

Also, Blakeman was limited to mowing only 20 of the 70-foot distance between the east side of the building and the Baginsky property line.

"Most everyone else mows their whole lawn—my goal is to make a very attractive property," Blakeman said.

Blakeman may be looking at other options for the property: In his phone message, he said it was too early to comment, and that he was "looking at other things, too."