As we have noted and documented with photographic evidence on this site, the current destruction of the Rocky Pond environment includes clear cutting of ancient trees, including the removal of many which have shaded rustic cabins for generations, exposing them to the sun, and their residents to intolerable conditions. I asked one of the residental activists to explain in detail the relevant implications of waivers given the developer so that new readers may have a simple and clear picture. We also asked for a brief explanation of abutter anger with the developer, the results of which are presented on the site as well. Here is what she wrote to me on July 24, 2002.

Dear Ron:

I have read some of the concerns regarding the clear cutting of ancient trees along the Boulder Way extension. People have implied that they feel the cutting has been very extensive and perhaps more than necessary.

I would like to  point out the Rules regarding subdivisions for Boylston. In particular I am referring to III 3.3.3o  of the Rules which requires the plans to show the location of trees to be retained with trunks over 3" in diameter and the identification of areas where trees are to be removed.  From the certificate of approval, March 10, 2000, (Boylston Planning Board with Cheryl Morrill , chairperson)  I quote  "Applicant has requested that the trees to be removed will be the minimum allowed by onsite conditions.  Criteria utilized will consider the damage to the tree roots from grading and removal of adjacent boulders. Trees will be retained where possible without creating a safety hazard.  The Board concurs and the requested waiver is Granted". That was one of the 14 to19 waivers (depending on how one counts them) granted to Mr. Sydow. If residents feel Mr. Sydow did not adhere to this perhaps they should write a letter to the Planning Board.

Under Findings and Conclusions the Boylston Planning Board (with Cheryl Morrill, chairperson) on March 10, 2000, 7.4 "The locus property is located in an environmentally sensitive area where the site is adjacent to and draining towards Rocky Pond.  In order to provide maximum protection to Rocky Pond, the Applicant has agreed to minimize the removal of the existing vegetation on site and to follow appropriate erosion control measures outlined on the Plans. Only the trees necessary for the construction of the roadway shall be removed unless diseased or otherwise damaged." I think the pictures on the web site speak for themselves and show the destruction of all trees in the area.

Another compelling concern is that of the abutters along Boulder Way as it goes through the neighborhood. Many residents have had to have their land surveyed and stakes inserted to show their boundaries. This is to prevent Mr. Sydow from encroaching on their property. The right of way width and the traveled width were not specifically shown on the Plans.

The abutters had asked the applicant to locate the roadway and the right of way on a plan before the subdivision was approved. They cited Section 3.2.2h of the Rules and Regulations for Subdivisions for Boylston which states "The definitive Plan shall contain the following information: location, general direction, names and present widths of streets or ways bounding, approaching, or within reasonable proximity of the subdivision, showing both roadway width, and right-of-way widths" Of course, Boulder Way is the only road leading to the subdivision. However, the Planning Board did not require the Applicant to adhere to Section 3.2.2h and ironically he didn't even have to request a waiver from 3.2.2 h. The engineers just left out that information and were not required to provide it.

Now the abutters are expending time, energy and money to resolve this problem with Mr. Sydow.

Carol Sornberger


Back to key documents, include additional evidence on waivers