Plaintiff Caddy Farms, LLC, filed its unverified Complaint on December 6, 2006, appealing the denial by Defendant Planning Board of the City of Revere of a definitive subdivision plan to create twenty-nine single-family house lots off Muzzey Street in North Revere, MA. On December 28, 2006, Defendant filed its Answer. Plaintiff filed its Motion for Summary Judgment on January 11, 2008, together with supporting memorandum, [Note 1] Statement of Material Facts, and Affidavit of Attorney Richard J. ONeil. On April 23, 2008, Defendant filed its Opposition and Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, together with supporting brief and Affidavit of Donald E. Goodwin (Superintendent of the Revere Department of Public Works) (Goodwin). [Note 2] This court held a summary judgment hearing on August 20, 2008. A decision of todays date has been issued.
In accordance with that decision it is:
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that relative to a looping water system and sewer evaluation study, the Revere Planning Board Rules and Regulations (the Rules and Regulations) were reasonably definite to provide Plaintiff adequate notice of what standards and procedures might be applied.
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendants vote on November 8, 2006, to deny Plaintiffs definitive subdivision plan was valid and not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable, or beyond the scope of authority of Defendant.
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and Defendants Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is ALLOWED.
By the court. (Sands, J.)
Deborah J. Patterson
Dated: May 1, 2009
[Note 1] A revised memorandum was filed on February 14, 2008.
[Note 2] Plaintiff made an oral motion to strike the Goodwin Affidavit at the summary judgment hearing, but gave no basis other than such affidavit was not supported by facts. However, the affidavit, was provided by the Superintendent of the DPW, a position Goodwin has held since January 2000, and this court considers Goodwin to be an expert relative to the City of Reveres water and sewer issues due to his nine years of experience as head of the DPW. The Goodwin Affidavit gave detailed rationale for the need for the water loop and sewer reports, which this court deems credible. As a result, Plaintiffs (oral) Motion to Strike Goodwins Affidavit is DENIED.