Our membership continues at over two hundred families in Harvard. Our major effort this year was to work on a settlement with Cisco to reduce traffic projected for Harvard specifically Littleton County Road which affects all of East Harvard using that access to Route 2 and Route 2A.
There were many strategy meetings during the year between the two Selectmen, Wallace and Marinelli, and the two CPRH representatives, Piantedosi and Chandler, as well as some meetings with Cisco's representative, Ross, to negotiate. In June we met with CPRH attorney, Art Kreiger of Anderson and Kreiger to ask for assistance in pursuing our efforts and to represent us at several hearings in Boxborough. Our appeal was filed in October after Boxborough issued a permit to Cisco for Phase 2 development. Reduced traffic numbers and specifics about a gate were discussed all year, but details were not finalized until the last hours of December.
What did we accomplish? What was important was that we achieved a reduced number from the original agreement signed by the Selectmen in 1992 when they gave Cisco permission to reach 550 vehicles in the peak hours. It has been reduced to 295 in peak hours. Managing this rate will be by an activated gate or gates to be installed within the Cisco property for Cisco employees only and it must be installed and operating before the road is opened for use. None of this was in the original agreement. Specifically, the CPRH attorney: 1) reduced the period of non compliance; 2) inserted the word "obtain" performance instead of "seek" performance; 3) shortened the time for Cisco to respond to not being in compliance before an injunction and 4) inserted my name in the agreement and as an enforcer. There is a stipulation that will permit an injunction to be filed to close the gate if it ever reaches 400 vehicles in one hour. Furthermore, the gate will be constructed within twelve months to control traffic from Phase 1 as well as the future Phase 2.
The above mentioned improvements to the settlement could not have been achieved without the efforts of legal counsel and the time spent by CPRH representatives. The developer approached CPRH representatives weekly and often daily. This information was then relayed to CPRH's attorney. It should be noted that on one very specific occasion CPRH asked to bring Mr. Kreiger to a key strategy meeting with the Selectmen but this was unfortunately denied. We do feel that this may have been a lost opportunity to bring new arguments to our cause.
In review, the money provided for legal representation did improve the original agreement. We also feel that more cooperation between the towns of Littleton and Harvard and earlier intervention with legal counsel may have further improved the agreement.
I will be glad to furnish a copy if you will leave your name.
Our attention has continued on the cleanup of Devens by attending the Restoration Advisory Board meetings. The major clean up has been achieved and the landfill completed on Patton Road. The pesticide around and under the former homes in the Grant Road area has been removed and the land is ready for construction. Shepley's Landfill and the Moore Airfield are still areas of concern. A variety of treatments have begun for them depending upon the depth and site of pollution. I heard this week that the South Annex of Fort Devens in Sudbury has been decontaminated and removed from the Superfund list. We can hope for the continuing progress out here. We shall continue to attend these monthly meetings.
Mildred A. Chandler
President