7

THE SAUGUS ADVOCATE – FriDAy, April 4, 2025 Page 7 BRIDGE | FROM PAGE 5 stabilized from just normal tides? During the decades of time the same tides prior to the takings the property had almost zero erosion until the enormous 2 Bridge Project arrived. SPS is now dredging the Saugus River abutting our property with 6’ to 8’ trenches impacting the tide and removing soil support for our building.” Here are some highlights of Flynn’s motion: • It alleges that heavy construction equipment used by SPS New England, Inc. resulted in significant structural damage. “The SPS construction activities during the entirety of this project have involved various massive pieces of heavy construction equipment, which has been set up right against the plaintiff’s building,” according to the motion. “This includes piledrivers and other huge machinery used for intrusive, heavy construction that causes signifi - cant vibrations on a daily basis. Attached as Exhibit C are just a few of many photos taken over the past couple of years illustrating the very close proximity of the heavy equipment and the plaintiff ’s building. “The building at issue is a 125 ft x 25 ft steel-frame building, which has for decades been occupied by the plaintiff s’ longtime tenant, a fully operational marina. Inside the building is a retail business, areas for boat repairs and storage, and other similar mariTOWN MEETING | FROM PAGE 3 or completely lacking speed limit signs. We need a major investment in signs and a plan on where they will do the most good. I know that signs alone will not slow drivers down, we must have a coordinated plan with the police department and a team of selectmen, town meeting members, and concerned citizens. The second part of the traffi c concerns in our town are these large (supersized) dump trucks that use Saugus as a shortcut to wherever they are going, usually out na-related equipment and Operations.” • At a recent meeting involving all parties, MassDOT and SPS formally took the position that the structural issues were caused exclusively by the tide and have nothing whatsoever to do with the massive construction occurring for years only inches from the building. “This is truly absurd. Before MassDOT and SPS came along, the building stood without issue for approximately 75 years,” the motion stated. “Further, MassDOT relies on a 250-page structural analysis, which is almost entirely photographs and which fails to even mention that MassDOT and SPS have been controlling the site and running massive construction for years.” • SPS sent representatives into the offi ce of the City of Lynn’s Inspectional Services to file a complaint that the marina building was unsafe, and this complaint prompted the City to issue an Order dated December 12, 2024, which commanded that the plaintiff “make safe and secure the building.” “It bears repeating that the plaintiff is the bystander and the landowner whose property was taken by eminent domain, and SPS is the general contractor performing MassDOT’s construction on the areas of the property which the Commonwealth took and controls,” Flynn wrote in his motion. “It is unconscionable and disingenuous, at best, for SPS or any other MassDOT agent or contractor to unilaterally fi le a formal complaint with the city about the condiof town. These trucks can often be found on smaller residential streets, where they should NOT be. Mark Panetta (Precinct 5): The one concern I hear the most in Precinct 5 is the status of the Lynnhurst school. There have been several good ideas shared, and I look forward to continuing discussions of its future use. Question Three: Are you working independently or in collaboration with other members on articles to be introduced for this year’s Town TOWN MEETING | SEE PAGE 8 tion of the property they have taken over, control, and have extensively damaged over the past six years.” • Carmine Guarracino, P.E., of Roome & Guarracino Structural Engineers, produced a report for the marina in which a rough estimate of the cost to repair the damages would be approximately $750,000 - $850,000. The structural engineer expressed the view that “this problem will continue to worsen as the bridge project advances. From past, current, and future construction there will be negative impacts to the property.” “The repairs recommended in this restricted letter report describe only the general nature and scope of the work required to bring the building towards pre-existing conditions pre 2022 - 2023 where the building was safe as part of the marina/retail operation,” that report stated. “The continuing nature of the project will make remediation for the landowner a catch 22. Even if it is repaired now the construction and dredging could undermine those efforts two or three years from now.” “MassDOT/SPS has unrestricted use of almost 18,000 sf of the owner’s property for construction purposes until November 2027.” If We Happen To Meet By Accident ... You’ll Be Glad You Found Us! There is a difference between the rest and the BEST! Celebrating 46 Years In Business! TONY’S AUTO BODY Call or Visit 781-321-0032 34 Sharon Street Malden, MA 02148 TONYSAUTOBODYLLC.COM COME VISIT OUR STATE OF THE ART BODY SHOP • Computerized Paint Matching (State of the Art Spray Booth) • Computerized Frame Machines • P.P.G. Refinishing System • R134 + 1234yf A/C Machines Fully Insured -RS2415 Insurance Company Approval ALL OUR WORK IS GUARANTEED! TONY BARTOLO Owner 46 Years Let Us Handle Your Next Insurance Claim. Go With the BEST It Doesn’t Get BETTER! RENTAL CARS Available

8 Publizr Home