HAMPDEN — The Hampden Board of Selectman voted not to appeal the Land Court’s decision in favor of plaintiff Daniel Garvey within the lawsuit concerning a self-storage facility at 2 Somers Rd.
With the court’s decision, the Hampden Planning Board has been required to reconsider Garvey’s case and “expeditiously [issue] a special permit requested by the plaintiff after considering whether imposition of reasonable conditions is warranted,” Board of Selectmen Chair Don Davenport reported at the board’s Aug. 1 meeting.
Garvey v. Hampden was first initiated in December 2021 when the formal complaint was submitted with the trial beginning in February 2024, according to the court. The dispute occurred after the Hampden Planning Board denied Garvey’s request for a self-storage facility on the 2 Somers Rd. property; a decision that was supported by many residents in the town.
During the Aug. 1 meeting, the Board of Selectmen reviewed the decision by the Land Court and raised multiple questions about how the Planning Board should proceed with following the judge’s requirements, the costs of appealing, and the likelihood of overturning the decision. These questions were then sent to their attorney with the available answers reported by the board at its Aug. 7 meeting. All other questions would need to be sent to the court for further information, Davenport said.
The Board of Selectman’s ultimate vote to not appeal the final decision was made during the Aug. 7 meeting, the day before the Aug. 8 deadline for an appeal.
At this meeting, Davenport reported that the town could not seek and receive clarification on the court’s decision prior to the Aug. 8 appeal deadline and that the town had a “50-50” chance that the court would provide “relief” from the damage costs involved with appealing, according to a document he read from the town’s attorney.
“They’re usually reluctant to award damages against the municipality. However, if they feel it’s frivolous or unreasonable and … you’re doing this to delay,” the court could make that decision, Davenport explained. He stated that the attorney was “pretty confident” that the town would not win if it appealed the decision.
Similarly, the attorney confirmed that the Planning Board could impose additional conditions on the 2 Somers Rd. project beyond the 21 conditions set by the board during the previous hearing as long as they were “reasonable” and do not “act as a denial of the special permit,” Davenport stated.
He further noted that “there could be a fight over whether the conditions are reasonable” if Garvey chose to object to the additional conditions placed by the Planning Board.
During the vote, the Selectmen highlighted their trust in the attorney’s knowledge, the likelihood that an appeal would be seen as unreasonable, the potential damage costs of appealing, and the opportunity for the Planning Board to place additional conditions as factors in their decision not to appeal.
“This is one of those [rare] occasions where your personal feelings have to be subservient to your stewardship of the town’s funds and the process,” Davenport said during his statement. He explained that he had “some substantial issues with certain things,” but that he was “reluctant” to vote for an appeal due to the other factors of the decision.
The Board of Selectmen voted unanimously against submitting an appeal. After the vote, Davenport stated that the town would move forward with requesting further clarification from the court on a timeline and next steps in the decision.
