Attorney Responds to Charges Regarding Norwest Woods Development-August 31, 1971

Attorney John J. Mulvehill appeared before the Planning Board to vigorously contest statements made by planner Thomas F. Cavanaugh regarding the ongoing cleanup and unfinished conditions at the Norwest Woods Apartments complex off Nahatan Street. The sharp exchange marked the latest development in local oversight of the private residential project owned by Sol Siegel.

Dispute Over Planning Board Jurisdiction and Site Conditions

The confrontation followed an August 26 site inspection by Cavanaugh, who criticized lingering hazards, abandoned equipment, and trash—including three broken beer bottles—two weeks after neighborhood residents voiced strong complaints. Cavanaugh expressed deep concern for children using the area as a shortcut to the Balch School, stating his intention to vote against any future matters brought by Siegel until the site was fully remediated. Furthermore, Cavanaugh asserted that the complex was a “shoddy area.”

Attorney Mulvehill countered that the apartment site was private property and argued that Cavanaugh’s complaints had no bearing on the specific planning matters legally before the board. Town Engineer Robert A. Hamilton previously confirmed the board lacked direct regulatory control over internal on-site work.

While Mulvehill acknowledged legal obligations regarding a retaining wall in the northwest corner, he maintained the developer was not strictly obligated to install fencing or drainage piping—though owner Sol Siegel had voluntarily promised to complete those improvements, alongside constructing a swimming pool for tenants, before the frost. Mulvehill also noted that the developer’s main labor force had been tied up over the summer constructing the pool.

Planning Board Chairman Thomas A. Riolo and Building Inspector John E. Grover expressed ongoing frustration with delays, noting that the developer’s completion bond expires in October. The board voted to call the bond in October if the road remains unfinished and agreed to invite Siegel to meet with them in two weeks. Planning member Francis Wisgirda abstained from voting on matters outside official board authority.

Alandale Parkway Residents Protest Commercial Driveway Use

During the same session, approximately 20 residents of Alandale Parkway appeared before the board to protest the proposed use of a neighborhood driveway to service the nearby Eysie Brothers’ Shopping Plaza—developed by George M. Eysie and Roger T. Eysie—under construction on a 40-acre tract.

Speaking for the neighborhood group, Leonard S. Kastner and William McCoy condemned the street as a dust bowl, complained of inadequate lighting and abandoned equipment, and warned of severe snow removal complications and pedestrian hazards. McCoy stated, “I’m ready to take my kids out of school until it’s done.”

Building Inspector Grover verified that the original plaza decision explicitly mandated that all curb cuts and commercial traffic access be routed to Washington Street rather than residential Alandale Parkway. Although developer George Eysie had previously claimed a utility easement across the property of Nicholas A. Franciosi at 5 Alandale Parkway, board members affirmed that residential streets cannot be utilized for commercial truck deliveries. Developer representative James J. Drummey had previously chaired the board of appeals during the plaza decision.

Archival Note: This article has been dynamically reconstructed from the original public record print archives of the Patriot Ledger