The mission of the Town of Duxbury is to deliver excellent services to the community in the most fiscally responsible and innovative manner while endeavoring to broaden our sense of community and preserve the unique character of our town.
Minutes 9/13/04
The Planning Board met in the Town Office Building Monday, September 13, 2004.
Present: George Wadsworth, Chairman; Angela Scieszka, Clerk; John Bear and James Kimball.
Absent: Amy MacNab, Vice-Chairman; Aboud Al-Zaim, and Rob Wilson.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director and Barbara Ripley, Administrative Assistant.
The meeting was called to order at 7:31 PM.
OPEN FORUM
Planning Board Member: Ms. Ripley reported that Mr. Al-Zaim has been ill. It is unclear when he will return to Planning Board meetings.
Mansionization: Ms. Scieszka said that the Assessor’s office will be implementing new GIS technology into their system within the next month or so. Once this occurs, the task of identifying small lots in Duxbury will be made much easier. Therefore, Ms. Scieszka suggested, and the Board agreed, to postpone further discussion of the mansionization issue to mid-October.
Budget: Ms. Stickney reported that the Planning Department will be required to make an initial FY ’06 budget presentation to the Board of Selectmen within the next few weeks. She said that she is concerned that further cuts to the department budget may be required.
O’Neil Farm: Ms. Scieszka said that an important fundraising goal was met on August 30. The next deadline for fundraising efforts will occur in January.
SPECIAL PERMIT RECOMMENDATION: 93 GURNET ROAD/ John L. & Mary E. Mastromarino
Ms. Stickney described the proposed project, which consists of an open air deck. After discussion the following motion was made:
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion to defer judgment on the Special Permit application to the ZBA. However, the Planning Board includes in their comments to the ZBA that because of the angle in which the house sits on the lot, that the proposed deck will infringe further into the southerly side yard setback by a half of foot. Likewise, due to the angle of the house, less encroachment will occur on the northern property line side yard setback with proposed extension. Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4:0).
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION/DINGLEY DELL ESTATES/ Off Congress Street
Ms. Stickney provided the Board with a letter from the applicant’s attorney, dated 9/8/04, requesting that the hearing be continued to October 18, 2004 at 8:30 PM. The attorney also provided the Board with a mutual extension form, signed by the applicant, which extends the decision date to November 30, 2004. The applicant has also agreed to provide revised plans to the Planning Office by September 27, 2004.
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion to extend the public hearing to October 18, 2004, and to extend the act-on date to November 30, 2004. Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
Planning Board members then signed the mutual extension form, which had already been signed by the applicant.
EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE PLANNING BOARD
MOTION: At 8:02 PM, Ms. Scieszka made a motion to enter executive session, in order to discuss potential litigation regarding the Jaycox property on West Street. Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion. A roll call vote was taken. Ms. Scieszka, Mr. Wadsworth, Mr. Bear, and Mr. Kimball voted in favor of the motion.
Therefore, the executive session commenced at 8:04 PM.
MOTION: At 8:15 PM, Ms. Scieszka made a motion to close the executive session. Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion. A roll call vote was taken. Ms. Scieszka, Mr. Wadsworth, Mr. Bear, and Mr. Kimball voted in favor of the motion.
Therefore, the executive session closed at 8:17 PM.
PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSION: RULES AND REGULATIONS
Ms. Stickney provided the Board with a list of suggested changes for the Subdivision Rules and Regulations. It was agreed that a public hearing would be held on November 8, 2004 for a general “clean-up” of the Rules and Regulations. The advertising would also include a specific description of the proposed new street acceptance procedures.
There was discussion over the best definitions to use for swales and basins, of the requirements for slope easements, and of whether neighborhood associations should be required to maintain the cul-de-sacs of public ways. These issues will be further refined in advance of the public hearing.
OTHER BUSINESS
Merry Village: Ms. Stickney explained that the developers made a proposal to the Town two years ago for a “friendly” 40B that would have included Town-owned property. However, the proposal was defeated at Town Meeting. Now, the developers are back with the land owned by Mr. Merry, as well as some land owned by Mr. Pink.
Ms. Stickney provided the Board with her review of the proposal in a memorandum dated 9/13/04. Included in Ms. Stickney’s concerns is the fact that the land needs to be surveyed because the plans do not agree with Town records per the Assessor’s office. Ms. Stickney also noted that the line-of-sight on Lincoln Street is problematic. Some re-grading of an adjacent parcel will be necessary to improve the line-of-sight, yet this parcel is not under the control of the developers. After further discussion, the following motion was made:
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion to recommend that the Zoning Board of Appeals continue the public hearing for the Merry Village Comprehensive Permit application due to the need for additional information in order to conduct an adequate review, and to forward the Planning Director’s review dated 9/13/04, and to concur with the comments in Mr. Sexton’s minutes of the Development Review Team meeting of 9/9/04, and to forward the following initial concerns of the Planning Board:
1) The information submitted relative to groundwater raised concerns with issues of separation for septic and drainage designs. The applicant’s engineer should provide an estimate as to the seasonal groundwater elevation to demonstrate proposed designs can meet the Town’s requirements.
2) It is the Planning Board's contention that the provisions of the Town's Aquifer Protection Overlay District (one dwelling unit per 60,000) as outlined in ZBL Section 406.6 are unable to be waived pursuant to the mandated water supply rules and regulations put forth in 310 CMR 22.21. A count of one bedroom per 10,000 square foot is exceeded with this application and is not an item entitled to a waiver per these state mandated regulations.
3) The applicant’s request for waivers has not sufficiently been identified and/or justified as to their request relative to the construction of the project.
4) The application lacks a sufficient and detailed Pro Forma with justification as to the both the hard and soft costs associated with this project.
Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
Engineering Invoices:
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion to pay Mainstream Engineering Invoices #20439 (Brook Road) and #20440 (T-Farm). Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
Route 139 Study-Marshfield: Ms. Scieszka agreed, on behalf of the Planning Board, to attend the workshop on the Route 139 Corridor Master Plan, to be held on September 27, 2004 at the Furnace Brook Middle School in Marshfield.
Minutes:
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion to approve the minutes of 7/26/04, 8/9/04, and 8/30/04 as written. Mr. Bear provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 PM. The next meeting of the Duxbury Planning Board will be held on Monday, September 20, 2004 at 7:30 PM in the Duxbury Town Offices.
| 
