The Planning Board met in the Town Office Building Monday, December 13, 2004.
Present: George Wadsworth, Chairman; Amy MacNab, Vice-Chairman; Angela Scieszka, Clerk; Aboud Al-Zaim, and Rob Wilson. Also present was Associate Member Harold Moody (non-voting.)
Absent: John Bear and James Kimball.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director and Barbara Ripley, Administrative Assistant.
The meeting was called to order at 7:49 PM.
The meeting was immediately adjourned to the Mural Room, in order for the Planning Board to hear a presentation from the Duxbury GIS (Geographic Information Services) Team about a proposal for having Assessing and GIS date available to the public on the internet.
(Mr. Al-Zaim arrived at this point.)
The Board of Selectmen voted unanimously (3-0) to endorse the policy of making Town of Duxbury Assessing Data available on the internet, with the provision that owners’ names are not included in the on-line information. The Selectmen also voted unanimously to conditionally support: 1) completing the technical process of digitizing Town maps; 2) the purchase of GIS software; and 3) the purchase of an annual license which will allow the Duxbury GIS data to be available on the internet. The condition placed on the endorsement was that the funds for these activities come only from existing departmental funds that have been earmarked for this purpose.
At 8:37 PM, four members of the Duxbury Planning Board re-convened in the Small Conference Room of Duxbury Town Hall (Mr. Wadsworth, Ms. Scieszka, Mr. Al-Zaim, and Mr. Wilson). Ms. MacNab remained at the Board of Selectmen meeting temporarily.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OFF HIGH STREET/ Teravainen
Ms. Ripley explained that the applicant has requested continuance of the public hearing due to the need to incorporate additional wetlands information that has become available.
The applicant’s engineer has signed a mutual extension form.
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to continue the public hearing for the proposed subdivision off High Street (Teravainen) to January 3, 2005 at 8:45 PM, with revised plans due to the Planning Office by December 20, 2004, and to extend the Planning Board decision date to February 3, 2005. Ms. Scieszka provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
Board members then signed the mutual extension form, to be filed with the Town Clerk on December 14, 2004.
OTHER BUSINESS
Engineering Invoices: Ms. Ripley presented the Board with six invoices from Mainstream Engineering for consulting services, to be paid from developers’ escrow accounts established for that purpose. Mr. Al-Zaim commented that it is unusual for an engineer to bill for travel time, especially when his office is so close to the projects. Mr. Al-Zaim asked about the progress of developing an RFP (Request for Proposals) for engineering services. Ms. Stickney said that she has been working on this with the other land-use department heads, and would like to have it ready as soon as possible.
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to pay the following invoices for Mainstream Engineering from the escrow accounts established for that purpose:
Invoice Project Amount
20498 Bayside Marine $540.00
20472 Pratt Circle $288.00
20474 Johnson’s Way $415.85
20497 Johnson’s Way $1,106.50
20455 T-Farm Estates $789.20
20496 Snug Harbor Boatworks $279.60
Ms. Scieszka provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
Annual Town Meeting: Ms. Stickney asked the group for clarification on whether the Board would like to go forward with a Town Meeting article to amend Article 5 of the Zoning Bylaw (regarding the trigger for making the Residential Conservation Cluster design a requirement). A place for such an article has been held on the Town Meeting warrant. However, specific language for the article will be needed very soon. Ms. Scieszka, Mr. Wadsworth, and Mr. Wilson said that an amendment is not necessary because the bylaw does reflect the intention of the CPZBIC committee. Mr. Al-Zaim said that he believes that the language is confusing and needs clarification. At this point, the discussion was postponed to allow for the commencement of a continued public hearing.
Ms. MacNab returned to the meeting at this point.
CONTINUED PUBLIC MEETING: ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW/ Proposed Medical Building at 104 Tremont Street
Present for the applicant were:
Thomas Tucker, Attorney
Mark Sullivan and Bob Deely, Principals of Deesul, LLC
Eric Eby, P.E., Traffic Engineer with Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.
Thomas M. DiCicco, P.E., Civil Engineer with Carter-Burgess
William Fornaciari, Architect (Fornaciari & Noseworthy)
Present for the Town was:
Walter Amory, P.E., Principal of Amory Engineers, PC
Two members of the public and one Duxbury Clipper reporter were also present.
The Planning Board Clerk read the correspondence list into the record:
· Mutual Extension Form to continue public meeting to 12/13/04 signed by applicant and Planning Board on 11/22/04
· Minutes of the 11/22/04 meeting
· Cover letter from Thomas M. DiCicco, P.E., dated November 24, 2004 including the following materials submitted with revised plans:
o Revised and Supplemental Stormwater Results, dated November 24, 2004.
o Web materials re: “Ecolume Post Top” Lighting, consisting of five pages.
o Forms 11 and 12 re: Soil Suitability and Percolation Tests.
o Cover Letter from Thomas M. DiCicco, P.E. for October 18, 2004 submission
(previously submitted).
o Response to Amory Engineering comments of 9/28/04 by Thomas m. DiCicco, dated
October 18, 2004 (previously submitted).
o Review Memo from Amory Engineering, dated 9/28/04.
o Response to Planning Director comments of 8/24/04 by Thomas. M. DiCicco, dated
September 17, 2004 (previously submitted).
o Technical Memorandum from Eric B. Eby, P.E. and Lynn Means, P.E., dated
September 15, 2004 (previously submitted).
· Memo from C. Stickney dated 11/26/04 to W. Amory – transmitting above reference material & plans.
· Memo from C. Stickney dated 11/26/04 to Atty. Tucker re: need for additional escrow funds.
· Memo from C. Stickney dated 12/1/04 to W. Amory re: transmittal of architectural plans
· Memo from W. Amory dated 12/2/04 re: peer review of plans and materials submitted.
· Memo from J. Dalrymple dated 12/6/04 re: review of revised septic plans
· Memo from J. Dalrymple dated 12/7/04 re: Denial of plans due to lack of surveyor’s stamp & bench mark
· Memo from T. DiCicco dated 12/9/04 re: response to Amory memo of 12/2/04
· DRT Minutes from 12/10/04
· C. Stickney staff memo dated 12/10/04 re: review and recommendation
· Letter from Fire Chief Nord dated 12/10/04 re: concerns with proposal.
Mr. DiCicco explained that the building design has been changed to respond to neighbor’s concerns about its size. It is now two stories high, rather than three. The footprint has increased by 1,000 SF, but the total size of the building has been reduced by 3,000 SF. The impervious cover ratio has increased from approximately 45% to 47%. Mr. DiCicco also described the roof drain system, and explained that the roof drains will not discharge into the basin in the rear of the property.
Ms. Stickney’s written comments about the shade trees proposed along the westerly edge of the property line were discussed. Mr. DiCicco agreed to re-locate the trees.
Ms. Scieszka commented on the steepness of the slope to the rear drainage basin. Mr. DiCicco described the safety measures (fence and guardrail) that have been planned to keep people from falling into the basin. Mr. Amory said that he is satisfied with the arrangements.
The subject of long-term maintenance of the drainage basin was addressed. It was agreed that this would be the responsibility of the building owner. This will be written into the conditions. Mr. Sullivan said that he has a letter from his contractor which states that there will be no problem in accessing the basin for maintenance.
Mr. Amory commented on Mr. DiCicco’s letter of 12/9/04, which was written in response to Mr. Amory’s memo of 12/2/04. Mr. Amory said that Mr. DiCicco’s letter only partially addresses Mr. Amory’s concerns. However, Mr. Amory said that he is confident that remaining items can be worked out between Mr. DiCicco and himself. He will notify the Planning Office with the terms of that agreement as soon as they are achieved.
The Planning Board discussed a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Granville Baker, abutters to the proposed medical building, dated 10/12/04. The letter states that they do not want to have a fence or additional plantings along their property line. They wish to have a clear view to the medical center. It was noted that future abutters might prefer to have a screen. Mr. Sullivan said that he would be agreeable to a condition which requires him to provide a landscaping screen if desired by a future abutter.
The 12/10/04 minutes of the Development Review Team were discussed. Mr. Joe Shea, Chairman of the Highway Safety Committee, noted that a major traffic problem is developing in this portion of Tremont Street. There will be a Town Meeting article, requesting $50,000 for a traffic study of four problem areas in Town. This is one of the four areas. Mr. Shea said that developers should contribute to the cost of the study, since they are partially responsible for the problem. He suggested that the current developer be asked to contribute $5,000 to the traffic study. Ms. MacNab said that this amounts to an impact fee. She said that she understands that recent legislation allows towns to assess impact fees. However, she said that this has never been done in Duxbury, and she is reluctant
to start it for this case.
Mr. Al-Zaim commented that the traffic study performed as part of this application showed that the addition of the medical center would not increase the level of service for Tremont Street. This would make it hard to justify having the developer pay for an additional traffic study.
Mr. Sullivan said that he could not comment on whether he would be willing to contribute to a traffic study until he heard more details.
Ms. Stickney said that she feels it is important that the developer contribute in some way to potential solutions for the Tremont Street corridor. She said that the $5,000.00 amount might not be appropriate. However, she would like to see the site plan approval be conditioned upon the developer’s participation in mitigation efforts. Mr. Tucker said that the conditions would have to be reasonable. For example, the developer could not be expected to agree to a solution which would involve moving his building further back from the roadway.
Mr. Al-Zaim noted the Building Inspector’s statement in the DRT minutes that, although the applicant meets the ZBL requirements for parking, that the ZBL requirements may be inadequate. Mr. Sullivan responded that he may not actually have nine medical offices in the building, and he believes the parking will be adequate. He said that it will be in his best interest to make sure there is adequate parking. Otherwise, he will have great difficulty renting the space. Ms. Stickney suggested that the number of offices could be capped in the site approval conditions.
Mr. Fornaciari, the project architect, described the concept behind the new architectural plans. He said that he drove around Duxbury and observed that many of the commercial buildings appear to have started out small, and then have had additions placed on them. He imitated that look with the proposed building.
Ms. Scieszka commented that the planned development of this site is very intense. However, the applicant has taken a huge step in the right direction with the current revision.
Mr. Jamie MacNab, 269 Old Tobey Garden Street, thanked the developer for changing the look of the building.
Fire Chief Kevin Nord’s letter of 12/10/04 was discussed. Chief Nord recommended that emergency access be provided through the Conway Realty parking lot. Ms. MacNab said that the Planning Board cannot require access through an abutting lot. Ms. Stickney said that Chief Nord is not looking for an easement in the current configuration. However, he would like to make sure that emergency access to 104 Tremont Street is not blocked during any future development of the Conway Realty lot.
Ms. Kay Foster, 134 Surplus Street, asked whether the new style of building would be energy efficient. Mr. Forniciari said that the building will be required to meet energy efficiency building codes. She also asked whether the applicant would be allowed to place the septic system under the pavement. Mr. Wadsworth explained that, although this is not ideal, it is allowed.
Mr. Eby, the project’s traffic consultant, said that the Mass Highway department has issued a curb cut permit for the project.
Requirements for the next submission were discussed. It was agreed that changes are required to pages C6 and C8. Seven copies of those revisions are required for the Planning Board. In addition, seven copies of the 2-page Board of Health submission are requested for the Board. Finally, one full set of the revised plans are to be provided to Mr. Amory, and another full set to the Planning Office.
MOTION: Ms. MacNab made a motion to continue the public hearing to January 24, 2005 at 8:00 PM, with revised plans due to the Planning Office by January 10, 2005, and with an extension of the Planning Board decision date to February 24, 2005. Mr. Wilson provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (5-0).
Board members then signed the mutual extension form, to be filed with the Town Clerk on December 14, 2004.
OTHER BUSINESS (Continued)
Minutes:
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to accept the minutes of 12/6/04 as written. Ms. Scieszka provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (5-0).
Annual Town Meeting: The discussion returned to the proposed amendment to Article 5 of the Zoning Bylaw. It was the consensus of the Board not to go forward with the amendment.
Traffic Problems: Ms. Scieszka brought up the issues of traffic problems and traffic studies. She questioned whether a traffic study could result in a recommendation to widen Route 3A. While this might work to lessen congestion, Ms. Scieszka and Ms. MacNab agreed that this would have a serious negative impact on the character of the Town. Mr. Wadsworth said that the State would be unlikely to pour funds into a traffic improvement that the Town was not absolutely clamoring for, given the enormous number of requests for State highway funds.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 PM. The next meeting of the Duxbury Planning Board will be held on January 3, 2005 at 7:30 PM in the Duxbury Town Offices.
| 
