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.
The Planning Board met in the Town Office Building Monday, October 25, 2004.
Present: George Wadsworth, Chairman; Amy MacNab, Vice-Chairman; Angela Scieszka, Clerk; Aboud Al-Zaim, John Bear, James Kimball and Rob Wilson.
Absent: No members were absent.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director and Barbara Ripley, Administrative Assistant.
The meeting was called to order at 7:38 PM.
OPEN FORUM
Freeman Farms: Ms. MacNab asked whether there had been any progress with access issues at this subdivision. Ms. Stickney reported that a certified letter was sent to Mr. Cushing requesting immediate removal of the concrete blocks and chains which were preventing access to the subdivision. In addition, a memorandum was sent to the building inspector about the ANR lot on Cushing Drive, requesting enforcement of ZBL Section 300, which requires that access be taken from the frontage. Mr. Wadsworth reported his observations that the chains have been removed, but not the concrete blocks, and nothing has happened with the driveway of the ANR lot.
SPECIAL PERMIT RECOMMENDATION: FISHER/ 52 Ocean Road North
The applicant is seeking a special permit to raze the existing structure and re-build an enlarged structure on the property. The Building Inspector has determined that the existing building coverage is 13.2%, and that with the new proposal (including a 2’overhang), the building coverage will increase to 16.5%.
Ms. MacNab questioned whether a variance would be required to increase the coverage above 15%. ZBL Section 410.4 (Coverage) was examined. Board members agreed that the Zoning Bylaw states that the ZBA may allow, by special permit, an increase in coverage up to 3% of the difference between the total area of the lot (4,500 SF) and 20,000 SF.
Mr. Bear commented that the porch may have to be included in building coverage, as well as the 2’ overhang.
Mr. Kimball said that it is very difficult to make a recommendation on this plan, because so little information has been provided. Mr. Al-Zaim agreed that the applicant has provided very little information. He said that is difficult to calculate the exact height of the proposed building. He also agreed with Mr. Bear that it appears that the porch has not been included in the calculations.
Mr. Wilson said that he objects to this five-room house with two bedrooms becoming a nine-room house with five bedrooms. Ms. Scieszka agreed that this could have negative impacts on the neighborhood.
MOTION:~ Mr. Wilson made a motion to recommend denial of the special permit application for 52 Ocean Road North based on the following objections:
1) The application lacks a site plan~with sufficient information as to existing and proposed~building coverage.~~~Lot coverage calculations~are unclear and~should include the~two foot (2')~overhang for the porch.
2) It appears that the house may exceed the 30-foot height limitation allowed by the Zoning Bylaw based on the definition of building height~.
3) Demolishing a five-room house with two bedrooms in favor of~a~three-story, nine-room house~with five bedrooms~will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, in the opinion of the Planning Board.
4) The Planning Board recommends not allowing greater than 15%~building coverage on such a small lot.~~
and furthermore the Planning Board recommends that, in the event of approval of this special permit, that the Sewer Commissioners of the Town of Duxbury be notified of the significant increase in the number of bedrooms~ and potential for increased flows~.
Ms. Scieszka provided a second for the motion.
Under discussion of the motion, Mr. Kimball questioned whether the Board should even make a recommendation on this application, given the lack of information provided.
By consensus, the Planning Board agreed to table the motion until the next meeting, in order to further discuss the language in the Board’s recommendation.
AS-BUILT APPROVAL & REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF SURETY: ABC CONSTRUCTION/ Brook Road
The applicant has made a written request for release of remaining funds in the performance bond account for Brook Road. No one was present to represent the applicant at the meeting. The As-Built plan was not provided to the Planning Department.
The Town’s consulting engineer, Mr. Tom Sexton, provided a memorandum to the Board recommending that $7,500.00 be held in the performance bond account for Brook Road. This amount includes allowance for the as-built plan and engineering review, final drainage system cleanout, and reseeding of the roadway shoulders.
Ms. Stickney commented that there is one lot in the subdivision which has not yet been released.
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to reduce the performance bond for the Brook Road subdivision to $7,500. Ms. MacNab provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (7-0)
PUBLIC MEETING: ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW: PERIWINKLE R.T. (BAYSIDE MARINE): Washington Street
Ms. Scieszka read the public meeting notice and the correspondence list into the record.
Correspondence List:
· Site Plan application, plans and other documentation
· Narrative from Bayside Marine re: operation & site stamped 9/29/04
· Petition to ZBA re: project narrative from JR Kent stamped 9/29/04
· Letter from R.S. Troy dated 9/29/02 re: issue Snug Harbor subdivision
· Copies of photos of signs at site submitted by applicant
· Memo from Mainstream Engineering dated 10/1/04 re: CC review
· Copy of public meeting advertisement from Clipper
· Letter to from C. Stickney to T. Sexton dated 10/6/04 re: peer review
· Development Review Team Minutes dated 10/14/04
· Memo from Mainstream Engineering dated 10/15/04 re: peer review
· Memo to ZBA/PB dated 10/15/04 from J. Dalrymple re: BOH issues
· Memo from C. Stickney dated 10/21/04 re: staff review
Present for the applicant were:
Mr. Jackson R. Kent, Jr., Principal, Periwinkle R. T.
Mr. Jackson R. Kent, III
Larry Poule, P.E. (ASEC Engineering)
George Morgan, Construction Consultant
Mr. Jackson R. Kent, Jr. presented the proposal. He said that Periwinkle Realty Trust has been formed to own the buildings. Bayside Marine owns the business operation. Mr. Kent explained that four existing buildings will be demolished. Also, the rear fifty feet of the “Expressions” shop will be demolished. Members asked whether he will be subject to the Demolition Delay bylaw. Mr. Kent said that he does not believe any of these buildings will qualify for review under the Demolition Delay bylaw, but if they are, that this would be triggered when he applies for demolition permits.
Mr. Kent said that he owns all of the property which houses the Bayside Marine operation, which is comprised of several lots. There has been a subdivision plan for Snug Harbor Drive, but this was never built. He said that he is waiting for direction from the Board about whether he will need to combine lots or whether he can leave things as they are. He said that none of the proposed or existing buildings cross lots lines, with one exception. He said that he would like to change the entrance to the former “Brant” building, and add a handicapped ramp. The ramp would be on a lot line. Ms. MacNab said that combining lots in the form of an 81-X plan would be fine. However, she said that changing interior lot lines would then require that that development of the lots meet
current standards.
Ms. Stickney added that there have been two subdivision plans for Snug Harbor Drive. Ms. Stickney said that several of the lots are in the jurisdiction of Land Court. This will complicate efforts to clarify the lot line situation. However, she said that the Planning Department and the DPW are actively working to seek possible answers to the problem.
Mr. Kent said that he has had approximately 203 rack storage spaces for boats. However, boats are growing in size, so he cannot accommodate that many boats at his existing facility. The proposed racks will be larger, and so he anticipates providing rack storage for 204 boats.
Mr. Kent said that the zoning bylaw requires him to provide 35 parking spaces. He will actually have 45 spaces. He is confident that he is providing for all of the parking needs of his business. His boating customers stagger themselves over the course of the day, so the 45 spaces will be adequate. He acknowledges that parking in the area is very difficult. However, he said that he is providing for his business. He often has the problem of having non-Bayside Marine customers using his lot. He is willing to work toward a neighborhood solution of the parking problems, and has some very specific ideas on what could be done. However, he said that he wants to be clear that he is meeting all requirements for his business.
Jackson R. Kent, Jr. added that the Bay Management Committee is working on this issue.
Mr. Kimball commented that the applicant has only taken the buildings into account when calculating the required parking spaces. The business of putting boats in the water has not been counted.
The discussion then turned to drainage. Mr. Kent said that he originally planned an infiltration system, because this type of system was approved for the site with his previous application. However, after meeting with the Conservation Agent, the Planning Director, and the Town’s consultant, a vegetated swale system is being considered. The bottom layer of the boat racks would have an open shelf. There would be vegetated swales under the boat racks. They could be expected to hold approximately ½” of runoff.
Mr. Sexton said that he is hopeful that the calculations for the vegetated swale system will work, because the biggest issue at the waterfront is water quality. He would like to see the swales hold one-inch of run-off, however.
Mr. Wadsworth asked whether it would be possible to better utilize the swales by using a trench drain to feed surface drainage into the swales.
Ms. MacNab asked whether the vegetative swales could be expected to function very well if they are covered by boats. The boats would block the sunlight needed for vegetation to grow. Mr. Sexton said that it would be important to select plants, recommended by a botanist, that can tolerate shade.
Mr. Kent said that he would like to put “floatables” in the swales, which are pillows that absorb oils and other objectionable materials. These would then be collected by a hazardous waste company and disposed of accordingly.
Mr. Wilson asked about views to the water from Washington Street. Mr. Kent said that there would be a clear view to the water between the boat racks. However, he added that he intends to come back in the future with a plan to enclose the racks for a boat storage building.
Mr. Kent said that he is being required to develop a plan for snow management. He said that, in reality, Bayside Marine does not plow snow, except for one path for emergency vehicles. However, he will comply with the requirement, and designate areas for snow storage.
Ms. Scieszka said that she would like to see more detailed information on site coverage. Specifically, she would like to see where the green space, gravel, asphalt, and concrete will be located. She commented that the plans were confusing with the two areas both incorporated.
Ms. MacNab said that, if the former “Brant” building lot will not be incorporated into the site, then its coverage calculations must be shown separately.
Mr. Kent added that the new plan includes a loading zone.
Mr. Wilson asked about the connections to the Snug Harbor sewer system. Mr. Kent said that these connections will be changing. He has provided information to the Board of Health. He will be purchasing additional flow for the restrooms.
Mr. Kent said that Bayside Marine provides a bay with a wash-pad and a re-circulating filtered water supply. However, today, some of the larger boats do not fit in that work bay and are washed outside. This problem will be solved with the proposed plan because of the larger building.
Ms. MacNab asked Mr. Sexton about his remaining concerns. Mr. Sexton stated that he has received nothing but cooperation from the applicant. Some of the remaining issues are: a) Resolving the issues of the property lines; b) Verifying available fire-flow; c) A lighting plan that shows direction of lighting and candlepower; d) Fencing as mitigation for abutters; and e) A “big picture” solution for traffic in the area.
Ms. MacNab agreed that the property line issue is important. She said that the creation of a subdivision created lot lines. These cannot simply be ignored. Ms. Stickney said that Town Counsel has opined that since the subdivision was never built that it has expired. She said that this opinion will have to be clarified, given that it has been learned that some of the land is under the jurisdiction of Land Court.
Mr. Al-Zaim said that the Planning Board cannot hold Mr. Kent responsible for the solution to traffic problems in the area. Mr. Kent added that this application does not close any doors to his participation in a future solution.
Ms. Joy Merrill, Senior Manager (Real Estate) of Talbot’s, Inc., said that her company is concerned about the status of Snug Harbor Drive, and it’s rights as an abutting landowner. Mr. Kent said that he will be happy to provide her with information about it. Ms. Merrill also said that she is concerned about the capacity of the Snug Harbor Sewer system. Mr. Kent said that there is plenty of excess capacity, and he plans to purchase some of it. Ms. Merrill said that she spoke with Duxbury’s DPW Director today, who said that there is very little excess capacity.
Mr. Wadsworth added that some of the water connection details on the plans are faulty. Ms. Stickney said that the applicant should confer with the DPW Director, who has standard details for these connections.
Ms. Scieszka said that she would like to see the building coverage decrease from existing conditions. Mr. Sexton said that this should happen if the swale system is utilized, because green area will add to the open space.
Mr. Kent said that he is trying to ascertain what is happening with the existing stormwater pipe at Snug Harbor Drive.
MOTION: Ms. MacNab made a motion to continue the public meeting for Periwinkle Realty Trust to November 29, 2004 at 8:00 PM, with revised plans due to the Planning Office by November 15, 2004, and with an extension of the Planning Board decision date to December 29, 2004. Mr. Wilson provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (7-0).
OTHER BUSINESS
Annual Town Report: Members gave Ms. Scieszka comments for the FY 2004 Annual Town Report, which she is preparing on behalf of the Board.
Proposed Island Creek Expansion: Mr. Wilson, the Board’s representative to the Local Housing Partnership (LHP) reported that Keith Properties, the owner of the existing Island Creek development, is interested in expanding. There was a meeting on October 20, 2004 between representatives of the LHP, the Planning Director, the Conservation Agent, and the Building Inspector. The current development was built under the provisions of MGL Chapter 40B, and includes 106 rental units. One-hundred three additional units are under consideration. Mr. Wilson commented that the existing 106 units generate very little traffic. Many of the residents are elderly or handicapped, and do not drive. Most of the traffic from the development comes from the commercial buildings at the front
of the lot. (It is a mixed-use development.) Mr. Wilson said that advantages include: a) The location is hidden from the street; b) There is a berm which hides the view of the development from the nearby cranberry bog; c) Residents are accustomed to having a housing development there; d) All of the rental units would count toward the Town’s supply of affordable units, even though many of them would be rented at market rate; e) The developer is not looking for financial help from the Town, so Community Preservation funds would not be impacted. Potential stumbling blocks include: a) The original development was approved with the condition of no further development. This would have to be reversed by the Board of Selectmen; b) Potential water supply issues; and c) Traffic impacts to already developing Tremont Street corridor.
Board members were enthusiastic about the concept.
MAPC Legislative Committee: Members gave Ms. Scieszka their ideas about legislative priorities for the Metropolitan Area Planning Council.
Minutes:
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to accept the minutes of 10/18/04 as amended. Ms. MacNab provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (7-0).
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 PM. The next meeting of the Duxbury Planning Board will be held on Monday, November 1, 2004 at 7:30 Pm in the Duxbury Town Offices.
| 
