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, January 31, 2005.
Present: George Wadsworth, Chairman; Amy MacNab (for part of the meeting), Vice-Chairman; Angela Scieszka, Clerk; Aboud Al-Zaim, John Bear, James Kimball (for part of the meeting) and Rob Wilson..
Absent: Angela Scieszka, Clerk; John Bear and Harold Moody (Associate Member).
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director and Barbara Ripley, Administrative Assistant.
The meeting was called to order at 7:40 PM.
OPEN FORUM
Scheduling: Ms. MacNab asked that the discussion of correspondence from Mark Casey of South Shore Survey, dated January 7, 2005, be postponed to the next meeting, since she has to leave early tonight. Members agreed. Ms. Ripley reviewed attendance plans for the next meeting and asked members to advise her of any schedule changes.
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
Mr. and Mrs. Chandler, current owners of 104 Tremont Street
Ms. MacNab read the correspondence list into the record:
· Pictures submitted at the 12/13/04 hearing of existing architecture around Town.
· Mutual Extension Form to continue public meeting to 1/24/05 signed by applicant and Planning Board on 12/13/04
· Minutes of the 12/13/04 meeting
· Letter from Atty. T. Tucker dated 12/15/04 re: attachment from Celtic Construction
· Letter from T. DiCicco dated 12/16/04 re: additional drainage calculations
· Letter from T. DiCicco dated 12/16/04 re: submission of revised plans
· Letter from C. Stickney to W. Amory dated 12/21/04 re: transmittal of materials
· Letter from W. Amory dated 1/3/05 re: plans in accord with requirements – one detail to be deleted.
· Letter from T. DiCicco dated 1/4/05 re: change made per W. Amory request.
· Draft conditions prepared by staff dated 1/14/05
· Letter from John E. Bowser, Acting Deputy Chief & Fire Prevention Officer, dated 1/19/05, stating that all Fire Department concerns have been addressed
The Planning Board reviewed draft conditions as prepared by Ms. Stickney. The following items were discussed:
Draft Condition #15, page 5: (Relative to the prevention and clean-up of earthen material onto Tremont Street during construction.) Mr. Wadsworth emphasized the need for this condition.
Draft Condition #23, page 6: (Relative to requiring the applicant to provide a landscaped buffer between 104 and 96 Tremont Street, once the ownership of 96 Tremont Street is transferred.) Ms. MacNab said that she would like to strengthen the language in this condition, so that the landscaped buffer would be provided once ownership of 96 Tremont Street changes hands. Mr. Al-Zaim was in favor of eliminating the condition. He said that it would be very difficult to control what happens with the landscaping after the approval process is complete.
MOTION: Ms. MacNab made a motion to include draft condition #23 on page 6 of the DRAFT conditions, dated 1/14/05 in the final conditions for the project; amended to read as follows:
In accordance with a letter submitted by the abutters, Mr. & Mrs. Granville Baker of #96 Tremont Street no fence or landscaping shall be required within the required 10’ buffer setback. This is intended as a temporary waiver of
the landscaping buffer requirement under ZBL section 603.2. Should future conditions, as determined by the Planning Board, warrant additional landscaping and/ or fencing to sufficiently screen the commercial use and abutting residential use, the property owner/applicant shall be required to install additional landscaping and/or fencing. The requirement of additional
landscaping shall carry forward should the Bakers transfer ownership by law of #96 Tremont Street to a new property owner but shall expire six (6) months after such conveyance.
Mr. Wilson provided a second for the motion, which carried by a vote of 3:1 (Mr. Al-Zaim against).
It was agreed that the Planning Director would write a letter to the Bakers, explaining the condition, and suggest that it be kept with other documents related to the property.
Draft Condition #13, Page 5: (Pertaining to providing a stamped certified copy of design build plans for the modular wall.) The applicant’s engineer objected to this condition, but Planning Board members agreed to require it.
Draft Condition #15, Page 5 (again): (Pertaining to the prevention and clean-up of earthen material onto Tremont Street during construction.) The applicant’s attorney requested that the word “prevent” be substituted for the word “prohibit” in the first sentence. Planning Board members agreed to leave the language as originally presented.
Draft Condition #18, Page 5: (Pertaining to requiring a right-turn only when exiting the property.) The applicant’s traffic engineer said that this would create more problems than it would solve. Planning Board members agreed to eliminate this condition.
Draft Condition #20, Page 6: (Pertaining to As-Built Review) The applicant requested, and received clarification on this item.
Draft Conditions #27 and #30: (Pertaining to parking and ZBA requirements) Attorney Tucker asked how to proceed if the ZBA requires more parking than currently planned. Board members agreed that any change to the site plans as presented would require Planning Board review. One or two spaces would probably not trigger additional formal review. However, if the Board determined that the change presented a substantial modification, a new submission under the Administrative Site Plan Review process would be required.
Draft Condition #16, Page 5: (Pertaining to landscaping at the rear of the lot) The applicant’s attorney questioned the open-ended nature of the condition. Planning Board members stated that if they had to specify required landscaping now, it might be more burdensome than what is actually deemed necessary once the drainage basin is completed.
After the conditions were reviewed, Ms. MacNab commented on the size of the project. She noted that the proposed building is smaller than other proposals for this same site, and is even smaller than what the applicant originally suggested during this submission process. The site plan complies with the Zoning Bylaw as written. However, it is still a large building. She said that the final decision on the size of the building resides with the Zoning Board of Appeals.
MOTION: Ms. MacNab made a motion to approve the site plan for 104 Tremont Street, proposed by Deesul, LLC, with conditions dated 1/14/05 and amended on 1/31/05. Mr. Wilson provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
Mr. Kimball joined the meeting at this point. Ms. MacNab left the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING: DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION PLAN FOR SONG SPARROW ESTATES—OFF FOREST STREET/ Estate of Clarence Kent
Present for the applicant were:
Jay Woodruff, Search Tech
Bill Devine, Search Tech
Steve Gioiosa, SITEC Engineering
Mr. Wilson read the public hearing notice and the correspondence list:
· Original application, plans and supporting documents filed 12/23/04
· Public Hearing Notice (Duxbury Clipper 1/12/05 & 1/19/05)
· Letter dated 12/28/04 from John Keegan of SITEC Engineering – noting a drafting error that will be corrected no next revisions of plans.
· Letter dated 12/30/04 from Paul Anderson, Water Superintendent with recommendations re: subdivision
· DRT Minutes dated 1/14/05
Mr. Gioiosa described the proposal for a two-lot subdivision off Forest Street. He said that the proposed roadway is 300-350 feet in total length. He said that the applicant agrees with comments made in the Water Superintendent’s letter of 12/30/04. He added that a low-impact drainage system has been designed. He said that extensive soil testing has determined that very good re-charge is available at this site.
Mr. Wadsworth called attention to the Development Review Team concern about pooling of water in the lot abutting the southeast corner of the site. It was noted that the property slopes down to that point (an approximate 35-foot drop over 1,000-foot distance). Mr. Gioiosa said that the water quality swale, the bio-retention areas, the roof drains, and some flattening of the grades should prevent the problem.
Next, Mr. Gioiosa presented the applicant’s request for a limited peer review of the proposal. He noted that the same parcel has been studied several times, since it has been the subject of several land-use proposals. Mr. Wadsworth emphasized the need for a careful study of the drainage, and for confirmation that the application meets Subdivision Rules and Regulations. However, he noted that a review of traffic, slopes, and some other issues will not be required.
Mr. Wilson noted an error on page C-3 of the narrative report by SITEC Engineering. Page C3 states that the maximum number of residential lots will be “eight”. This should be changed to “two”.
Six members of the Northwest Duxbury Resident’s Association (abutters’ group) were present, but made no comments.
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to continue the public hearing for Song Sparrow Estates to March 21, 2005 at 7:45 PM, with the decision date remaining 5/7/05. Mr. Al-Zaim provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
PRESENTATION BY THE DUXBURY BAY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
Five members of the Duxbury Bay Management Committee were present. Mr. Shawn Dahlen and Ms. Margaret Kearney spoke on behalf of the group. Ms. Kearney said that the group has been working for three years, and has discovered that management of Duxbury’s greatest natural resource is an enormous and complicated job. They outlined their progress to date. The Committee is proposing two Town Meeting articles to continue the goals of the Committee. The first article would establish a permanent Duxbury Bay Management Commission. The second article would amend the Zoning Bylaw to notify and request comments by the DBM Commission before approving new Bay related activities. Planning Board members praised the work of the Committee and noted that the Board will be holding a public hearing on the
proposed Zoning Bylaw change on February 14, 2005 at 7:45 PM.
SPECIAL PERMIT RECOMMENDATION: CASEY/ 17 Orchard Lane
Mr. Jeff Casey was present. Mr. Casey has applied for a building permit to replace an existing deck with a three-season room, and to build a new deck on his property in the Weston Farms cluster development. The footprint of the residence will change. The building inspector has referred the application to the ZBA, to determine whether an amendment to the original Special Permit for Weston Farms will be required. The ZBA will be holding an administrative meeting in order to determine this and the Planning Board was asked for their comments. However, the Planning Board did not have a copy of the original permit for Weston Farms, and so could make no comment. The Planning Board did note that if it is determined to be an amendment, they will be reviewing the matter again at a later
date.
SPECIAL PERMIT RECOMMENDATION: QUIGLEY/ 182 Powder Point Avenue
The applicant seeks to amend a condition of their 2002 Special Permit for a Bed & Breakfast establishment. The amendment would allow the provision of candlelight dinners, provided by a caterer (not prepared on-site).
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to make no recommendation on this application, as there are no Planning issues. Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
OTHER BUSINESS
Song Sparrow Estates: Mr. Wadsworth suggested that the Board use Horsley & Witten, Inc. to complete the peer review of this project. He said that this firm has special expertise in innovative drainage designs. Other Board members agreed. Ms. Stickney agreed to contact Horsley & Witten, Inc.
Engineering Review Invoices:
Invoice #20515, from Mainstream Engineering, for Snug Harbor Boatworks application, amount= $1,078.90.
Ms. Ripley explained that Planning Staff has requested replenishment of the escrow account for this application, but the applicant has not done so. The applicant has complained about the cost of the engineering review. Ms. Ripley further explained that, after payment of this bill, there will only be approximately $500.00 left in the escrow account, yet there will be additional charges for a water analysis (Dufresne-Henry, Inc.) which are expected to be approximately $1,500. Therefore, the Planning Director has instructed Mainstream Engineering to stop all peer review work. The continued public meeting for this project is scheduled for February 7, 2005. There will be DRT information, but no peer review. Board members agreed that they would be unlikely to issue any kind of site approval
for this project, without a completed peer review.
Mr. Al-Zaim said that he has felt for a long time that the invoices from Mainstream Engineering are excessive, but he has not pushed the issue. He said that it is imperative that the Planning Board issue a Request for Proposal, in order to increase the pool of peer review engineers from which the Planning Board may choose. Ms. Stickney said that part of the problem, in her opinion, is that the Mainstream reviews go into areas that are not the purview of the Planning Board. She suggested that the Planning Board be more specific about the expected scope of the review. Mr. Wilson said that the Planning Board should pay the current bill because Mr. Sexton has performed the services, and put in the hours. Ms. Stickney agreed to draft a Request for Proposals for the Planning Board’s review.
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to pay Invoice #20515, from Mainstream Engineering, for the Snug Harbor Boatworks application, in the amount of $1,078.90. Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion, which carried by a vote of 3-1 (Mr. Al-Zaim opposed).
Invoices from Amory Engineering, PC
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion to pay:
Invoice #10640A, for 104 Tremont Street, in the amount of $1,095.00
Invoice #10640B, for Hillside Lane, in the amount of $60.00
Invoice #10640C, for Dingley Dell Lane, in the amount of $1,350.00
Mr. Wilson provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
Addition to Invoice #20506, Mainstream Engineering, for Bayside Marine, amount = $181.20.
Ms. Ripley explained that these charges had been erroneously billed by Mainstream Engineering to the Zoning Board of Appeals. They should have been billed to the Planning Board.
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion to pay Invoice #20506, Mainstream Engineering, for Bayside Marine, in the amount of $181.20. Mr. Wilson provided a second for the motion, which carried by a vote of 3-1 (Mr. Al-Zaim against).
Minutes:
MOTION: Mr. Wilson made a motion to approve the minutes of January 3, 2005 and January 10, 2005 as written. Mr. Kimball provided a second for the motion, which carried unanimously (4-0).
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 PM. The next meeting of the Duxbury Planning Board will be held on Monday, February 7, 2005 at 7:30 PM in the Duxbury Town Offices.
| 
