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.
Town of Duxbury
Massachusetts
Planning Board
Minutes 12/12/05
(Approved 01/09/06)
The Planning Board met in the Town Office Building, Monday, December 12, 2005.
Present: Amy MacNab, Chair; George Wadsworth, Vice-Chairman; Angela Scieszka, Clerk; Aboud Al-Zaim, John Bear, Jim Kimball and Harold Moody. Also present was Associate Member Douglas Carver.
Absent: No one was absent.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director; and Diane Grant, Administrative Assistant.
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM.
OPEN FORUM
No new business was introduced at Open Forum.
AS-BUILT APPROVAL / PRATT CIRCLE
Present for the discussion:
Mr. Gerald White, applicant
Atty. Robert Galvin, applicant’s attorney
Mr. Christopher Coleman, 3 Pratt Circle
Mr. Charles Fox, 5 Pratt Circle
Mr. Henry Oheim, Jr., 7 Pratt Circle
Atty. Galvin distributed to the Board copies of his December 8, 2005 letter advising Pratt Circle homeowners of tonight’s meeting. Atty. Galvin explained that regarding this definitive 3-lot subdivision plan, all road conditions have been met. He said that a Homeowners Association had been drafted and approved by Town Counsel Atty. Robert Troy, but that the lots had been released before the Homeowners Association was recorded at the registry of deeds. He said that he had attempted to reach the homeowners to discuss the situation with no success. Atty. Galvin reported that he is stymied as to what to do and requested a continuance, and also suggested he may consider asking the Board to waive the Homeowners Association requirement.
Ms. MacNab advised Atty. Galvin that the approval states that all conditions need to be met, and that it is not the Board’s responsibility to facilitate the Homeowners Association that should have been recorded before the lots were released. She asked if any homeowners were present, and all three homeowners identified themselves.
Mr. Oheim stated that he had no idea that a Homeowners Association existed upon his purchase of the lot in April 2004, and that he was not made aware of it until Atty. Galvin’s September 22, 2005 letter advising him that the Homeowners Association had not been recorded. Mr. Oheim stated that he feels the document is more of a trust than a Homeowners Association, and that he has no intention of signing it as is. Ms. MacNab advised Mr. Oheim that he would need to work with Atty. Galvin.
Ms. Scieszka noted that the Homeowners Association existed at the time of subdivision approval, and that the Homeowners Association was required due to the unique nature of the subdivision. Mr. Fox asked if homeowners can make changes to the Homeowners Association at this point in time, and Ms. Stickney replied that Town Counsel had reviewed the document and would need to be consulted. Mr. Al-Zaim stated that the document should remain the same since the Homeowners Association was part of the subdivision approval, and noted that the Homeowners Association stipulates that the subdivision roadway is never intended as a public way.
Ms. MacNab asked Mr. Coleman if he had any comment, and Mr. Coleman replied that he was in agreement with the other two homeowners and had no further comments. Ms. MacNab noted that the performance bond will be held until the issue is resolved, and Atty. Galvin advised that he is not requesting bond release at this time.
Mr. Wadsworth and Ms. MacNab advised the homeowners that a Homeowners Association is in the best interest of all the property owners, and to remember that the Town of Duxbury is a silent party in the association, so that any revisions would need to be reviewed by the Town and the Board. Mr. Moody disclosed that he had worked as Mr. Coleman’s attorney at a mortgage refinancing, and reinforced the importance of having a Homeowners Association in place.
Mr. Oheim responded that because he was not aware of the Homeowners Association, he feels he bought the property under false pretenses. Atty. Galvin advised Mr. Oheim that he would be happy to meet with him to discuss the matter further. Ms. MacNab noted that the Board worked with Atty. Galvin on many revisions of the Homeowners Association before it was approved, and that she would like to see Atty. Galvin and the homeowners come to an agreement.
Ms. Stickney asked if returning January 23, 2006 would fit Atty. Galvin’s schedule and he replied that it would. Mr. Kimball requested that Atty. Galvin report on any interim progress. Ms. MacNab asked the developer, Mr. Gerald White, if he had any further comments, and he responded that if the Homeowners Association had been recorded before the lots were released, there would have been no issue. Ms. MacNab thanked all participants for attending, and they departed.
OTHER BUSINESS
Because it was not yet 8:00 PM, the Board conducted other business:
Engineering Invoices
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Wadsworth provided a second, to pay Amory Engineering invoice #11067A in the amount of $359.75 for services related to Hillside Lane subdivision, and Amory Engineering invoice #11067B in the amount of $453.25 for services related to the Deer Run subdivision. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (7:0).
Meeting Minutes
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Ms. Scieszka provided a second, to accept the November 28, 2005 Board meeting minutes as amended. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (7:0).
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Bear provided a second, to accept the December 5, 2005 Board meeting minutes as amended. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The vote carried unanimously (7:0).
An Amory Engineering invoice related to services for the Deesul Medical Building was deferred until December 19, 2005 to ensure that engineering escrow funds are sufficient.
DISCUSSION WITH LOCAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP
Present for the discussion were Local Housing Partnership chairman Mr. Bill Campbell and members Ms. Diane Bartlett, Mr. William Childs, Mr. R. Lane Partridge, and Mr. Charles Rourke. Ms. MacNab noted that Ms. Scieszka serves as Board representative to the Local Housing Partnership as well, and asked Ms. Scieszka for an update on a proposal to create a Housing Coordinator.
Ms. Scieszka reported that the Local Housing Partnership has requested funds from the Community Preservation Commission on the Annual Town Meeting warrant for a Housing Consultant, and noted the change in term from “Coordinator” to “Consultant.” She noted that the LHP has agreed that the Housing Consultant’s priority should be creating an affordable housing plan, and that the Board would be responsible for overseeing its development. She noted that the Board had received a copy of the LHP’s proposal to the CPC describing the Housing Consultant’s duties.
Ms. MacNab stated that she wanted to make sure that a majority of the LHP was in agreement but noted that only four out of eleven members were present at that time. (Ms. Scieszka was not included in this count, and Mr. Partridge arrived at a later point.) Mr. Al-Zaim reinforced that the Board was seeking consensus.
Mr. Campbell provided some background, reporting that the LHP had been working with Judi Barrett to develop a plan, but that she had advised them that she was not able to continue this work. He said that the LHP is looking for a professional to supplement planning work that Ms. Stickney does not have time to do, and so they went to the CPC to obtain funding. He noted that the primary responsibility of the Housing Consultant is to carry out work that the Board had requested of the LHP.
Ms. Bartlett reported that the LHP’s idea for a Housing Consultant originated with their visit to Nantucket where a housing coordinator position and a comprehensive plan are in place. Mr. Campbell added that their purpose tonight is to come to agreement with the Board on creating the plan that the LHP had agreed to do toward the goal of getting someone to do the housing work that needs to be done.
Discussion turned to the specific duties and management of a Housing Consultant. Ms. MacNab agreed that while the Board fully supports the housing plan as the top priority, it appeared that the LHP had a broader list of duties for the Housing Consultant. Mr. Al-Zaim stated that there may be a fundamental difference in intentions between the Board and the LHP. He said that creating an affordable housing plan is a one-time job with a well defined scope of duties, while a Housing Consultant position needs to be funded yearly. He noted that the Board looks at issues more globally than the LHP does, and that he has difficulty combining the Housing Consultant with a housing plan.
Ms. Bartlett responded that the affordable housing plan is one aspect of the housing issues that need to be resolved. She reported that in Nantucket CPC funds were used as seed money, and they presently have over 20 affordable housing projects underway and have secured $750,000.00 to augment their affordable housing efforts. Mr. Rourke stated that the LHP believes that one person can create an affordable housing plan for the Town of Duxbury and implement it as well.
Mr. Partridge stated that once an affordable housing plan is in place, it will be important to have someone to help carry out development of affordable housing. Mr. Al-Zaim questioned if the CPC funding is intended to be a one-time request, and Mr. Rourke said that Nantucket has a housing coordinator staff of three that is funded by grants. Mr. Al-Zaim stated that the Board is hoping that a Housing Consultant become a self-sustaining position funded through grants.
Ms. MacNab stated that she would like a more explicit breakdown of funding expenditures, and she and Mr. Al-Zaim questioned if any funds would remain after the Housing Coordinator had completed the affordable housing plan. Ms. Stickney responded that an RFP can specify the scope of the position, and noted that the Housing Consultant may need to apply for grants throughout the first year because they are time sensitive. She also noted that the Town of Scituate spent $20,000.00 to create their affordable housing plan.
Mr. Kimball questioned if $30,000.00 was enough to fund a Housing Consultant, and Ms. Bartlett responded that the LHP was attempting to keep costs down and that creating the housing plan would be a finite project. Mr. Rourke added that much of the background information is in place, and Ms. Stickney noted that the Community Development Plan can be used as a basis for submitting an affordable housing plan.
Mr. Wadsworth reported that he and his colleagues on the CPC approved an Annual Town Meeting warrant to create a Housing Consultant, then because of potential concerns that voters would not support funding an ongoing position, the Board was considering an alternative warrant article to fund the position from the Town’s general fund. The CPC concluded that a separate article might be confusing to voters and be seen as competing. Mr. Wadsworth advised the Board that it should consider removing the alternative article. Ms. Bartlett agreed that the best approach would be for the LHP and the Board to co-sponsor a warrant article using CPC funds.
Ms. MacNab asked if potential changes to the Housing Consultant description would affect CPC’s approval, and Mr. Wadsworth replied that it would not affect the CPC because they were more concerned with the broad issue of funding a Housing Consultant. Ms. Scieszka suggested that the Housing Consultant description be revised according to priority, with an affordable housing plan at the top of the list. She also noted that the Board would like to clearly define roles before they agree to co-sponsor. Ms. MacNab agreed, suggesting that any staff time devoted to the Housing Consultant position needed to be defined and supported by the Board.
Ms. Bartlett suggested the Board provide a revised Housing Consultant draft for the LHP to review, but Ms. Stickney noted that time is an issue if the Board wished to pursue drafting an alternative article because warrant articles are due by December 19, 2005. She further noted that the warrant article sponsored by the CPC had already been reviewed by Town Counsel. Ms. MacNab asked if Housing Consultant duties were listed on the ATM warrant, and Mr. Wadsworth replied that they were not, but that the public will want to know what the duties are. Ms. MacNab said that the Board could agree to co-sponsor the warrant and further refine the Housing Consultant job description by ATM in March. However, she stated her preference to define the Housing Consultant duties before agreeing to co-sponsor.
Mr. Wadsworth asked if the Board needs to commit to co-sponsoring the ATM warrant, and Ms. Stickney replied that because it is a CPC article they are not required to endorse or not, unlike zoning articles where the Board takes a vote to endorse.
Ms. Bartlett suggested a sub-committee of the Board and LHP members work toward revising the Housing Consultant description. After some discussion it was decided that the Board would provide input and then send its suggested revisions to the LHP. Ms. MacNab requested that Ms. Scieszka continue to keep communication open between the LHP and the Board. The LHP members departed the meeting.
Mr. Kimball noted that the warrant is already sponsored by the CPC, and Ms. Stickney advised that although it is not a statutory requirement, the LHP is looking for the Board’s support. Mr. Bear suggested the possibility of one Board member and one LHP member presenting the article at Annual Town Meeting.
ZBA REFERRAL – 204 PARKS STREET / BERGSTROM
Mrs. Bergstrom was present as the applicant who is seeking a special permit for an addition to the rear of a non-conforming structure. Ms. MacNab noted that the non-conformity stems from two structures on the lot that date back to pre-1950 zoning restrictions. Mr. Wadsworth noted that the setback was within limits and that there is no concern with site coverage.
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to defer judgment on the application to the Zoning Board of Appeals. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (7:0).
WORK SESSION
Discussion was briefly interrupted when newly appointed Town Manager, Mr. Richard MacDonald stopped by the meeting room and was greeted with a spontaneous round of applause.
ANNUAL TOWN MEETING WARRANT ARTICLES
Board members reviewed five proposed ATM warrant articles and made minor revisions. Ms. Stickney agreed to email the revisions to the Board for final review.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Kimball provided a second, and the motion passed unanimously (7:0).
The Planning Board meeting was adjourned at 9:33 PM. The next meeting of the Duxbury Planning Board will be held on Monday, December 19, 2005 at 7:30 PM in the Duxbury Town Offices.
| 
