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 04/03/06
Approved 05/01/06
The Planning Board met in the Town Office Building, Monday, April 3, 2006.
Present: Amy MacNab, Chair; George Wadsworth, Vice-Chairman; Angela Scieszka, Clerk; John Bear, Brendan Halligan, Jim Kimball and Harold Moody.
Absent: Associate Member Douglas Carver.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director; and Diane Grant, Administrative Assistant.
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM.
OPEN FORUM
New Planning Board Members: Ms. MacNab welcomed newly elected Planning Board members Brendan Halligan and Harold Moody.
Duxbury Senior Center ASPR: Ms. MacNab reported that she had attended a meeting last week with Town Manager Richard MacDonald, DPW Director Tom Daley, Council on Aging Director Joanne Moore, and Ms. Stickney regarding proposed expansion of the Senior Center parking lot. She stated that the Council on Aging will be submitting an ASPR application and will perform drainage calculations. The application fee will be waived and engineering peer review will be billed as required. She stated that the intention is to submit the ASPR first and then the ANR to delineate lot lines. Ms. Stickney noted that the ASPR is scheduled for April 24, 2006 and will be advertised in the Duxbury Clipper on April 5 and April 12, 2006. Ms. MacNab asked if abutters are being notified and Ms. Stickney replied that they are.
Bayside Marine, 433 Washington Street: Owner, Mr. J.R. Kent, was present to discuss a proposed trench drain to be installed adjacent to the concrete pad and boat storage racks for water collection from boat washing. On September 8, 2003 the Board had approved with conditions Mr. Kent’s administrative site plan review for demolition of two existing structures and construction of a new two-story building with site improvements. He stated that the current proposal is to install a 3-inch wide, 40-foot long drain with a sump to be used for power washing boats outside of the building. Waste water would be captured by a six-inch drain trench and filtered. He noted that the drain is small because the power washer generates very little water volume. Ms. MacNab asked what was previously located in the area he proposes
for power washing, and he replied that it is where fork lifts maneuver to obtain boats from racks.
Ms. Scieszka asked if the drain connects into the pipe from the showroom to the new building, and Mr. Kent responded that all drains on his property go into a circulation system. Ms. MacNab asked if it was a stand-alone system and Mr. Kent replied that it was. Mr. Wadsworth advised Mr. Kent to make sure that water flows in the direction of the sump, and asked what would happen if the sump were to fail. Mr. Kent stated that employees would notice if the sump backed up and would stop any power washing activities. Mr. Wadsworth suggested that Mr. Kent consider installing an alarm on the water treatment equipment. Mr. Kent objected to this idea, stating that it would pose a maintenance issue. Mr. Wadsworth asked what materials were located under the boats in storage, and Mr. Kent replied that the material used to be grass but
is now peat moss for drainage.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Moody provided a second, to accept a minor modification to plans for Bayside Marine Corporation as submitted on 04/03/06, 2 sheets.
AMENDMENT: Ms. Scieszka proposed an amendment, and Mr. Wadsworth provided a second, to approve modifications subject to the approval of Department of Public Works Director, Mr. Tom Daley.
DISCUSSION ON AMENDMENT: Mr. Bear did not accept the amendment, stating that he did not want to add to the cost for the Town or the applicant, and credited the applicant for taking the initiative to approach the Board with this minor modification. Mr. Kent stated that he would like to receive unconditional approval since he is hoping to pave in the next three days. Ms. MacNab stated that she preferred Mr. Daley inspect the site.
VOTE ON AMENDMENT: The amendment carried, 6-1, with Mr. Bear voting against.
VOTE ON MOTION: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
CONTINUED PUBLIC MEETING: ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW – BONGI TURKEY ROOST, 414 KINGSTOWN WAY / BONGI REALTY TRUST
The public meeting commenced at 8:05 PM. Present for the discussion were the applicant, Mr. John T. Pierce; Mr. Paul Brogna of Seacoast Engineering; and Atty. Robert Galvin. Mr. Walter Amory was also present as Town consulting engineer.
Ms. Scieszka read the correspondence into the record:
§ Mutual Extension Form to continue public meeting to 04/03/06 signed by applicant and Planning Board on 02/27/06.
§ Planning Board meeting minutes of 02/27/06.
§ Memo from Christine Stickney to Building Inspector Scott Liambase dated 03/08/06 re: lot lines.
§ Revised plans and supporting documentation dated March 20, 2006.
§ Cover memo from Seacoast Engineering dated 03/20/06 re: revised plans and responses.
§ Memo to Town departments dated 03/21/06 re: notice of 03/31/06 DRT meeting.
§ Letter from Building Inspector Scott Liambase to applicants, dated 03/31/06 re: lot lines.
Mr. Brogna noted that all issues raised at the February 27, 2006 Board meeting had been resolved. Regarding the parking and traffic flow, Mr. Brogna stated that where before there had been ten new parking spaces and twelve spaces were required, they have taken Mr. Amory’s suggestion to locate all twelve new parking spaces in one area, and they plan to remove the sign in front of the business to allow for a two-lane driveway. Ms. Scieszka asked why they had proposed twelve parking spaces when only ten were required, and Ms. MacNab noted that if the Pierce residence were ever sold, parking near the Pierce home may not count toward the required minimum. Ms. Amory added that with twelve spaces at the same location, there would be no possibility of questions or concerns in the future.
Regarding the water questions, Mr. Brogna stated that two test wells have been dug 4’ 3” below grade. He said that he and Mr. Amory were working on drainage calculations to ensure that the drainage works as efficiently as possible. Mr. Wadsworth asked if the swale would be vegetated, and Mr. Brogna replied that it would not. Mr. Amory clarified that the infiltration system will be vegetated, and Mr. Brogna added that the infiltration system has been redesigned for a 25-year storm.
Regarding groundwater issues, Mr. Brogna stated that Health Agent Ms. Jennifer Dalrymple defers judgment to the Water Superintendent, Mr. Paul Anderson. Mr. Brogna stated that, at the Village at Duxbury located south of Bongi’s, the groundwater goes from northwest to southeast. Mr. Wadsworth noted that at a site east of Bongi’s, Parker’s Grove off Elm Street, three wells have been installed. Ms. Scieszka stated that the Parker’s Grove wells may be further from Bongi’s than the Village at Duxbury wells.
Ms. MacNab asked if any nitrogen calculations had been done, and Mr. Brogna replied that they had not been done at the advice of Ms. Dalrymple to wait and see if they were needed. Mr. Brogna distributed to the Board newly revised plans dated March 22, 2006, and noted four Title V upgrades had been performed, and that soils tested consistently, high groundwater was consistent, and that the septic had been inspected by Ms. Dalrymple. Mr. Wadsworth suggested that Mr. Brogna should have tested the water. Ms. MacNab added that historically there have been issues with elevated nitrogen issues in that part of Town. Mr. Amory commented that they had found saturated soil but no standing water upon inspection. Atty. Galvin noted that their project was to be addressed at the Zoning Board of Appeals on April 27, 2006.
Mr. Bear asked if any lot line changes would be proposed, and Atty. Galvin replied that there is no intention of doing that. Mr. Wadsworth suggested that an 81X would eliminate the interior lot line that currently appears to straddle the existing brooding house. Atty. Galvin objected to the financial burden of an Approval Not Required fee. Ms. MacNab suggested that a perimeter plan could be submitted to the Registry of Deeds, and advised Atty. Galvin that this may be an issue when they attempt to obtain any future building permits. Ms. Stickney added that it makes sense to take care of any issues now to avoid any potential future problems. Atty. Galvin stated that he did not deem it necessary to change the lot lines because the plan does not pertain to the brooding house. Ms. MacNab advised that the project needs to work
within its own site.
Mr. Kimball asked about handicap accessibility parking and the proposed traffic flow. Mr. Brogna stated that a new entrance will be placed at the southeast corner of the property rather than the current northeast entrance. Ms. Scieszka asked if pedestrian traffic would go in that direction, and Mr. Brogna replied that there would be another entrance on the east side of the building. Mr. Moody asked if traffic flow would be one-way, and Mr. Brogna replied that it would be one-way in a southbound direction.
Mr. Amory was asked for his comments and stated that he and the applicant were on the same page on all issues with the exception of groundwater flow. He said that he is not convinced that the water flows from a northwest to southeast direction, and that, while the Village at Duxbury is not located in Zone 2, Bongi’s is located in Zone 2. He stated that Mr. Brogna has not provided sufficient evidence that groundwater flow is in a southeasterly direction. Mr. Wadsworth noted that Zone 2 has strict assumptions, and that the well needs to flow for 180 days continuously. Mr. Amory stated that Zone 2 is a line defined by an area contributing to a well which is generated by 180 days of no recharge. Ms. MacNab asked why there was no groundwater plan, which is standard in a Zone 2 location, and Mr. Brogna replied that it
would entail thousands of dollars in cost and weeks of time. He noted that there is no increase proposed in the number of turkeys being farmed.
Ms. Stickney noted that Development Review Team minutes from March 31, 2006 were not yet available, but provided an overview:
§ New circulation design went over well.
§ Sign on island needs to be located on applicant’s property.
§ Traffic still flows over residential property. (Atty. Galvin replied that the applicant would be willing to consider drafting an easement from the homeowners to the Realty Trust, or closing some curb cuts.)
§ Fire Department asked about any point of access from the rear of the property from Autumn Avenue, and suggested the applicant speak to them regarding this issue. (Mr. Brogna agreed to contact Chief Nord the next day.)
Ms. MacNab noted that the main issue at this time is the groundwater direction. Mr. Amory suggested that he and Mr. Brogna review the situation, and if results were inconclusive, then he would entertain Mr. Wadsworth’s suggestion that the applicant build three test wells. Mr. Bear noted that there is no proposed change in nitrogen loading with this project. Mr. Brogna stated that he and Ms. Dalrymple had agreed that the applicant would submit a manure maintenance plan for the Board of Health with a few minor modifications that they had discussed.
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to continue the administrative site plan review public meeting for Bongi’s Turkey Roost, 414 Kingstown Way, to Monday, May 8, 2006 at 8:00 PM, with an act-on date of June 1, 2006, and plans due to the Planning Office by May 1, 2006. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
WORKING SESSION OF THE PLANNING BOARD
ZBA Meeting: At 9:12 PM the Board adjourned to the Mural Room for a joint discussion with the Zoning Board of Appeals. Present for the Zoning Board of Appeals were Mr. James Lampert, Chair; Ms. Elizabeth Lewis, Vice Chair; Ms. Sara Wilson, Clerk; and associate members Ms. Florence Gregg; Mr. Thomas McClure, Mr. Dennis Murphy, and Mr. Y. Oktay. .
Ms. MacNab proposed that the two groups form a mansionization sub-committee, and Mr. Lampert responded that the ZBA is limited in what they can do regarding mansionization, and that they are not a policy-making group. Mr. Bear, Ms. Scieszka, and Mr. Wadsworth provided input as to why a sub-committee would be helpful to both the Planning Board and the ZBA. Ms. Lewis asked if the ultimate goal would be to change the zoning bylaw, and Ms. Scieszka replied that it could be an outcome.
Mr. McClure stated that he was not sure what the ZBA could do, and Ms. Scieszka replied that together the Boards could define triggers such as design and massing guidelines. Mr. Lampert stated that the Town should form an historic district following guidelines currently used in Nantucket. Ms. Scieszka noted that this could be a possible area of discussion for a sub-committee.
Mr. Lampert noted that height is an issue. Ms. MacNab stated her opinion that the change in site coverage at Annual Town Meeting had been a step backward. Mr. Lampert said he felt it was a step forward. Mr. McClure noted that site coverage is a different issue than mansionization. Ms. Lewis added that mansionization is not much of an issue for the ZBA. Ms. MacNab noted that the Town appears to be losing smaller homes that could add to the diversity of housing. Ms. Wilson asked if the Planning Board had conducted any surveys of bylaws in Massachusetts, and Ms. Stickney responded that they had done some research on other towns’ floor-to-area ratios.
Mr. McClure noted that he sees a difference in the roles of the ZBA and the Planning Board. He stated that the Planning Board is trying to set policy, and asked if members felt they had a mandate from Town residents. He said that residents say they don’t approve of mansionization except when it concerns them directly. Mr. Kimball stated that residents are afraid of losing small houses on small lots.
Ms. Scieszka suggested the two groups host a public forum asking the public “What is Mansionization?” Mr. McClure stated that the ZBA does not hear this type of complaint from residents. Mr. Lampert noted that the current 3% increase limit does not usually make an impact, but volume is a different matter. Ms. Lewis stated her concern with narrowing standards, and said that the standards should be more subjective. Ms. Wilson stated that the ZBA sees applicants with site coverage information of their neighbors so that they are staying in character with the neighborhood. Ms. Scieszka asked why not put a cap on addition size, and Ms. Wilson stated that there are too many factors to consider.
Mr. Bear noted that the type of mansionization concern the Planning Board hears is a large house being built on a small lot, and Mr. Lampert noted that the ZBA hears from residents trying to fit in with a nearby neighborhood instead. Ms. MacNab concluded that the mansionization discussion was useful, and suggested that the two groups meet quarterly and continue discussing issues. Ms. Wilson suggested that the Planning Board collect zoning strategies from other towns to share with the ZBA.
Ms. MacNab introduced the topic of 81X registration of Chapter 40A plans. She stated that the Planning Board had met with Town Counsel, Atty. Robert Troy, and he supports their position that only the Planning Board has the authority to endorse subdivision plans. Mr. Lampert stated that he disagreed with Atty. Troy’s interpretation of the law. Ms. MacNab stated that the intent of Chapter 40B had never been to subdivide lots. Mr. McClure stated that Chapter 40B trumps subdivision approval, and Ms. Wilson said that evidence exists that the ZBA may endorse a subdivision plan. Ms. Wilson further questioned why it matters who endorses a plan, and Ms. MacNab responded that the Planning Board members believe that only they can endorse a subdivision plan. Ms. Lewis stated that the Housing Appeals Committee’s view is
that Chapter 40B allows the ZBA to endorse a subdivision plan. Mr. Halligan asked to see a copy of that decision, and Mr. Lampert replied that the ZBA will provide it.
The discussion ended and the Board reconvened to the Small Conference Room at 10:25 PM.
OTHER BUSINESS
Bay Farm Montessori Academy ASPR: Ms. Stickney noted the upcoming public meeting on May 1, 2006 and suggested that Board members make a site visit, especially during student drop-off and pick-up times.
Blue River Montessori School: Ms. Stickney noted that she would be attending a meeting with the owner of this proposed school and the Director of Inspectional Services within the next week.
PD Consulting Engineers: Ms. Stickney noted that two out of five engineers contacted had expressed interest in providing consulting services.
Pilgrim Byway: Ms. Stickney advised the Board that an issue had arisen with a property subdivided without Board approval and a lot sold with a deed. She asked for approval to contact Atty. Troy regarding this issue, and the Board agreed.
Planning Board Appointments: The following appointments were made:
§ Community Preservation Committee: Mr. Wadsworth agreed to continue serving (term expires June 30, 2007).
§ Economic Advisory Committee: Mr. Bear agreed to continue serving (term expires June 30, 2006).
§ Land-Use Group: Ms. MacNab agreed to continue serving, and Mr. Wadsworth agreed to serve as alternate.
§ Local Housing Partnership (LHP): Ms. Scieszka agreed to continue serving (term expires June 30, 2007).
§ MAPC: It was agreed that Mr. Lewis would continue to serve.
§ MBTA: Mr. Kimball agreed to continue serving.
§ South Shore Coalition: Ms. Scieszka agreed to continue serving.
§ LHP Sub-Committee on Housing Strategies: This recently proposed ad hoc group would work toward finding mutual agreement on housing strategies before the Housing Consultant position is filled. Ms. Stickney advised that the LHP has appointed Mr. Brendan Keohan, Mr. Thomas O’Regan and Mr. Charles Rourke. After brief discussion, the Board appointed Mr. Brendan Halligan, Mr. Jim Kimball, and Ms. Amy MacNab.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board meeting was adjourned at 10:40 PM. The next meeting of the Duxbury Planning Board will be held on Monday, April 10, 2006 at 7:30 PM in the Small Conference Room of Town offices.
| 
