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 09/18/06
Approved 11/20/06
The Planning Board met in the Duxbury Town Offices on Monday, September 18, 2006 at 7:30 PM.
Present: Amy MacNab, Chair; George Wadsworth, Vice-Chairman; Angela Scieszka, Clerk; John Bear, Brendan Halligan, Jim Kimball, and Harold Moody; and 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 7:30 PM.
OPEN FORUM
Freeman Farms: Mr. Wadsworth stated that Mr. Len Viera, a neighbor, is interested is having a streetlight installed at the end of Icehouse Road. Mr. Viera was told that a light is included on approved subdivision plans. Ms. Stickney noted that because the subdivision does not have a two-year deadline as current ones do, the only requirement is for the light to be installed before the subdivision is completed. She suggested that Mr. Viera speak to the Police Department or Highway Department about a temporary light if vandalism is a concern.
Mr. Wadsworth asked if the subdivision approval could be amended to force a two-year completion, and Ms. Stickney replied that it could be, but would require public notice and abutter notification. Ms. MacNab noted that the developer has only developed two lots per year. She added that large stockpiles of sand have been on site for the past ten years. However, she stated that she did not believe the subdivision approval should be re-opened. Ms. Stickney agreed that it is difficult to rescind a subdivision approval now that there are individual property owners along with the developers.
Millbrook Crossing ASPR: Ms. MacNab commented that there were meeting room issues at last week’s meeting, and staff assured her they would be corrected for the next Senior Center public meeting. Ms. MacNab also noted public perception that the proposal was being reviewed by the Planning Board behind closed doors, because the applicant had presented preliminary plans to the Local Housing Partnership and the Economic Advisory Committee which have Planning Board representation. Mr. Kimball suggested that future applicants should be advised to go through the proper channels rather than preliminary meetings. Mr. Bear stated that he is not sure previews should be eliminated. Ms. MacNab suggested that these preliminary meetings could be better advertised to the public.
Ms. Scieszka suggested a preliminary public presentation after a formal application has been received. Ms. MacNab recommended that the Board consider future discussion on this topic.
PUBLIC MEETING, ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW:
766 TEMPLE STREET / INDUSTRIAL TOWER AND WIRELESS, LLC
Ms. MacNab opened the public meeting at 8:00 PM. Present for the discussion were Atty. Edward Angley representing the applicant; Mr. Graig Joyce, applicant; Mr. Kevin Delaney, Radio Frequency Engineer for the applicant; and Mr. Shaikh Mahmood, Radio Frequency Engineer for co-applicant T-Mobile; and Mr. Walter Amory, Town consulting engineer.
Ms. Scieszka read into the record the public meeting notice and correspondence list:
§ Letter from S. Lambiase to R. & D. Dinius (766 Temple Street) re: special permit and site plan review required
§ Administrative Site Plan Review Application, plans and supporting documentation submitted on 08/09/06
§ Letter from G. Joyce to C. Stickney dated 08/09/06 re: agreement to extension of decision deadline
§ Letter from W. Amory to Planning Board dated 08/16/06 re: project review
§ Public meeting notice submitted to Town Clerk on 08/22/06
§ Development Review Team meeting minutes dated 08/23/06
§ Letter from J. Grady to G. Joyce dated 08/28/06 re: Orders of Resource Delineation.
Atty. Angley introduced the proposed application, noting that the applicants had not yet filed with the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). The project requires a variance from Section 610 of the Zoning Bylaws. The proposed cell tower is set back 800 feet from the nearest residence, and all other requirements are met. Atty. Angley stated that Planning Board comments are welcomed.
Mr. Graig Joyce of Industrial Tower and Wireless introduced himself as the firm’s site acquisition specialist. He displayed a topographical map of the proposed location. Mr. Wadsworth asked where existing towers are located in the area, and Mr. Joyce replied that they were on Modac Street near Route 3, Exit 11, and the north on Lone Street at their office in Pembroke. Mr. Joyce displayed a site plan for Board review.
Ms. Stickney noted that the application is pending Conservation Commission approval, and Mr. Joyce stated that the wetlands lines have been established but not yet approved. Ms. MacNab asked about a discrepancy in materials submitted regarding the proposed height of the cell tower, noting that Zoning Bylaws limit height to 100 feet. Mr. Moody noted that Sheet 4 in the current plans show 180 feet.
Mr. Halligan noted that the nearest point to the property owner’s house is 220 feet. Mr. Joyce stated that the distance is 400 feet from the Dinius house (owner) and 550 from the Dunlap house (abutter). Mr. Joyce stated that an 800-foot diameter is shown on the plans. He said the applicants would have a land lease with the property owners. Ms. MacNab noted that although submitted materials reference only one house too close to the proposed cell tower, there are actually two.
Ms. Carol Chubb of 782 Temple Street stated that a deed restriction exists that limits the property to only one building. Ms. Stickney stated that the Conservation Agent, Mr. Joe Grady, has suggested that the abutters supply a copy of the deed.
Mr. Joyce displayed renderings of the proposed monopine tower and noted that the base would be covered from view by existing trees. He confirmed that the base would be 56 square feet in diameter.
Mr. Moody noted a discrepancy in the proposal regarding the height of the equipment structure, asking if it was 19 feet or 12 feet. Atty. Angley stated that the building will be hidden in the woods out of view. Ms. MacNab noted that a lot of clearing would be done that may increase its visibility. Atty. Angley stated that no tree clearing would be required, and the applicants would use natural fill. Ms. Scieszka noted that the Conservation Agent had a concern with past filling on the property.
Mr. Joyce noted a utility easement on the property, as well as a pond with a stream. Ms. MacNab stated that the Conservation Agent questions whether the land can support the cell tower structure. Ms. Scieszka commented that she would like to hear from Mr. Amory regarding drainage.
Mr. Kevin Delaney, Radio Frequency Engineer for Industrial Tower and Wirelesw, presented the need for the cell tower, noting that a lower frequency would cover a larger geographical area. He said that the frequency would be 1,900 megahertz, and the cell tower would be shared by Sprint and T-Mobile. He displayed a map showing coverage of the proposed cell tower. Mr. Delaney pointed out other existing cell tower locations in the area, noting that there is a gap in coverage in the proposed area.
Ms. MacNab asked for Mr. Amory’s comments. Mr. Amory noted that the plans submitted are signed and stamped by a registered professional, and the applicants propose an 180-foot monopole type A4 tower. He stated that the equipment building height can be addressed but should be limited to 12 feet.
Mr. Amory stated that it is unclear what rights the Town of Duxbury has regarding this tower. He stated his concern with the floodplain, noting that ground cover has changed which have caused changes in the floodplain, and delineation of the floodplain need to be determined. The eight-foot diameter support needs to be founded on solid material.
Ms. MacNab thanked Mr. Amory for his comments, and asked for Board comments. Mr. Bear asked if the Fire or Police Departments will need space on the tower, and Ms. Stickney replied that it would be dealt with through the special permit conditions. Atty. Angley assured the Board that they would give the Town the space it needs.
Mr. Kimball stated his concern with a residential homeowner leasing 10,000 square feet, noting that it would be a commercial use. Ms. Stickney noted that this would be addressed also through the special permit. Mr. Kimball also was concerned about the variant capacity of the soil, and Ms. Stickney noted that the Board could require test pits. Ms. MacNab asked if test pits would be sufficient, and Mr. Amory said they would if performed by a professional engineer. Mr. Wadsworth asked if a geologist would be preferred, and Mr. Amory responded that the professional engineer would be sufficient.
Mr. Kimball questioned maintenance checks, questioning if the applicant could install rental bays for storage. Atty. Angley assured the Board that the applicants would use the storage building only for their equipment needed to service the tower.
Mr. Kimball asked about the A2 control panels, and Atty. Angley stated that they would be connected to public telephone lines. Mr. Wadsworth asked if the telephone service on the street had adequate capacity. After some discussion on calculations Atty. Angley offered to supply the Board with the mathwork to show that the capacity was adequate.
Ms. Scieszka questioned the public health safety of the cell tower signals, and Atty. Angley replied that the Federal Communications Commission requires all cell tower antennae to be located ten feet above ground for safety reasons. Ms. Scieszka questioned a leased site being located in a residential neighborhood, and Ms. Stickney responded that a land lease would be allowed because it was an accessory use and that dual use is allowed as long as a special permit is approved. She added that under state statutes they are governed by the state utility commission.
Ms. Scieszka asked about variances, and Atty. Angley stated that the variances would be approximately 400 to 500 feet. He added that the plans will be stamped once they are finalized, but had not been stamped yet because the applicants do not have a professional engineer in-house. Ms. MacNab noted that plans are usually submitted with the engineering stamp, and Atty. Angley assured her that this issue would be addressed.
Ms. Scieszka asked how many parking spaces are proposed, and Atty. Angley replied that parking spaces would not be needed. Mr. Joyce added that they plan to install a crushed stone path for truck access onto the site. Atty. Angley stated that it would be more environmentally sound not to pave the area in order to lessen the impervious space. Ms. Stickney agreed that this was the consensus of the Development Review Team (DRT) meeting because the property is located with the Aquifer Protection Overlay District (APOD) and there will be no long-term parking. Ms. Scieszka expressed concern with runoff from oil and anti-freeze. Ms. MacNab asked how long trucks would be parked in the area, and Mr. Mahmood replied that they would be parked an hour on average.
Mr. Amory stated that he believed the parking issue had been addressed adequately, since this is not a public parking area. Mr. Wadsworth commented that because the property is within the APOD, the Board has a policy regarding paving. Ms. Stickney noted that she believes it is a site coverage issue, reading from Zoning Bylaws Section 610.6 that access roads should not be paved. Ms. MacNab confirmed with Mr. Amory that parking had been addressed satisfactorily.
Mr. Amory noted that the DRT group made observations regarding site development, that the Fire Department would like 18 feet of access from Temple Street, and that the Water Department suggests propane versus diesel fuel to be used for the generator. Mr. Joyce said that they would address those issues.
Ms. MacNab invited public comment. An unidentified resident stated that his parents live on Deer Path Trail South off of Laurel Street and the cell phone coverage there is not adequate. He stated his support for the proposal, stating that it may be a potential safety issue to not have adequate cell phone coverage.
Ms. MacNab advised the applicant that the variance should be addressed immediately. Ms. Stickney asked if the variance is not granted, if the applicants would attempt to relocate the cell tower. Atty. Angley stated that he would prefer to resubmit plans to the ZBA with the proper information. Ms. MacNab advised the applicants that they need a variance before coming back to the Planning Board. Atty. Angley stated that he is attempting to perform due diligence on the proposed project.
Ms. Scieszka asked about site lines, and Mr. Joyce stated that they flew a balloon from the site and it could not be seen from the street or from the Dinius home, and could only be seen from Temple Street. Mr. Joyce said that they would file through the ZBA by Friday, September 22, 2006.
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Bear provided a second, to continue the public meeting for administrative site plan review of 766 Temple Street / Industrial Tower and Wireless until Monday, December 11, 2006 at 8:00 PM, with materials due to the Planning office by Monday, November 27, 2006 and a decision deadline of January 22, 2007.
DISCUSSION: Ms. MacNab confirmed with Atty. Angley that the plan submittal deadline was agreeable.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
The public meeting closed at 9:15 PM.
CONTINUED PUBLIC MEETING, ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW: DUXBURY YACHT CLUB, 70 FAIRWAY LANE
Ms. MacNab opened the continued public meeting at 9:17 PM. Present for the discussion were Mr. Shawn Dahlen representing the applicants, and Mr. Freeman Boynton representing Mr. and Mrs. Barrington, abutters. Ms. Scieszka read the correspondence list into the public record:
§ Mutual Extension Form signed 8/28/06
§ Memo from Dahlen Company dated 8/28/06 with revised plans and response to various department concerns. (Submitted at 8/28/06 meeting)
§ Letter from Duxbury Yacht Club dated 8/10/06 to the Barringtons – includes Barrington’s written agreement of project with conditions. (Submitted at 8/28/06 meeting)
§ Draft Conditions dated 9-13-06
§ Letter from Deputy Chief Carrico dated 09-13-06 re: Fire Department comments.
Ms. MacNab confirmed with Ms. Stickney that all outstanding issues had been resolved. Mr. Dahlen noted that the applicants would comply with all orders of condition issued by the Conservation Commission, and added that gasoline would be in vehicles but there would be no other fuel storage. Ms. Scieszka asked if the restriction of dry fertilizer only would contradict the zoning bylaw prohibiting hazardous materials.
Ms. MacNab referenced a letter of private agreement between the Yacht Club and a private abutter, and noted that it is not good policy to reference a private agreement in conditions. Mr. Halligan noted that it puts the Town at risk. Ms. Stickney offered to remove that reference in the conditions. Mr. Boynton stated that Mr. and Mrs. Barrington are expecting that reference to be part of the record but are not expecting the Town to enforce the agreement.
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to approve the administrative site plan review for plans titled, “Proposed Storage Building Location in Duxbury for Duxbury Yacht Club” dated 8/28/06 revised 9/19/06 stamped by Robert W. Crowell (RPE) 1-sheet, and “Duxbury Yacht Club-Storage Building” dated 6/15/06 stamped by Edward Demone (SRPE) of D.E.C., Inc. 2-sheets, with conditions dated 09/18/06.
DISCUSSION: There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
The Board signed the administrative site plans.
WORK SESSION
Duxbury Estates Planned Development (PD) Fiscal Analysis: Mr. Wadsworth offered to work with Ms. Sara Wilson from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) to determine the financial impact of this Planned Development. Ms. MacNab noted that the Planning Board report submitted to the ZBA should be helpful to them.
Whitepine Lane Escrow Return Request: The Board addressed Dr. Robert LoNigro’s written request dated August 10, 2006 for return of funds being held by the Town for this two-lot subdivision. Ms. Stickney stated that approximately $1,150.00 in funds remain in an escrow account held for establishment of grass and capping telephone wire conduits. Ms. MacNab noted that the escrow account exists at Town Counsel’s suggestion because a new type of drainage system had been installed under the road. Ms. Stickney noted that another $10,000.00 is being held for ten years as part of the subdivision approval dated December 21, 1998. Mr. Wadsworth asked if the other homeowner in the subdivision should receive half of the escrow return. Ms. Stickney suggested that the Board table the matter so it could be researched
further.
OTHER BUSINESS
Engineering Invoices:
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to pay the following Mainstream Engineering invoices:
§ Invoice #20843 in the amount of $469.50 for services related to the Town of Duxbury Senior Center parking lot, 10 Mayflower Street
§ Invoice #20844 in the amount of $1,568.00 for services related to Millbrook Crossing
§ Invoice #20845 in the amount of $952.00 for services related to Duxbury Yacht Club.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
Meeting Minutes:
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to approve the following meeting minutes as amended:
§ Minutes of June 26, 2006
§ Minutes of August 28, 2006.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (7-0).
Engineering RFQ: The Board discussed how to review the consulting engineering proposals that had been submitted, and it was decided that each Board member would bring a short list of top candidates to the next meeting. It was agreed to cancel the Monday, September 25, 2006 Planning Board meeting because of a lack of agenda items and to use the time as a reading night to review consulting engineer proposals.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board meeting was adjourned at 9:50 PM. The next meeting of the Duxbury Planning Board will be held on Monday, October 2, 2006 at 7:30 PM at Duxbury Town Hall, Small Conference Room, lower level.
| 
