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 01/29/07
Approved May 7, 2007
The Planning Board met in the Duxbury Town Offices on Monday, January 29, 2007 at 7:30 PM.
Present: Amy MacNab, Chairman; George Wadsworth, Vice-Chairman; Brendan Halligan, Jim Kimball, and Harold Moody.
Absent: Angela Scieszka, Clerk; John Bear; Associate Member Douglas Carver; and Christine Stickney, Planning Director.
Staff: Diane Grant, Administrative Assistant.
Ms. MacNab called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM.
OPEN FORUM
Local Housing Partnership (LHP) Workshop: Mr. Wadsworth reported that he had attended a January 27, 2007 LHP workshop in place of Ms. Scieszka, who was unable to attend. He distributed copies of the agenda for Board members to review, and stated that he came away with two clear messages: The Planned Production Plan is the top priority, and the LHP needs to keep the Planning Board involved in the process. Mr. Wadsworth stated that the Housing Consultant, Mr. Phillip Mayfield, would be sending a draft of the plan to Board members.
Community Preservation Committee (CPC) Turf Proposal: Mr. Wadsworth also distributed copies of public hearing notices regarding a proposal to the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) to replace two school athletic fields with artificial turf. He reported that he had attended a January 25, 2007 presentation. Mr. Moody asked if Mr. Wadsworth represented the Planning Board at CPC meetings, and Ms. MacNab confirmed that he was an appointed member. Mr. Wadsworth reported that Town Counsel is looking into legal issues regarding the proposal. He stated that the proposal requires only a majority vote at Annual Town Meeting. Mr. Moody noted that two other Towns in Massachusetts are in litigation over turf fields. Mr. Wadsworth identified those Towns as Newton and Wayland.
Ms. MacNab reported that the Planning Board members had been invited to attend tonight’s Board of Selectmen (BOS) meeting regarding the turf fields, but suggested that members consider not attending because of the full Planning Board agenda. Mr. Wadsworth reported that he planned to attend the BOS meeting at 8:15 to make a financial presentation on behalf of the CPC. Mr. Wadsworth stated that the BOS members most likely would not take a stand on the turf issue until the CPC takes a position.
Ms. MacNab advised the Board that the public hearings would be the best forum for members to attend regarding the turf fields. She stated that the Board could take a position recommending approval or denial, or they could choose to take no position. Mr. Moody requested confirmation of the Board’s stance that this proposal does not comply with the original intent of the Community Preservation Act. Mr. Wadsworth added that using CPA funds for turf fields would take funds away from the original three purposes: open space, historic preservation and affordable housing. Ms. MacNab stated that she helped to initiate the CPA in the Town of Duxbury, and it was never the intent to include recreation.
Mr. Wadsworth urged Board members to attend the February 13, 2007 CPC public hearing regarding this issue. Ms. MacNab stated that it is important for the CPC to act as gatekeepers, sifting through proposals to determine which ones are worthy. Mr. Wadsworth stated that the CPC’s current approach is to determine if a proposal is legal and appropriate, and then allow Annual Town Meeting to decide if it is worthy. He said that this is the first proposal the CPC has come across that has many pros and cons.
Discussion with Attys. Witten and Troy: Ms. MacNab referenced last Monday’s meeting with Town Counsel, Atty. Troy and invited guest, Atty. Jon Witten, and summarized two important outcomes of the discussion: Ramifications of rezoning from Residential Compatibility to commercial within the Aquifer Protection Overlay District, and the opinion that non-profit organizations may require special permits. Mr. Wadsworth questioned if these matters are under the jurisdiction of the Zoning Enforcement Officer, and Ms. MacNab agreed and stated that the information needed to be passed along.
ZBA REFERRAL: 249 HIGH STREET / BOUTIN
The applicant, Ms. Pamela Boutin, and her husband were present for the discussion. Mr. Halligan recused himself from the discussion because he was a former neighbor of the applicants. Ms. MacNab noted that the applicants wish to expand the back of their dwelling on a lot that is fairly long and narrow.
Ms. MacNab stated that the two main issues with the proposed plans were coverage and nonconformity. She noted that no building coverage was depicted on plans. Ms. Boutin stated that that an 8.5’ x 8.7’ entryway is proposed, and that the existing dwelling encroaches within the side setback of 15 feet. Mr. Boutin noted that the addition would square off the house.
Ms. MacNab noted other proposed renovations depicted on the plans, and Ms. Boutin advised her that those renovations were never going to happen. Mr. Wadsworth stated that the plans are not clear because they represent proposed renovations that are not included in the current application. Ms. Boutin agreed that although the plans depict a 10’ x 10’ addition, the current proposal is actually 8.5’ x 8.7’.
Mr. Wadsworth asked if the existing deck is covered, and Mr. Boutin replied that it is not. Mr. Wadsworth noted that the existing shed should be included in coverage calculations, and advised the applicants that total coverage cannot exceed 15 percent. He and Ms. MacNab noted a discrepancy in the lot area between the Assessor’s property card and the surveyor’s figures depicted on the plans. Ms. MacNab advised the applicants that current and proposed lot coverage figures need to be included on the plans.
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Moody provided a second, to defer judgment to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding a special permit application for 249 High Street, noting the following issues/concerns:
§ Plans do not depict the actual and proposed site coverage figures for the proposed addition.
§ The proposed 8.5’ x 8.7’ addition is the only renovation that the Planning Board reviewed. Other proposed renovations depicted on plans dated 01/10/07 by Hoyt Land Surveying were not part of the special permit application and therefore were not considered.
§ The proposed renovations would increase the pre-existing non-conformity of the structure’s fifteen-foot side setback from an adjacent property by extending the length and by increasing the height.
There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (4-0).
The applicants departed the meeting.
WORK SESSION
Reviewing Engineer Contract: Board members reviewed and suggested revisions to a draft Agreement for Professional Services that had been approved as to form by Town Counsel.
ZBA REFERRAL: 393 TREMONT STREET / MC CLUSKEY
Board members had reviewed this referral at their January 22, 2007 meeting but wanted more time to review this application for an accessory apartment proposed to be constructed within an existing residential structure.
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to defer judgment to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding a special permit for 393 Tremont Street, noting that floor plans were incomplete and no site plans were submitted by the applicant.
DISCUSSION: Board members added that the Planning Board would be happy to review site plans if submitted, also noted that site plans should show a designated parking space for the accessory unit.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
OTHER BUSINESS
Annual Town Meeting Warrant Articles: The Board reviewed proposed Planning Board articles. Ms. MacNab noted that at a previous public hearing Ms. Ruth Rowley of 546 Washington Street had expressed concern that parcels were not referenced regarding revisions to zoning maps.
Ms. MacNab also reported that Mr. Jackson Kent of Bayside Marine on Washington Street had spoken with her at the Planning office regarding the proposed revision to the definition of “coverage,” recommending that pervious and impervious definitions need to be clarified first. She stated that the Conservation Commission had initiated the proposed revisions to the “coverage” definition. Mr. Halligan, who had previously served on the Conservation Commission, stated that they were seeing many applications with cantilevered decks off of second stories that were not being included in lot coverage.
Mr. Kimball questioned why Bongi’s Turkey Roost, of 414 Kings Town Way, was requesting rezoning. Ms. MacNab replied that she was not sure why they were requesting rezoning, noting that it had not been a condition of their recent administrative site plan review decision.
DHCD Chapter 40B Subsidized Housing Inventory: The Board noted this report dated January 18, 2007 showing that the Town of Duxbury is currently at 3.37% affordable housing.
Mainstream Engineering Invoice: This invoice had been deferred from last week’s Board meeting. Ms. MacNab requested staff obtain further clarification regarding charges related to the Duxbury Yacht Club maintenance building administrative site plan review.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board meeting was adjourned at 9:35 PM. The next meeting of the Duxbury Planning Board will be held on Monday, February 5, 2007 at 7:30 PM at Duxbury Town Hall, Small Conference Room, lower level.
| 
