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 04/30/07
Approved July 23, 2007
The Planning Board met in the Duxbury Senior Center, Ellison Room on Monday, April 30, 2007 at 7:30 PM.
Present: Amy MacNab, Chairman; George Wadsworth, Vice-Chairman; Brendan Halligan, Clerk;
John Bear, Jim Kimball, Harold Moody, and Angela Scieszka.
Absent: Associate Member Douglas Carver.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director; and Diane Grant, Administrative Assistant.
Ms. MacNab called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM.
OPEN FORUM
Planned Production Plan – Ms. Scieszka noted that the Planned Production Plan was presented at a workshop last Thursday, April 26, 2007, with a small public turnout. It will go to the Board of Selectmen for approval tonight. Ms. Scieszka noted that the plan needs more work but she wanted to wait for public input. Ms. Stickney urged Planning Board members to submit their suggested revisions in writing and noted that the document needs to be submitted to the State by the end of May. Ms. MacNab noted that the Board of Selectmen may require more time to review it.
West Bay Landing Proposed LIP: Ms. MacNab noted that the Board of Selectmen had moved up this project to discuss it tonight rather than May 7, 2007 as originally scheduled. She stated that Ms. Stickney had submitted a letter to the Board of Selectmen requesting that they delay their vote until they have reviewed Planning Board comments that would be finalized at tonight’s meeting.
Endorsement of 40B Lots: Mr. Bear stated that he wants to discuss endorsement of 40B projects in general, including the Board’s approach for future projects. Ms. Stickney reported from Town Counsel that he would meet with the Town Manager and the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals to agree on an approach.
ZBA REFERRAL: DUXBURY YACHT CLUB MAINTENANCE BUILDING, HARRISON STREET
Discussion of this Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) referral had been deferred at last week’s Planning Board meeting so that it could be determined if the applicant was seeking a special permit for use as conditioned in their Administrative Site Plan Review decision. Ms. Stickney confirmed that the legal notice states that the special permit is for use. She also confirmed that the Director of Inspectional Services, Mr. Scott Lambiase, is also clear about the intent of the special permit. Ms. Scieszka noted that the intended use or uses are typically noted in the special permit application. Mr. Halligan noted that a letter that was submitted with the ZBA special permit application noting that the project was for a maintenance building with one lunchroom and two bathrooms. Ms. Scieszka asked if the Yacht Club had ever
obtained any other special permits, and Ms. Stickney replied they had for their clubhouse.
Ms. Scieszka stated that she would like to see a resubmission of the special permit application specifying use. Mr. Wadsworth suggested that the Board’s recommendation could specify the use.
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to defer judgment regarding a special permit for the Duxbury Yacht Club off Harrison Street, noting that the Planning Board recommends that the intended use should be defined and should be included in the ZBA’s decision.
DISCUSSION: Ms. Scieszka noted that the Administrative Site Plan Review (ASPR) specified that the applicant seek a special permit for use. She asked if the Board is now deferring judgment on use. Ms. Stickney suggested including the ASPR condition with the recommendation to the ZBA, and the Board agreed.
VOTE: The motion carried 5-0-2, with Mr. Bear and Ms. Scieszka abstaining.
PUBLIC MEETING, ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW:
BERRYBROOK SCHOOL, INC., 267 WINTER STREET
Present for the applicants were Mr. Mike DiNapoli, project manager; Mr. Joe Webby, engineer; Mr. Tom Murray from the Berrybrook Board of Directors; Mr. Vcevold Strekalovsky, architect; and Ms. Pat Keeley, headmaster; Ms. Ann White from the Berrybrook Building Committee; Mr. Doug Hanfield; Ms. Angelique Pena; and Ms. O’Neil, teacher. Also present was Town consulting engineer, Mr. Thomas Sexton of Mainstream Engineering, Inc. Approximately 25 members of the public were present in the audience.
Ms. MacNab opened the public meeting at 8:00 PM. Mr. Halligan read the public meeting notice and correspondence list into the public record:
§ Administrative Site Plan Review Application, plans and supporting documentation submitted on 03/28/07
§ Public Meeting notice advertised in the Duxbury Clipper 04/11/07 & 04/18/07. Also mailed to abutters on 04/10/07
§ Development Review Team notice dated 04/03/07
§ Email from T. Baugous to C. Stickney dated 04/06/07 re: Health Agent initial comments
§ Development Review Team meeting minutes of 04/13/07
§ Letter from Design Review Board dated 04/16/07 (with accompanying architectural and site plans) re: Design Review approval
§ Letter from Mainstream Engineering, Inc. dated 04/27/07 re: engineering review.
Ms. MacNab asked for the applicant’s presentation. Ms. White stated that the application was the result of a five-year assessment and planning process. In May 2003 the Berrybrook School underwent a strategic planning process with three specific goals:
§ To expand the current program so that all students could attend a two-year program (birth dates and space limitations currently prevent this)
§ To add space for indoor gross motor play
§ To create space that is accessible for all children.
Ms. MacNab asked Mr. Joe Webby, engineer, to present the site. Mr. Webby stated that the project is located on Winter Street approximately a half-mile from an intersection with Route 53. The site includes a 54-acre parcel of land, of which the trustees would like to keep 27 acres. An intermittent stream runs on the west side. The applicants will go before the Conservation Commission with a Notice of Intent on May 1, 2007 and the hearing is expected to be continued to address the wetland jurisdiction. The applicants propose an update to the parking located no closer to wetlands than before.
Proposed plans include construction of a new 5,800 square foot building. A porch and office will be removed from the existing school building. The parking lot has been increased slightly to include a drop-off lane. The proposed drainage system includes a catch basin system with a grit chamber and infiltration system that utilizes a slope to the south of the property. The proposed septic system is placed well beyond the 150-foot Board of Health requirement. It has not yet been determined if utilities will be placed overhead or underground, although Mr. Webby noted that Town consulting engineer, Mr. Sexton, recommends underground. A new water service is proposed, along with a fire sprinkler system.
Ms. MacNab asked for Planning Board comments or questions. Mr. Wadsworth asked if the site was located within the Town of Kingston’s Zone 2, and Mr. Webby replied that he is uncertain. Ms. Scieszka asked how many brooks are located on the site, and Mr. Webby responded that there is a small brook, called a perennial stream, along with a valley that is wet only when it rains, considered an intermittent stream. The brook drains into Bassett Brook.
Ms. MacNab asked how many cars would be allowed to queue in the drop-off lane, and also asked how many children would be dropped off. Ms. Keeley responded that 36 children would be dropped off. Adults currently bring their children in to the school, and they are proposing a drop off lane to allow the option. Mr. Webby noted that drop off loop is 250-foot long, which would allow 25 cars. Mr. Bear noted that half of the loop would allow approximately ten cars. Ms. MacNab asked how many staff are presently employed and projected, and Ms. Keeley responded that they currently have a staff of eleven and propose to increase the staff to fifteen.
Mr. Wadsworth asked about the number of buildings currently existing on the property and what their proposed uses would be. Mr. Murray stated that the first building, a goat house, would retain its current use. The next building, a storage barn, would house school materials in an attractive barn-like structure. Next is the shingled house that is currently mislabeled as “existing playhouse.” It may have historic significance but is structurally uncertain, and it is locked and staff is not allowed to enter. Next is a shed that is the vent house for an old septic system. It is currently mislabeled on plans.
The farmhouse is the current school at which lead was discovered at a recent inspection done by a school licensor. Mr. DiNapoli noted that it is an integral part of the campus and it may hold some historic significance because it was built in 1733. He stated that although no children are currently allowed in the school building, they anticipate it being used as a fourth classroom in the future when the lead has been removed. Future historic restoration is a possibility as well because of the building’s historic significance to the school and to the Town.
Ms. Scieszka confirmed with Ms. Keeley that the maximum number of students would be 72, with the current enrollment at 36 students. With the proposed construction, 54 students would be in the new building and 18 students would be in the current school building.
Mr. Strekalovsky presented the architectural plans, stating that they wanted to preserve the farmlike characteristics of the site. After considering an addition to the farmhouse (existing school building), they decided instead to cluster the buildings in a farmlike setting. New construction allowed them the opportunity to develop some green building characteristics with a southern exposure. The new building is proposed at a height of 26 feet and is designed to be in character with an 18th century farmhouse. He displayed the elevation drawings and floor plans which showed three classrooms, administrative space, and a lobby on the main level. The lower level basement would provide utility storage space. A courtyard is proposed outside the south side of the building.
Mr. Wadsworth asked about the second floor, and Mr. Strekalovsky replied that there is no second floor. The plans include dormers to bring in light. Ms. MacNab noted a letter from the Design Review Board questioning why the dormers were placed off center. Mr. Strekalovsky assured the Board that the dormers would be centered over the entrance. Mr. Wadsworth asked about a proposed elevator, and Mr. Strekalovsky stated that the elevator would go from the main level to the lower level for storage. Ms. MacNab asked if the basement level would be used by students and Mr. Strekalovsky replied that it would not.
Ms. MacNab asked if a loading area for supplies had been included in the parking lot, and Mr. Webby responded that they did not. Ms. Keeley stated that they had not planned a loading area at this point. Ms. MacNab asked about handicap accessible parking, and Mr. Webby responded that they have two designated spaces but need a third one. Ms. MacNab asked if the current plans include a ramp for access, and Mr. Strekalovsky stated that the all areas are accessible without a ramp.
Ms. MacNab asked about Fire Department comments from a Development Review Team (DRT) meeting of April 13, 2007. Mr. Halligan noted that the Fire Department would like ladder trucks to access the building as close as possible. Mr. Murray stated that he had not been able to reach Deputy Chief William Carrico of the Fire Department. He stated that the building will be fully equipped with sprinklers, and stated that he was sure they could come to an agreement with the Fire Department. He suggested that the proposed gated playground could provide emergency equipment approach to the building.
Mr. Wadsworth noted that a six- to eight-inch water main was needed to come into the building. Mr. Murray stated that the water mains will be sized appropriately. Mr. Wadsworth noted a DRT concern that the hydrant should be located closer to the building, and asked if a hydrant was needed. Mr. Sexton stated that although a hydrant may not be needed, it was brought up at the DRT meeting.
Mr. Wadsworth asked if the applicants had considered vegetated retention swales rather than infiltration basins, and Mr. Webby responded that they would consider that option, noting that the only possible location would be on the southeast corner of the property due to wetlands restrictions. Mr. Wadsworth stated that vegetated swales would break down pollutants and would save the cost of underground drainage.
Ms. MacNab asked about a dotted line on the site plans, and Mr. Webby replied that they showed a proposed interior property line. He stated that currently the school owns both lots. Ms. MacNab noted that the new building may straddle the proposed lot line. Ms. Stickney suggested that the Berrybrook trustees may rearrange the lot lines in the future.
Mr. Moody pointed out sections of the Zoning Bylaws which show that a traffic and parking circulation plan is required; the loading zones are required; and that five handicap accessible parking spaces are required for lots with fifty or more spaces. Ms. MacNab emphasized that it is important to show how students, faculty and staff would move from the parking lot to buildings.
Mr. Wadsworth questioned how many parking spaces would be required for all-school or public events. Ms. Keeley stated that for the one annual community-wide event, the Harvest Festival in the fall, parking is allowed on the field and a police detail is hired. There is also a spring event which is for Berrybrook families only.
Mr. Halligan asked if the playground area near the front of the proposed building is the only playground area. Mr. DiNapoli stated that they intend to keep the playground near the front of the building so children are visible to parents at pick-up time. A split-rail fence surrounds the play space.
Ms. MacNab asked where the trash dumpster would be located, and Mr. Murray stated that it is kept near the goat house and is separated from the school buildings for other certification requirements.
Ms. MacNab asked for comments from Town consulting engineer, Mr. Thomas Sexton of Mainstream Engineering. Mr. Sexton stated that the applicant intends to add a few items that are missing from current plans, including a topographical depiction of the location of a valley that runs through the property. Also, temporary school trailer buildings are not depicted on the current plans.
Mr. Sexton also noted other missing items from current site plans:
§ Lighting plan with intensities
§ Landscaping plans, including fencing
§ Screening, especially on the east side abutting a residence.
Ms. MacNab pointed out that it would be helpful to show existing utilities as well.
Mr. Sexton noted that a portion of the site is located within the WPOD and needs to be shown on the plans The site is within the Natural Heritage areas that have been delineated as Priority Habitat of Rare Species and Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife, and he suggested referring the need for habitat investigation to the Conservation Commission for review and comment. He confirmed that the property is located in Zone 3, not in Zone 2. Mr. Sexton noted that recharging is an important issue because roof runoff would feed into Bassett Brook which is a tributary to the Jones River.
Mr. Sexton noted that traffic and pedestrian movement still need to be addressed. He estimated 144 vehicles at peak traffic hours. Ms. Stickney noted that although a roundabout was being considered at the intersection of Winter Street and Route 53, current plans are to install a traffic light. She also noted that Berrybrook drop-off and pick-up times do not coincide with commuter hours. Mr. DiNapoli confirmed that traffic studies were performed with the assumption of a traffic light although currently only a stop sign exists at the intersection of Winter Street and Route 53. Mr. Wadsworth stated that the Board would like to see traffic study results without a stop light. Ms. Stickney noted that Mass Highway was aware of a potential expansion of Berrybrook and the 1 to 5 percent growth rate includes that
information.
Ms. Scieszka asked if the queuing lane was one lane wide, noting that it should include two lanes to accommodate both parked and moving vehicles. Mr. Murray stated that the emergency lane could serve as a second lane. Ms. MacNab asked if older children would be dropped off, and Ms. Keeley responded that parents have typically parked and walked their children into the school but a recent parent survey indicated that some parents might prefer to drop off their children. Mr. Halligan recommended that the applicants consider defined walkways, including crosswalks and cones.
Ms. Scieszka expressed a concern with the proximity of the playground to the parking circulation area. Ms. MacNab pointed out that a fence is proposed, and Ms. White stated that their licenses are very strict in this matter to ensure children’s safety.
Mr. Bear questioned why temporary trailers need to be depicted on current plans, and Mr. Sexton recommended that the applicant should at least show septic and utilities that go into the buildings.
Ms. Scieszka asked about soil quality, and Mr. Sexton stated that the soils seem favorable and the concern is greater for potential groundwater issues because the system is shallow.
Mr. Moody recommended that the applicants make sure to address all uses of buildings as required in Section 615.4 of the Zoning Bylaws. He also advised the applicants to refer to Zoning Bylaws in calculating building height for the new construction.
Ms. MacNab opened the floor to public comments.
Mr. John Resk of 139 Duck Hill Road asked if the property is being subdivided or sold off where the property line is depicted on site plans. Ms. MacNab replied that the Board has not seen a subdivision plan for this property. Mr. Webby noted that the new property line runs along the intermittent stream. Mr. Murray stated that the school is negotiating with the Town of Duxbury and advised Mr. Resk to consult with Conservation Administrator, Mr. Joseph Grady. Mr. Resk asked if this land would be developed, and Ms. MacNab stated that she is not aware of these negotiations and referred him to the Board of Selectmen or the Conservation Commission. Mr. Wadsworth advised Mr. Resk that any potential Town land acquisition would require a two-thirds vote at Town Meeting.
Ms. Nancy Reed of 31 Captains Hill Road stated that she was a Berrybrook teacher during the 1970s and is currently a member of the corporation. She asked if a pond or low grade elevation is located on the site, and Ms. White stated that a pond still exists.
Mr. Carl O’Neil of 146 Winter Street introduced himself as an abutter on the north side of the property for as long as the school has existed. He stated that he is on the Board of Directors and is the caretaker for the property. He stated that the pond is located on the property within the Town of Kingston and has a 100 foot foundation. The pond was originally a spring and in the 1950s was excavated for an irrigation pond.
Mr. O’Neil stated that as a resident he does not believe the proposed construction will be detrimental to the area. He does not believe that school traffic will have an impact on commuter traffic. He stated that he and other neighbors do have a concern over the land being sold.
Ms. Margaret O’Neil Holden of 43 Beaverbrook Lane stated that she is concerned about conservation of land and hopes that Berrybrook would consider leaving land for the Towns of Duxbury and Kingston. She stated that when the administration closed the current school building because of lead contamination, they stated that they did not have the financial resources. She stated that she believes they do have financial resources and she hopes they restore the school building because of its historic significance.
Ms. White stated that the school has no intent to demolish the current school building. Mr. DiNapoli stated that people might have different ideas about what constitutes historic preservation.
Ms. Jeannie Resk of 139 Duck Hill Road asked if Planning Board meeting minutes were public record, and Ms. MacNab replied that they are.
Mr. Wadsworth asked if plans could show the distance for groundwater measurements, and Mr. Webby responded that they could. Ms. Stickney noted that the applicants need time to address Conservation Commission issues and suggested allowing more time for Board review. Ms. Stickney suggested a continued public meeting date of June 4, 2007 and Ms. MacNab suggested an act-on date of July 5, 2007. Mr. DiNapoli stated that an act-on date of July 5, 2007 would be unacceptable because the applicants are trying not to interrupt the school schedule.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Wadsworth provided a second, to continue the public meeting for administrative site plan review of Berrybrook School, 267 Winter Street, until June 4, 2007, with revised plans and materials due on May 21, 2007 and an act-on date of July 5, 2007. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
Ms. Keeley and the Planning Board signed a mutual extension form.
WORK SESSION: MAINSTREAM ENGINEERING BILLING RATES
Mr. Thomas Sexton of Mainstream Engineering was present for the discussion of billing rates for ongoing projects that span years when billing rates have changed. Ms. Stickney provided an example of the issue, where the Planning Board had issued a subdivision decision in 2005 and the applicants is now into the construction phase. Mr. Sexton is charging 2007 rates when the Board is expecting 2005 rates. Mr. Sexton explained that he considers design review and construction to be separate phases, and he charges current rates to keep consistency with clients.
It was agreed that the Board would accept the original rates for Ingall’s Grove and for Song Sparrow until the applicants extend the subdivision approval deadline. For outstanding administrative site plan reviews, the Board would expect Mr. Sexton to charge his current rates. Ms. Stickney made it clear that under the current engineering review contract, travel time and incidentals such as telephone and fax charges would not be allowed.
BOARD OF SELECTMEN REFERRAL:
WEST BAY LANDING LOCAL INITIATIVE PROJECT / HAMADEH
Mr. Halligan departed the meeting before this discussion began. Ms. MacNab referenced a letter from Mr. William Campbell to the Board of Selectmen dated April 25, 2007, objecting to her input on this project off of Soule Avenue since her in-laws reside on Soule Avenue. Ms. MacNab stated that although the allegations were unfounded and no conflict exists, she would recuse herself from the discussion in order to protect the Planning Board and the Town of Duxbury. She departed the meeting at 10:15 PM.
Mr. Wadsworth, as co-chair, proceeded to lead the discussion. He distributed to Board members a sheet with financial assumptions for the proposed project. He stated that, using the same template from the Board’s calculations for the Duxbury Estates planned development project, the Town would incur a loss of $15,000 per year in taxes from the West Bay Landing project.
Mr. Bear noted that the plans were preliminary. Ms. Scieszka stated that the applicants’ assumptions were preliminary as well. She urged the Board of Selectmen to look at the project in a more global way to decide how the developer came to the current plan, and to consider if back-up figures were included that made assumptions regarding the density of the neighborhood. She stated that the Planning Board is looking for the applicant to demonstrate the benefit of this project to the Town. Issues remain regarding the minimum cut and fill and tree clearing, as well as the width of Sanger Road. She stated that it appears that the only benefit to the Town is one extra affordable unit.
Mr. Bear stated that he felt that the Board of Selectmen would approve the LIP application tonight at their meeting. Ms. Scieszka stated that if the land were developed it would have an adverse impact to the neighborhood and would not be a good use of the land. Mr. Kimball agreed that there would be an adverse impact, and stated that he felt it the decision was in the hands of the Board of Selectmen.
Board members discussed their review letter to the Board of Selectmen and agreed that Mr. Wadsworth would sign the letter.
ZBA REFERRAL: 148 WEST STREET / KENNEDY
Ms. Stickney noted that the applicant is proposing to construct an uncovered deck behind a garage on a non-conforming lot. She stated that when she drove by the site it appeared that supports had already been built for the project. She noted that the plans were difficult to understand but it appeared that the non-conformity would increase to the side setback from 28 to 20.4 feet.
MOTION: Mr. Moody made a motion, and Mr. Bear provided a second, to defer judgment to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the special permit application for 148 West Street, noting that the proposed deck increases the side setback nonconformity from the public way. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board meeting was adjourned at 10:57 PM. The next meeting of the Board will take place on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 7:30 PM at Duxbury Town Offices, Small Conference Room, Lower Level.
| 
