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 02/12/07
Approved May 7, 2007
The Planning Board met in the Duxbury Town Offices on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 7:30 PM.
Present: George Wadsworth, Vice-Chairman; Angela Scieszka, Clerk; Brendan Halligan,
Jim Kimball, and Harold Moody.
Absent: Amy MacNab, Chairman; John Bear; and Associate Member Douglas Carver.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director; and Diane Grant, Administrative Assistant.
Mr. Wadsworth called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM.
OPEN FORUM
West Bay Landing LIP Proposal, off Soule Avenue: Ms. Scieszka stated that she had been unable to attend a recent Local Housing Partnership (LHP) meeting where Mr. Chafik Hamadeh presented his West Bay Landing project and the LHP members voted to endorse it to the Board of Selectmen. Ms. Scieszka stated that she is disappointed that the LHP voted the same night they received the proposal and when criteria has not been established to determine what constitutes an LIP. She noted that the applicant, Mr. Hamadeh, plans to go to the Board of Selectmen for approval on February 26, 2007. She stated that the LIP process needs to be defined and the process should require more than one LHP meeting and one Board of Selectmen’s meeting to evaluate the application. She recommended that the project go through Annual Town
Meeting approval as well.
Ms. Stickney noted that she had notified the Town Manager, Mr. Richard MacDonald, that the February 26, 2007 date would not allow a strong Planning Board presence due to scheduling conflicts. She stated that the presentation date may change due to pressing Annual Town Meeting business as well. She explained that the LIP is by design a flexible, vague program. Mr. Wadsworth noted that it is a cooperative effort between the 40B developer and the Town, and requires the Board of Selectmen’s endorsement to be eligible for State approval through the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). Ms. Stickney stated that she has tried to contact the DHCD but with the new governor there has been reorganization at the DHCD as well. She stated that the project would go through the comprehensive permit process after
it receives State approval.
Ms. Stickney advised the Board that the Zoning Board of Appeals will review the LIP project just as it does any other 40B comprehensive permit, including traffic and impact on the neighborhood. She noted that there is no statutory requirement regarding time limits for Board of Selectmen endorsement of an LIP. Ms. Scieszka stated that rushing into controversial, inappropriate program will hurt affordable housing in the Town of Duxbury and is clearly not in the Town’s best interest. She objected that only the LHP and Board of Selectmen would be reviewing the project, bypassing Annual Town Meeting. Mr. Wadsworth stated that the project needs to be well thought out and designed.
Community Preservation Committee (CPC) Athletic Turf Field Proposal: Mr. Wadsworth urged all Board members to attend a CPC public hearing scheduled for March 23, 2007 at 7:30 PM. He reported that the CPC would then be meeting on March 25, 2007. He stated that one issue with the proposal is that only one dollar is being proposed for every CPC dollar approved. Ms. Scieszka asked why the CPC had not voted to not endorse the proposal, and Mr. Wadsworth replied that if the CPC did not recommend the proposal it would not go to Annual Town Meeting and the CPC felt it was important that the Town residents have a voice. He stated that Planning Board presence at the public hearing would provide representation for opposition to the proposal.
OTHER BUSINESS
Because it was not yet time for the scheduled continued public hearing, the Board addressed other business.
As-Built Approval, Amado Way: Ms. Stickney noted that she had heard today from both the Town consulting engineer, Mr. Thomas Sexton, and from Mr. Paul Anderson, Water Superintendent. She referenced a memo from Mr. Sexton dated February 12, 2007 stating that the as-built is approvable according to 1996 Subdivision Rules and Regulations that were in place at the time of subdivision approval in 2004. She noted that the Water Department had hired an inspector and that Mr. Anderson is fine with as-built approval, noting that at the subdivision approval date it was not required to show where utilities led from the main to the structures. She said that currently it is required to show all utility placement, including water, gas and cable. Mr. Wadsworth noted that gas mains have to meet utility company specifications,
which are very strict. Ms. Stickney added that Dig Safe would need to be notified if anything were to be done to the street.
MOTION: Mr. Moody made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to approve As-Built acceptance for Amado Way plans entitled, “Road As-Built Plan, Amado Way, Duxbury, Massachusetts, prepared for Sealund Corporation,” dated November 4, 2006 and stamped by Bernard E. Munro, SR, PLS and Henry T. Mover, P.E. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Ms. Stickney noted that there is a cash surety on the road. Mr. Kimball asked if there would be further engineering review, and Ms. Stickney stated that she does not recommend closing the engineering escrow account until all bills are in from the consulting engineer.
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to release the surety for Amado Way road construction. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Engineering Invoices:
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to approve payment of Amory Engineer invoice #11540 in the amount of $93.75 for services related to 21 Chestnut Street. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to approve payment of the following Mainstream Engineering invoices:
§ #20909 in the amount of $1,983.00 for services related to Millbrook Crossing
§ #20910 in the amount of $936.50 for services related to Duxbury Yacht Club maintenance building
§ #20924 in the amount of $580.00 for services related to Amado Way
§ #20925 in the amount of $246.50 for services related to Duxbury Yacht Club maintenance building.
There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Consulting Engineer Contracts: Ms. Stickney noted that contracts were mailed last week to the selected engineering review firms. Amory Engineer’s signed contract had been returned already.
MEETING RECESS
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to recess the Planning Board meeting in order to attend a Board of Selectmen meeting regarding proposed Annual Town Meeting articles sponsored by the Planning Board. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
The meeting was recessed at 8:12 PM.
MEETING REOPENED
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion, and Ms. Scieszka provided a second, to re-open the Planning Board meeting. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
The public meeting was re-opened at 8:31 PM
PUBLIC HEARING ON WARRANT ARTICLES FOR ANNUAL TOWN MEETING 2007
Ms. Scieszka read the public meeting notice into the record.
Amendment to Zoning Bylaw Regarding the Definition of Natural Grade and Finish Grade:
Ms. Stickney reported that Mr. James Lampert, Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA), had provided a revision to the proposed bylaw based on tonight’s discussion with the Board of Selectmen. Ms. Scieszka suggested discussing why the definitions were included. Mr. Wadsworth stated that the intent is to alert the Inspectional Services Department when a mounded septic system is being proposed. Ms. Scieszka noted that the Planning Board was seeing special permits not only for improved views, but also to alleviate groundwater issues. Ms. Stickney noted that some lots have been raised up to 20 feet around a structure. She stated that natural and finish grade should be delineated, but noted that Town Manager, Mr. Richard MacDonald, had brought up a good point when he questioned who would police it.
Ms. Scieszka stated that it is more of an issue of future regulation rather than policing what has been done in the past. Mr. Kimball expressed concern that the proposed bylaw may result in zoning being decided on Annual Town Meeting floor. He recommended that the article be indefinitely postponed until the Planning Board and ZBA can agree.
Mr. Lampert of the ZBA stated that he had not realized that this issue has had an effect across such a broad spectrum. He stated that residents may take issue with a raised grade on a small lot, but may not take issue with making rough spaces smoother in a larger subdivision. He stated that the proposed bylaw does not address these nuances. Ms. Scieszka pointed out that the Merry Village comprehensive permit is an example of an entirely raised development.
Mr. John Wisbach of 52 Josselyn Avenue stated that the proposed bylaw leaves little discretion for legitimate needs to fill a lot. He commented that it does not address the Planning Board’s issue adequately. Mr. Lampert suggested that the bylaw could be based on lot size.
Mr. Wadsworth noted that the Board could take action or choose to defer judgment. Ms. Stickney recommended that the Board take action because the Finance Committee needs a recommendation from the Board. Mr. Lampert suggested the Board consider including a 35 foot limit, which would require an amendment at Annual Town Meeting. Ms. Stickney noted that the Town Moderator has advised that it is easier to remove wording from proposed bylaw amendments than it is to add wording. Mr. Kimball stated that he preferred to withdraw the proposed bylaw rather than allowing zoning on Annual Town Meeting floor. Mr. Halligan suggested deleting reference to “average natural grade.” Ms. Stickney noted that the Zoning Bylaws do not provide a definition for average finish grade.
MOTION: Mr. Moody made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to close the public hearing regarding proposed revisions to the Zoning Bylaws regarding the definitions of natural grade and finish grade. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
MOTION: Mr. Moody made a motion, and Ms. Scieszka provided a second, to recommend indefinite postponement regarding the definitions of natural grade and finish grade. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Amendment to Zoning Bylaw Regarding the Definition of Building Height: Ms. Stickney noted that this proposed amendment was sponsored by the ZBA and the Planning Board. Mr. Lampert stated that the ZBA is witnessing the distance from the gutter to the ridge is being “artistically interpreted.” He stated that the Town of Duxbury is the only Town that measures halfway up the roof, and noted that absolute height is generally being measured as no more than 35 feet.
Mr. Wisbach of 52 Josselyn Avenue stated that the proposed wording may preclude building with one ridge higher than another. Mr. Wadsworth disagreed. Mr. Lampert that the ZBA is seeing many special permit applications with building height under 30 feet, with a majority under 35 feet. Mr. Wisbach stated that he preferred flexibility in the bylaw rather than rigid rules, and objected that the proposed bylaw does not encourage varied design elements.
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion, and Ms. Scieszka provide a second, to close the public hearing regarding a proposed amendment to the Zoning Bylaws regarding the definition of building height. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to recommend indefinite postponement of a proposed amendment to the Zoning Bylaws regarding the definition of building height.
DISCUSSION: Mr. Moody stated that he does not believe the proposed amendment would limit architectural design. He stated that he felt the ZBA would find the amendment helpful, adding that limiting differentiated structures would cause difficultes. Mr. Halligan agreed with Mr. Moody.
VOTE: The motion failed, 2-3, with Mr. Kimball and Ms. Scieszka voting for, and Messrs. Halligan, Moody and Wadsworth voting against.
MOTION: Mr. Moody made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to recommend that the definition of height be amended in the Zoning Bylaws to reflect elimination of any reference to average natural grade and average finish grade in Zoning Bylaws Section 302, Section 400 and Section 425.1, with the intention that references to the article indefinitely postponed would be removed.
DISCUSSION: Ms. Scieszka suggested that the motion needs to be specific as to where reference to average natural grade and average finish grade would be removed from Section 410.4. Mr. Moody and Mr. Halligan agreed to the amendment. Mr. Halligan also recommended deleting references to average natural grade or average finish grade from Section 425.1. Mr. Moody agreed to the amendment.
VOTE: The motion carried, 3-2, with Messrs. Halligan, Moody and Wadsworth voting for, and Mr. Kimball and Ms. Scieszka voting against.
Amendment to Zoning Bylaw Regarding Demolition of Historically Significant Buildings: Present for the discussion were Historical Commission members Ms. Barbara Kiley and Mr. Norman Tucker. Ms. Kiley reported that the Board of Selectmen had postponed their recommendation regarding this proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment. She stated that this proposed amendment represents a resubmittal from Annual Town Meeting 2006. She said that the Historical Commission believes that a six month delay is not long enough because it does not provide the applicant enough of an incentive to work with them.
Mr. Wadsworth asked if this amendment is identical to last year’s, and Ms. Kiley replied that it was not. Ms. Stickney stated that the term “substantial” had been removed from last year’s proposed amendment. Mr. Tucker stated that the Historical Commission had seen 7 partial demolitions and 11 complete demolitions, with one delay opposed on Cove Street. He stated that since 1999, four delays have been successful.
Mr. Wadsworth suggested that visual displays at Annual Town Meeting may be helpful toward emphasizing their point of view, and Ms. Kiley responded that she is not sure they have “before” photographs of demolished structures to use. Mr. Lampert suggested that the Historical Commission consider revising the proposed demolition delay to nine months instead, but Ms. Kiley stated that the Commission believes that a 12 month delay is most effective. She stated that last year’s amendment did not pass because of an obfuscation regarding the term “substantial.” She added that the National Trust web site lists the Town of Duxbury as an example of teardowns in historically significant areas.
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to close the public hearing regarding an amendment to the Zoning Bylaw regarding demolition of historically significant buildings, changing “six months” to “twelve months.” There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to recommend approval of an amendment to the Zoning Bylaw regarding demolition of historically significant buildings, changing “six months” to “twelve months.” There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Annual Town Meeting Mullens Rule Warrant Article:
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to recommend approval of Annual Town Meeting 2007 warrant article #25, known as the Mullen Rule. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
Amendment to 2006 Zoning Map Regarding New Land Acquisitions and the Creation of a New Category for the Publicly Owned Land Overlay District: This amendment includes recent acquisitions by the Town and also proposes a new category, Duxbury Housing Authority, which is a Town/State entity, for depiction only. Ms. Scieszka stated that Ms. Ruth Rowley of 546 Washington Street could not attend tonight’s public meeting and has requested that discussion be postponed so that she can provide input at a later date.
MOTION: Mr. Kimball made a motion to close the public meeting for new land acquisitions and the creation of a new category for the Publicly Owned Land Overlay District. There was no second, so the MOTION FAILED.
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to postpone the public meeting regarding new land acquisitions and the creation of a new category for the Publicly Owned Land Overlay District until February 26, 2007 at 8:15 PM. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
Adoption of Amended 2007 Zoning Maps (Seven Sheets Total), along with References to Zoning Maps in Protective Zoning Bylaws: This article proposes to accept a base map that correlates with lots as they appear on the Town’s Geographic Information System (GIS) data. Ms. Scieszka reported that Ms. Ruth Rowley of 546 Street had an issue with what would happen if Annual Town Meeting did not pass the Publicly Owned Map. This base map would include publicly-owned land not accepted by Annual Town Meeting. Ms. Stickney stated that the revised map reflects land voted in last year or gifted to the Town during the past year.
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to postpone the public meeting regarding adoption of amended 2007 Zoning Maps (seven sheets total), along with references to Zoning Maps in the Protective Zoning Bylaws, until February 26, 2007 at 8:15 PM. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED (ANR) PLAN OF LAND:
500 AND 532 FRANKLIN STREET / ZIKO
Peter and Maureen Ziko and realtor, Ms. Laurie Reeney, were present for the discussion. Ms. Stickney explained the application, noting that the applicants are proposing to revise a lot line between two parcels with one owner. Mr. Wadsworth confirmed that the desired result would be two buildable lots. He asked if there were any wetlands issues, and Mr. Ziko replied that there were not. Mr. Kimball asked if access would be over a neighbor’s lot, and Ms. Stickney responded that the access may need to be moved.
MOTION: Ms. Scieszka made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to endorse a plan of land entitled, “Compiled Plan of Land, 500 & 532 Franklin Street, Duxbury, Mass.” dated January 4, 2007 and revised January 30, 2007 and stamped by Thomas John Sullivan, RLS – one sheet, as not requiring approval under Subdivision Control Law. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
The Planning Board members present signed the plan.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED (ANR) PLAN OF LAND:
SURPLUS STREET AND SOUTH STATION STREET / O’BRIEN
Mr. Tim O’Brien was present as the new owner of these properties. Ms. Stickney explained that although the Board recently approved an ANR for these parcels, the new owner is requesting to change the plan. Mr. O’Brien stated that his intent is to move the septic away from existing wetlands, and that would like to keep the lot lines as similar to historical lot lines as possible.
Ms. Stickney advised the Board that they could choose to rescind the previous ANR. Mr. O’Brien assured the Board that the surveyor had shredded the previous ANR plan and it had not been recorded at the Registry of Deeds. Mr. Moody questioned if a deed existed, and Mr. O’Brien stated that the closing is scheduled within thirty days. Mr. Moody recommended that the original ANR be rescinded.
MOTION: Mr. Moody made a motion, and Ms. Scieszka provided a second, to endorse a plan of land entitled, “Plan of Land, Surplus Street and South Station Street, Duxbury, Mass.,” dated February 6, 2007, stamped by Douglas Bailey, PLS – one sheet, as not requiring approval under Subdivision Control Law, and to note that this ANR plan replaces a plan of land dated January 2, 2007 also drawn by Douglas Bailey, PLS, as not approved on January 8, 2007. There was no discussion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
The Board members present signed the plan.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board meeting was adjourned at 10:31 PM. The next meeting of the Board will take place on Monday, February 26, 2007 at Town Hall, Small Conference Room, lower level.
| 
