Town of Duxbury
Massachusetts
Planning Board
Minutes 01/14/08
Approved January 28, 2008
The Planning Board met in Duxbury Town Offices, Small Conference Room, lower level on Monday, January 14, 2008 at 7:30 PM.
Present: Amy MacNab, Chairman; George Wadsworth, Vice-Chair; Brendan Halligan, Clerk; John Bear, James Kimball, and Harold Moody.
Absent: Angela Scieszka.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director; and Diane Grant, Administrative Assistant.
Ms. MacNab called the meeting to order at 7:32 PM.
OPEN FORUM
Chapter 40B Reform: Mr. Wadsworth asked if the petition to reform Chapter 40B had failed to gain enough signatures, and Ms. MacNab confirmed this as true. She stated that the effort will be reorganized for resubmittal in two years.
Local Housing Partnership: Mr. Wadsworth reported that the LHP is currently reviewing its warrant articles for Annual Town Meeting. He has been attending in place of Ms. Scieszka. Ms. MacNab advised the Board that LHP chairperson, Ms. Diane Bartlett, has requested that Mr. Wadsworth be given voting rights on the LHP. Mr. Wadsworth stated that he does not need voting rights at this point. After Town elections in March when the Planning Board appoints a permanent representative to the LHP, that representative should have voting rights. Ms. Stickney pointed out that the LHP sometimes has quorum issues where another voting member may be needed.
Community Preservation Committee: Mr. Bear reported that the current estimate for the next phase of renovating the Tarkiln Building on Summer Street is $2.1 to $2.2 million. Ms. MacNab noted that this estimate is more than double the estimate from Annual Town Meeting 2007. Mr. Wadsworth noted that $155,000 has been spent on the project to date. Ms. Stickney advised the Board that an Administrative Site Plan Review application would be filed before Annual Town Meeting.
11 Washington Street / Triebel: Ms. Stickney advised the Board that Ms. Jennifer Triebel has requested to speak to the Board to determine if Administrative Site Plan Review is required for her proposed renovations to an existing building. Ms. Triebel was present along with her engineer, Mr. Robert Crowell. Ms. Stickney reported that the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) will be issuing a special permit soon. That special permit usually triggers Administrative Site Plan Review, although the renovations with this project are mostly interior.
Ms. Triebel stated that Mr. Scott Lambiase, Director of Inspectional Services, has inspected the site and has noted that the renovations are cosmetic, with no structural changes. Ms. MacNab asked what changes would be made outside the building, and Mr. Crowell advised her that a fence would be replaced, parking spaces will be delineated, and a handicap accessible parking space would be added.
Ms. MacNab advised Ms. Triebel that the ZBA addresses change in use, although no pre-existing use had been applied for through the Town with the dentist office that had occupied the building previously. Previous to the dentist office, the building had been used as a photography studio and a realtor’s office. The Planning Board’s focus is different from the ZBA’s, addressing access and egress, and impact of the project to the neighbors. She noted that the Administrative Site Plan Review process does not take a significant amount of time. She also noted that another project similar in scope, 21 Chestnut Street, recently went through the Administrative Site Plan Review process. A waiver is granted only when it is deemed as a public benefit.
Mr. Bear pointed out that although Administrative Site Plan Review is required, the scope of engineering review may be limited in a project such as this one. Mr. Crowell asked if a $5,000.00 engineering escrow account would be required, and Ms. MacNab responded that staff would determine the amount.
Mainstream Engineering: Mr. Thomas Sexton was present to clarify the degree of inspection required for applicants under Administrative Site Plan Review and Subdivision approval. During a recent project, the Song Sparrow subdivision, an installation was performed without an advance call for observation. This has also happened with the Duxbury Yacht Club maintenance building and Berrybrook School. In both cases, paving occurred without notification for observation. He noted that these are private projects. Mr. Bear noted that in some cases the work could affect the neighbors.
Ms. Stickney noted that there are no guidelines for inspections under Administrative Site Plan Review, therefore no enforcement or penalty. She suggested that the Board consider developing Administrative Site Plan Review rules and regulations. In the meanwhile, Ms. MacNab recommended that the reviewing engineer be notified to observe installations so that there is a process of checks and balances. Ms. Stickney suggested that the checks and balances already exist through As-Built plans. She recommended that Administrative Site Plan rules and regulations are preferable to including conditions on individual projects.
Ms. Stickney noted that development of Administrative Site Plan Review rules and regulations requires a public hearing process. Mr. Moody advised that the rules should be simple and not onerous to the applicant. Mr. Bear noted that the Department of Inspectional Services and Board of Health use checklists.
Mr. Sexton advised the Board that he would request As-Builts for the projects in question. He asked if he should stay for the Song Sparrow agenda item, and Ms. Stickney advised him that the discussion had been continued until next week because revised plans had been submitted. She gave a set of the revised plans to Mr. Sexton.
Dingley Dell Subdivision Status
Mr. Roman Striebel, the applicant, was present for the discussion. He stated that, despite his best efforts, he was not able to complete the project by the December 1, 2007 deadline. One reason is that the Wildlands Trust and the State cannot agree on wording for the Conservation Restriction. He referenced a November 26, 2007 letter from the Wildlands Trust stating that it was nearing completion. He submitted a copy of the letter for the project file.
The other reason he was unable to meet the completion deadline was that the top coat of asphalt has not been installed. Minor work around the swale area was completed, and then rain and icy conditions prevented the asphalt installation. Ms. Stickney noted that not much can get accomplished at this time of year until the spring.
Ms. MacNab asked if other work remained, and Mr. Striebel noted that there was a question regarding whether to install a culvert or to issue a bond to guarantee its installation. Mr. Striebel stated that if it is possible to install the culvert without losing too many trees, he would prefer to do that.
MOTION: Mr. Halligan made a motion, and Mr. Wadsworth provided a second, to grant an extension of the Dingley Dell subdivision completion to June 17, 2008.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
PUBLIC HEARING:WARRANT ARTICLES FOR ANNUAL TOWN MEETING 2008
Ms. MacNab opened the public hearing at 8:22 PM. Mr. Halligan read the public hearing notice.
Zoning Bylaws Section 570 Establishing an Affordable Housing Bylaw:
Present from the bylaw cosponsor, the Local Housing Partnership (LHP), were Ms. Diane Bartlett, chairperson; Mr. Charles Rourke, vice-chariperson; Mr. Bruce Bygate and Ms. Barbara Kelley. Ms. Stickney noted that this proposed bylaw is a result of a recommendation made by a consultant hired from a grant, on creative ways to obtain affordable housing. A number of land parcels exist in the Town of Duxbury that have issues with frontage and/or lot size so that the owner is not able to obtain a building permit. The Assessor’s office printed a list of vacant parcels from less than 5,000 square feet to much larger.
This bylaw proposes to allow building permits for affordable housing on lots with at least 25 feet of frontage and 10,000 square feet of area. The property would be deed restricted to remain affordable housing in perpetuity.
Ms. Bartlett stated that this affordable housing strategy has been published in the Town’s Planned Production Plan. She noted that while it may not solve the lack of affordable housing in the Town, it is an option worth exploring. Ms. Bartlett noted that there is a recommendation to cap the eligible lot size at 40,000 square feet. She stated that Judi Barrett, a housing consultant who lives in the Town of Duxbury, recommends that it is not a good idea to limit the eligible lot size, so at a subsequent meeting the LHP voted to remove the cap.
Ms. Stickney reported that Mr. Wadsworth had done some research that concurs with the Assessor’s lists from FY2006, showing that 92 potential parcels would be eligible under this bylaw. Other parcels may have significant issues which would preclude them from eligibility. Mr. Wadsworth added that in the July 2006 Stantec report 371 parcels were reviewed. With a mimimum of 25 feet frontage, the number would go to 139 eligible lots. He summarized from a spreadsheet which he distributed the eligibility of parcels:
§ 41 parcels with 25 feet of frontage and 10,000-40,000 square feet of area
§ 51 parcels with 25 feet of frontage and over 40,000 square feet of area.
The result is 92 potential parcels eligible with the minimum criteria presented. Ms. Stickney noted that not all of those 92 parcels would actually be eligible, since upland area is not specified. Mr. Wadsworth added that no data was gathered regarding upland area.
Ms. MacNab noted that 92 potential lots is a much higher number than presented in earlier discussions that identified a potential of 36 to 40 lots. She stated that Town Meeting voters may be concerned with the large number of potential lots. Mr. Wadsworth noted that capping the parcel size at 40,000 square feet yields a more manageable number of 51 potential lots.
Ms. MacNab asked for public comment:
Mr. Shawn Dahlen of 60 Long Point Lane asked if the term “affordable” was based on bedroom size or household size. Ms. Stickney replied that it is based on household size, and Ms. MacNab added that the eligibility is based on regional calculations that establish affordable units. Mr. Wadsworth noted that there would be septic limitations as well. Mr. Dahlen expressed surprise that the affordability was not based on the number of bedrooms. He stated that most owners would build a one-bedroom house since the sales price is similar to a larger home. Mr. Dahlen also recommended that the parcel size not be limited to 40,000 square feet, noting that otherwise there may not be enough parcels that would meet the requirements for a buildable lot.
Mr. Bruce Bygate of the LHP agreed with Mr. Dahlen, stating that the probability of these lots meeting the criteria for buildability would be about fifteen percent, based on his experience with other committees. Mr. Bygate offered to help perform additional research that might help further identify potential lots.
Ms. MacNab stated that she still believes the lot size should be capped at 40,000 square feet in order to keep the potential eligible lots at less than 40. Mr. Halligan stated that he could go either way, but advised that Town Meeting voters need to be fully informed.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to notify the Board of Selectmen that the Planning Board recommends supporting the proposed warrant article adding Section 570 to the Zoning Bylaws to establish an Affordable Housing Bylaw as published.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth stated that more time is needed to discuss including a cap on parcel size. He requested that Mr. Bear consider an amendment to the motion that this recommendation is subject to further analysis regarding maximum lot size. Mr. Bear and Mr. Kimball agreed to the amendment.
DISCUSSION: Mr. Kimball stated that although he agreed with the amendment for discussion purposes, he does not believe that further analysis is required. Mr. Halligan and Mr. Moody agreed that further analysis is not required, with Mr. Halligan recommending to allow Town Meeting voters decide.
MOTION WITHDRAWN: Mr. Bear withdrew his motion, and Mr. Kimball withdrew his second.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to close the public hearing regarding a proposed Annual Town Meeting warrant article to add Zoning Bylaw Section 570 establishing an Affordable Housing Bylaw. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to recommend support of a proposed Annual Town Meeting warrant article to add Zoning Bylaw Section 570, establishing an Affordable Housing Bylaw, as published. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried, 5-1, with Mr. Wadsworth voting against.
Citizen’s Petition to Amend Zoning Bylaws Section 425 Regarding Building Coverage and Site Coverage in Neighborhood Business Districts:
Ms. MacNab invited Mr. J.R. Kent, the resident who initiated the proposal, to speak to the article. Mr. Kent, who introduced himself as Mr. Jackson S. Kent of 1351 Tremont Street, and owner of Bayside Marine at 441 Washington Street, distributed a handout with his comments regarding the proposed warrant article.
Mr. Kent noted a typographical error in his citizen’s petition, and clarified that he is attempting to amend Zoning Bylaw 425.1.5.e.
Mr. Kent noted that the issue of pervious versus impervious coverage consumes much time on Town boards. This proposal would help to clarify the recommended maximum building coverage at thirty percent and the maximum site coverage at ninety percent. He stated that he chose those numbers as the maximum because they could not go higher but could be reduced on Town Meeting floor. He admitted that further research may be required to set different percentage but stated that he does not have time right now to research and amend the current proposal.
Mr. Kent stated that he has written to all local business owners to get their input. He noted that some attractive commercial buildings in Town, such as the Lougee Insurance building at 24 Bay Road, might be considered having ninety percent site coverage if the gravel parking was included a pervious. Mr. Kent noted that currently there is no definition of “pervious” in the Town’s Zoning Bylaws.
Mr. Bear noted that a property owner needs to deal with all water that comes into a property, no matter what the surface is. Ms. MacNab noted that another proposed warrant article requiring paved parking in Neighborhood Business districts will go hand in hand with the citizen’s petition.
Ms. Stickney noted that in her research of other Towns’ Zoning Bylaws, it appears that most site coverage figures do not exceed 80 percent, with no more than 30% building coverage.
Ms. Jeanne Clark of 88 Surplus Street stated that she and other residents had toured existing commercial sites throughout the Town this past weekend. She noted that many attractive business properties appear to have a high percentage of site coverage. She stated that while the proposed 90 percent site coverage seems high, the current 50 percent is not working because it is not being enforced. Ms. Clark stated that the process needs to be streamlined for businesses so that they can have drainage work done at the same time as paving. More parking is needed at commercial sites and building size needs to be limited. She also noted that the proposed bylaw helps to tighten up the Zoning Bylaws wording.
Mr. Shawn Dahlen of 60 Long Point Lane stated that with the proposed bylaw, commercial builders will be able to base their building size from parking needs. He stated that most business owners in the Town of Duxbury are residents who want to work in the Town where they reside. He stated that the current bylaw is not economically feasible for business owners and the proposed amendment gives them something to work with. He agreed with Ms. Clark that many attractive existing businesses in the Town are at 80 to 90 percent site coverage.
Ms. Kay Foster of 134 Surplus Street stated that she had gone on the “business tour” with Ms. Clark last weekend and made a number of observations. She stated that when she first read Mr. Kent’s proposal she believed that 90 percent was too high for site coverage, but after viewing existing business properties, 80 to 90 percent coverage seems to be the standard. She especially liked the look of businesses that placed parking to the rear of the building. She supports the proposed 30 percent building coverage. Ms. Foster noted that, with the Goodrich area on Railroad Avenue as an example, Town boards should look first at the land to determine what the site can support.
Mr. Kent noted that Administrative Site Plan Review appears to be a beneficial process to the Town. Mr. Dahlen added that the current proposal helps Town boards to clarify parameters.
Ms. Patricia Loring of 245 Washington Street stated soils should dictate the project, and this should be the initial focus of the Planning Board.
Mr. Stephen Carleton of 1 River Lane stated that he owns a business on St. George Street (FarFar’s Ice Cream). He noted that the proposed bylaw would not affect the amount of retail development in the Town. He stated that most new applications would be for business and professional offices.
Mr. Kent noted that he would be presenting his proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment to the Zoning Board of Appeals on February 3, 2008.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Wadsworth provided a second, to close the public hearing regarding a proposed citizen’s amendment to amend Zoning Bylaws Section 425 regarding building coverage and site coverage in Neighborhood Business Districts. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
MOTION: Mr. Halligan made a motion, and Mr. Bear provided a second, to recommend to the Board of Selectmen, the Finance Committee and the Fiscal Advisory Committee, in conjunction with a proposed amendment to Zoning Bylaws Section 603.5 regarding requirement of paved parking in Neighborhood Business Districts, that the Planning Board supports a citizen’s petition to amend Zoning Bylaws Section 425.1.5e as presented, noting that the Planning Board prefers a reduction of building coverage and site coverage from the proposed percentages. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
Ms. Clark asked if this article would be considered under Annual Town Meeting or Special Town Meeting, and Ms. Stickney responded that she would need to confirm the answer with the Board of Selectmen.
Proposed Amendment to Zoning Bylaws Section 603.5 Regarding Requirement of Paved Parking in Neighborhood Business Districts:
Mr. Kent noted that he would not like to see this proposed amendment pass without his citizen’s amendment passing also to increase the amount of site coverage and building coverage in Neighborhood Business Districts.
Mr. Shawn Dahlen of 60 Long Point Lane recommended that local business owners show the facts regarding site coverage of attractive existing businesses.
Mr. Stephen Carleton of 1 River Lane questioned why the two proposed articles could not have been combined, and Ms. MacNab confirmed that because one was a citizen’s petition they need to be separate.
Mr. Kent asked the Board if his citizen’s petition regarding site and building coverage does not pass at Annual Town Meeting, would the Board would consider indefinitely postponing the proposed amendment regarding paved parking. Ms. MacNab responded that she knew of no reason why the Board would indefinitely postpone it.
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to close the public hearing regarding a proposed amendment to Zoning Bylaws Section 603.5 regarding requirement of paved parking in Neighborhood Business Districts. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
MOTION: Mr. Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, for the Planning Board to recommend support for the proposed amendment to Zoning Bylaws Section 603.5 regarding requirement of paved parking in Neighborhood Business Districts. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
Continued Public Hearing for a Proposed Amendment to Zoning Bylaws Section 560.11 Regarding Payment in Lieu of Affordable Housing Construction
Mr. Bear confirmed with staff that Town Counsel, Atty. Robert Troy, approved the language, especially regarding the Affordable Housing Trust. Ms. Stickney responded that the Affordable Housing Trust already exists. The proposed amendment would not change the amount of money an applicant would submit; it would only change the timing of the payment schedule.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to close the public hearing regarding a proposed amendment to Zoning Bylaws Section 560.11 regarding payment in lieu of affordable housing construction. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, for the Planning Board to recommend support for a proposed amendment to Zoning Bylaws Section 560.11.2 regarding payment in lieu of affordable housing construction, as amended. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
Zoning Bylaw Section 906.5(A) Regarding the Requirement of a Land Surveyor’s Stamp for Special Permit Site Plans:
Mr. Kimball noted a discrepancy in the Zoning Bylaws between the proposed amendment to Section 906.5, which would require a surveyor’s stamp on special permit applications, and Section 424, which requires a surveyor’s stamp or a professional engineer’s stamp for special permits within Neighborhood Business District zones. It was agreed to indefinitely postpone the proposed warrant article to ensure that wording is consistent throughout the Zoning Bylaws. Ms. Stickney noted that the public hearing for this proposed Annual Town Meeting article had been closed at the Board’s January 7, 2008 meeting.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, that the Planning Board recommends to indefinitely postpone a proposed amendment to Zoning Bylaws Section 906.5(A) regarding the requirement of a land surveyor’s stamp for special permit site plans, with the intent of ensuring consistency throughout the Zoning Bylaws. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
Island Creek North Proposed 40B Project, Tremont Street: Ms. Stickney noted that the Board of Selectmen will be sending a review letter to the applicant regarding their project eligibility application. She noted that 106 rental units currently exist which count toward the State-mandated ten percent affordable housing for 40B exclusion, and of the 238 new units proposed, 190 would be affordable. Ms. MacNab noted that the proposed project is much larger than anticipated. She also noted that the applicant’s proposal to include commercial operations is inappropriate.
Engineering Invoices:
MOTION: Mr. Halligan made a motion, and Mr. Wadsworth provided a second, to approve payment of the following engineering invoices:
§ Mainstream Engineering invoice #21062 dated December 21, 2007 in the amount of $595.00 for services related to Song Sparrow
§ Fay, Spofford & Thorndike invoice #1 in the amount of $3,842.01 for services related to Duxbury Bay Maritime School.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
Meeting Minutes:
MOTION: Mr. Halligan made a motion, and Mr. Bear provided a second, to approve meeting minutes of December 17, 2007 as presented.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
Duxbury Farms: Ms. MacNab reported that she had notified the Board of Selectmen that the Zoning Board chairman’s and applicant’s comments were inserted into a document with a Planning Board letterhead. She expressed concern that if the case went to litigation, the document could be considered a Planning Board document. She has requested through the Board of Selectmen to expunge this letter from the file record.
Ms. Stickney noted that the ZBA hearing regarding this project is scheduled for January 17, 2008. Ms. MacNab also noted that Zoning Board Chairman, Mr. James Lampert, has resigned. She reported that the ZBA has requested Mr. Walter Amory, the Planning Board’s consulting engineer for project review, to attend the ZBA meeting. It was agreed that Mr. Amory would be free to attend the ZBA meeting to represent himself and answer questions under his review, but not to speak to any other Planning Board questions. Mr. Bear noted that the Planning Board should not put itself in a position of negotiating with the applicant. Mr. Kimball confirmed that if Mr. Amory attends the ZBA meeting, he would invoice the ZBA for his time.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board meeting was adjourned at 11:03 PM. The next meeting of the Planning Board will take place on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 7:30 PM in Town Offices, Small Conference Room, lower level.
| 
