Approved 07/14/08
Town of Duxbury
Massachusetts
Planning Board
Minutes 06/16/08
The Planning Board met in Duxbury Town Offices, Mural Room, lower level on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 7:30 PM.
Present: Amy MacNab, Chairman; George Wadsworth, Vice-Chair; Brendan Halligan, Clerk; John Bear, Cynthia Ladd Fiorini, James Kimball, and Harold Moody.
Absent: No one was absent.
Staff: Christine Stickney, Planning Director; and Diane Grant, Administrative Assistant.
Ms. MacNab called the meeting to order at 7:31 PM.
OPEN FORUM
Land Use Summit: Ms. MacNab stated that she believed the Land Use Summit hosted by the Board of Selectmen on June 11, 2008 had provided some useful discussion.
Comprehensive Plan Update: Ms. MacNab reported that she and Mr. Wadsworth are scheduled to attend a meeting on June 20, 2008 with Ms. Stickney regarding the best way to approach the update to this plan that was last published in 1999. The purpose of the meeting will be to determine which parts of the plan would require a consultant and which parts could be updated in-house.
454 Franklin Street (Cell Tower): Ms. MacNab reported that she and Ms. Stickney had met with the Director of Inspectional Services, Mr. Scott Lambiase, regarding this project. She directed staff to send a memorandum to Mr. Lambiase requesting documentation from this meeting. She reported that there are some ongoing zoning enforcement issues and litigation regarding this property.
Proposed Revision to Zoning Bylaws Regarding Parking: Mr. Wadsworth reported that he and Mr. Bear met with Ms. Stickney regarding this topic for potential action at Town Meeting. Ms. Stickney had provided parking information from other town’s Zoning Bylaws. Mr. Bear noted that parking requirements for the Town of Duxbury are outdated. He stated that it will be important to include Mr. Lambiase, the Director of Inspectional Services, in the discussions because of potential enforcement issues. Ms. MacNab suggested that the list of allowed uses should be updated and the applicant’s proposed use should be required with the special permit application.
SONG SPARROW ENGINEERING INVOICES
Present for the discussion were Mr. Jay Woodruff, the applicant for the Song Sparrow Estates subdivision, and Mr. Thomas Sexton of Mainstream Engineering, Town consulting engineer. They were present at the invitation of the Planning Board for the purpose of resolving billing issues regarding Mainstream Engineering invoices dated January 31, 2008 and February 26, 2008. The issue stemmed from a discovery in January 2008 that the project had been reviewed under 2005 Subdivision Rules and Regulations when they should have been reviewed under 2002 Subdivision Rules and Regulations. Ms. MacNab noted that Mainstream Engineering had submitted a proposed credit as requested by the Board, but Mr. Woodruff had not.
Mr. Woodruff expressed his concern that Mainstream Engineering had changed its recommendations regarding certain issues with each review letter. Mr. Woodruff submitted a document containing a memorandum from his engineer, Mr. Steven Gioiosa of Sitec Engineering, dated June 13, 2008, stating that approximately $664.42 of his billing to Mr. Woodruff represented unnecessary engineering work. Mr. Moody asked Mr. Sexton if this estimate is reasonable, and Mr. Sexton responded that he did not believe it is reasonable. Mr. Sexton noted that there were no revised plans submitted between the first and second review letters when the error had been discovered.
Mr. Woodruff complained that Mainstream Engineering reports listed work not done which in fact had been completed, such as installation of bounds and a stop sign. Mr. Sexton stated that Mr. Woodruff’s complaints were based on his engineer’s judgment alone, and Mr. Sexton does not necessarily agree with that judgment. Ms. Stickney noted that Mainstream Engineering had required items in his review letters that she believes were unnecessary. She also questioned if Mainstream Engineering’s construction observer had actually performed some work that was billed, noting that at the least, the observer had made errors in his report.
Ms. MacNab noted that it was important to understand the premise for this scheduled discussion, which is the difference in review time for 2005 and 2002 Subdivision Rules and Regulations. She stated that she was unaware of other issues until now. Mr. Sexton stated that his proposed credit of $290.00 represents the difference in time of two hours spent reviewing 2005 and 2002 Subdivision Rules and Regulations.
Ms. Stickney noted that in January and February 2008 Mainstream Engineering submitted two invoices totaling approximately $2,200.00 for As-Built review of Song Sparrow Estates. She suggested that if Mr. Sexton agreed to withdraw his invoice dated February 26, 2008 in the amount of $836.00, it may provide a compromise.
Mr. Moody noted that $836.00 represents approximately five and a half hours of billable time from Mainstream Engineering. Ms. MacNab asked for agreement from both parties for a credit of this amount. Mr. Woodruff stated that the money is less important than the process and his dissatisfaction with the Town consulting engineer’s review work. He estimated that he has paid double what he should have for project review.
Mr. Sexton stated that both his work and his costs are within the standard range. He said that it is rare to hear complaints regarding work performed by Mainstream Engineering; however, he is willing to negotiate in order to avoid potential legal fees.
Both Mr. Woodruff and Mr. Sexton verbally agreed to the $836.00 credit. Ms. MacNab noted that the agreement is now on record, and so the issue can be put to rest. Mr. Woodruff stated that he has further concerns beyond the billing amount. Ms. MacNab stated that his concerns would be duly noted in the meeting minutes. Mr. Sexton expressed concern that if Mr. Woodruff submitted another letter with issues regarding engineering review, he would need to respond. Mr. Moody suggested that as part of the resolution of this disagreement, both parties should agree not to revisit the issues raised. He noted that it is in everyone’s best interest not to spend more time on the matter.
Mr. Bear asked if Mr. Woodruff and Mr. Sexton would agree with the monetary resolution and consider the project closed. Both parties verbally agreed.
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Bear provided a second, to pay Mainstream Engineering invoice #21068 in the amount of $1,397.50 for services related to Song Sparrow As-Built review. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
CONTINUED PUBLIC MEETING: 454 FRANKLIN STREET / INDUSTRIAL TOWER AND WIRELESS, LLC
Ms. MacNab opened the public meeting at 8:07 PM. Present for the discussion were Mr. Donald Cody and Mr. John Champ from Industrial Communications and their attorney, Edward Angley. Also present was Town consulting engineer, Mr. Walter Amory of Amory Engineers.
Mr. Halligan read the correspondence list into the public record:
§ Mutual Extension form signed at the Planning Board meeting of 05/05/08
§ Letter from S. Lambiase to M. Williams dated 05/11/06 submitted at 05/05/08 PB meeting
§ Photographs of site submitted by F. Prosl at 05/05/08 PB meeting
§ Photograph of monopine prototype submitted at 05/05/08 PB meeting
§ “Site Lease with Option” submitted on 05/07/08
§ Letter from L. Groppi of Industrial Communications dated 05/07/08 re: hazardous waste licensed vendor
§ “Photographs of Wireless Facilities” submitted 05/07/08
§ Planning Board meeting minutes of 04/28/08
§ Planning Board meeting minutes of 05/05/08
§ Revised site plan dated 05/24/08 submitted 06/03/08
§ Revised site plan dated 05/24/08 submitted 06/11/08 (including WPOD elevations)
§ Letter from M. Flaherty of Flaherty & Stefani, Inc. dated 06/11/08 with plan entitled, “Proposed Temporary Beams over Culverts” dated 06/10/08.
Ms. MacNab asked if the property owner, Mr. Williams, was present. Atty. Angley stated that his office had made repeated calls to the owners that were not returned. Ms. Stickney noted that at the public meeting of May 5, 2008 issues were identified with the owner, who is considered a co-applicant by the Planning Board. Those issues are currently under review. Mr. Williams is scheduled to go before the Conservation Commission on June 24, 2008 with a Notice of Intent application. In addition, Mr. Williams has enforcement issues and legal issues he is working to resolve with the Town.
Mr. Cody noted that revised plans had been submitted that depict the elevations for the Wetlands Protection Overlay District (WPOD) zoning line. Ms. Stickney noted that the 1971 Wetlands and Watershed Protection Districts map indicates an elevation of 50 feet, and the plans submitted show elevations of 50 feet and 40 feet. She requested that the applicant’s surveyor contact her to discuss the matter.
Atty. Angley stated that information has been submitted regarding a 30 inch corrugated metal culvert, as requested at the Board meeting of May 5, 2008. Mr. Amory noted that at a June 13, 2008 site inspection he had discovered another 12-inch reinforced concrete culvert at the north end of the access road. Mr. Cody stated that the 12-inch culvert is not a part of their work. The South River has an intermittent flow of water and the applicants are not responsible for that. Ms. Stickney disagreed, stating that at least the culvert should be depicted on the site plan. Mr. Amory stated that he needs to discuss this culvert with the applicant’s structural engineer.
Mr. Amory reported that he had spoken with the applicant’s structural engineer, Mr. Anderson, regarding recalculation of the strength of the temporary oak planks that would be utilized for bridging during the construction of the cell tower. Mr. Amory is awaiting an answer from Mr. Anderson. Mr. Amory explained his concern that the design of the temporary oak planks is based on a span of nine feet, when the actual span is closer to ten feet. Mr. Amory also questioned the basis for allowable loading on oak beams. He stated that it is crucial that the wood must be dry and contain no splits, cracks or knots to ensure it can bear the load of construction equipment.
Ms. MacNab asked if Mr. Amory was satisfied with the applicant’s response regarding the consistency of the access roadway, and Mr. Amory responded that he is not satisfied. Ms. MacNab noted that the Board is concerned if the drainage structures can support vehicle load during construction. Atty. Angley stated that it is a driveway, not a roadway, and that after the crane travels over it on a one-time basis, only service vehicles will cross after construction. Mr. Amory noted that the designer has taken this factor into account, multiplying the normal load times 1.25 for construction only.
Mr. Moody confirmed with Mr. Amory that he recommends that the temporary oak beams should be utilized over the 12-inch culvert as well as the 30-inch culvert.
Ms. MacNab asked Mr. Amory to review deficiencies in the site plan. Mr. Amory noted a typographical error on the site plan, with a plan date that should read 3/14/08 rather than 3/14/07. Mr. Amory also made the following recommendations:
§ Utility locations should be shown, including construction details for utilities. He expressed concern that the applicant’s intent to install the utilities along the roadway may be an issue because of the culverts.
§ Road construction information needs to be provided. Mr. Amory noted that the roadway was first a footpath that was converted to a crushed stone and gravel surface. More information is needed on the actual consistency of the roadway base. Mr. Cody noted that a cross-section of the 30 inches of gravel was shown on the plan, and Mr. Moody pointed out that it was depicted on the culvert drawing, and should also be shown on the site plan.
§ All culverts should be shown on the site plan. He noted his concern with the potential corrosion of the 30-inch corrugated metal pipe. Other culverts are built with cast iron or reinforced concrete. Mr. Amory noted that in the early spring he detected another culvert but with vegetation filled in at this time of year, he has not been able to find it recently. Mr. Wadsworth stated that all culverts should be bridged during construction.
§ The leased area should be clarified because it has been described both as a 100 x 100 foot area and a 60 x 60 foot area enclosed by a fence. It was agreed that the 60 x 60 foot area would be considered the leased area.
Ms. MacNab opened the floor to questions from the Board. Mr. Kimball asked if issues with the property owner are being separated, and Ms. MacNab responded that the owner is in the process of dealing with pending Conservation Commission, zoning enforcement, and litigation issues.
Ms. MacNab asked about the design as monopole versus tower. She prefers the tower design. Mr. Cody stated his agreement but noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) referenced the monopine style in its variance permit. Ms. MacNab stated that she believes the ZBA may be satisfied with a tower design. Mr. Amory noted that the tower would be 70 feet above the treeline.
Mr. Kimball asked if the driveway easement needs to be noted on the site plan.
Ms. MacNab invited public comments, especially regarding tower versus monopine design. Mr. Jerry Janousek of 531 Franklin Street asked how many antenna rays would extend from the pole, and Mr. Cody replied that a maximum of five antennae are allowed. Atty. Angley noted that the pole could accommodate more antennae, and Mr. Cody added that the special permit would need to be modified to allow for more than five antennae.
Mr. Amory noted that twenty percent of the top of the tower is reserved for the Town’s public safety equipment, and Mr. Cody clarified that only space within the top twenty percent of the pole is reserved for Town use. Atty. Angley stated that this provision is to be worked out with the ZBA, noting that they are scheduled with the ZBA for July 26, 2008.
Ms. Marion O’Connor of 452 Franklin Street stated that she has experience appraising cell towers, and noted that as an abutter she prefers the monopine style to the tower because the tower would be unsightly. Ms. O’Connor asked about utilities, and Atty. Angley responded that the applicants will be discussing that topic with the Conservation Commission. He noted that they would prefer to construct the utilities underground if possible.
Ms. Nancy Sharpe of 465 Franklin Street stated that she prefers a tower because the monopine style would be less appealing visually.
Ms. Stickney asked if the applicant’s lease that references the easement is recorded on the property. Atty. Angley replied that once the project has been approved, the lease will be recorded on the title.
Ms. MacNab noted that it is important to recognize ongoing issues at the site regarding zoning enforcement. She stated that it has become obvious from the May 5, 2008 Board meeting and subsequent conversations with Mr. Scott Lambiase, Director of Inspectional Services, that some uses on the property are not in compliance with Zoning Bylaws. It appears that current uses exceed grandfathered uses outlined in a handwritten note that was submitted at the May 5, 2008 Board meeting.
Ms. MacNab noted that continuing the public meeting will allow Mr. Amory more time to review plans and will allow conditions to be drafted for the Board’s decision. Mr. Halligan asked if the applicants understand the outstanding issues, and Mr. Cody stated that the review should have been finished by now. Mr. Amory noted that the applicants should address issues raised both tonight and at the May 5, 2008 Board meeting that remain unresolved. Ms. Stickney noted that Mr. Amory has done an excellent job of project review considering culvert information had been submitted on June 12, 2008, only two business days earlier. She noted that the following information is still needed:
§ Construction details
§ Utility details
§ Culverts shown
§ Correction of date on plans
§ Depth and consistency of roadway
§ Plans to be stamped by engineer.
Mr. Moody confirmed that Atty. Angley would contact the applicant’s engineer, Mr. Mark Flaherty, and ask him to contact Mr. Amory.
Ms. Stickney suggested scheduling the continued public meeting on July 28, 2008, after the applicant’s meetings with Conservation Commission and ZBA. Mr. Cody expressed his frustration with the Board’s recommendation to continue the public meeting.
MOTION: Mr. Halligan made a motion, and Mr. Kimball provided a second, to continue the public meeting for Administrative Site Plan Review of 454 Franklin Street / Industrial Tower and Wireless LLC, until Monday, July 28, 2008 at 8:00 PM, with revised plans and materials due by July 14, 2008 and a decision deadline of August 28, 2008. There was no discussion regarding the motion.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
Atty. Angley and Board members signed a mutual extension form.
DINGLEY DELL SUBDIVISION STATUS
Ms. Stickney noted that the subdivision is very near completion. The final paving has been done and only the driveway culvert remains. She stated that she is pursuing resolution of the Conservation Restriction with the state. Ms. Stickney reminded the Board that the applicant, Mr. Striebel, agreed to construct a culvert rather than post funds. She noted that the Board has not released the lot as of yet and stated that she is confident that work will be completed soon.
PLANNING BOARD APPOINTMENT TO THE LOCAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP (LHP)
Ms. Stickney noted that LHP chair, Ms. Diane Bartlett, has requested the Board to appoint a representative to the LHP to represent the Board and to help with achieving a quorum at LHP meetings. Ms. MacNab noted that the Board had been waiting for a Board representative to be appointed to the Affordable Housing Trust, and now Mr. Moody has been appointed. She noted that Mr. Wadsworth has agreed to serve as the Planning Board representative to the LHP.
MOTION: Mr. Halligan made a motion, and Mr. Bear provided a second, to appoint Mr. Wadsworth to the Local Housing Partnership as a Planning Board representative, to serve the term expiring June 2010 by Ms. Angela Scieszka, who completed her Planning Board term in March 2008.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
MBTA/ South Shore Coalition Appointment: Board members agreed to make another formal appointment.
MOTION: Mr. Bear made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to appoint Mr. Kimball to serve as a Planning Board representative to the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority / South Shore Coalition for a term of one year.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 4-0.
OPEN SPACE PLAN REVIEW AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
Ms. Stickney noted that the Open Space Plan draft has been completed and the Open Space Committee is anxious to finalize it as a requirement for a self-help grant. Board members reviewed the draft goals. Ms. MacNab noted that the Conservation Commission should be responsible for submitting the Stormwater Bylaw for Town Meeting approval. Ms. MacNab also noted as a general comment that responsibilities for goals should lie within Town Hall and not outside organizations. It was agreed that Board members and staff would review the draft plan and provide comments by June 30, 2008.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mainstream Engineering Invoice:
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion to pay Mainstream Engineering invoice #21070 dated May 31, 2008 in the amount of $1,832.05 for services related to Berrybrook School.
DISCUSSION: Before the motion was seconded, Ms. Stickney noted that the invoice reflects a billing rate above the contracted amount.
MOTION WITHDRAWN: Mr. Wadsworth withdrew his motion, and Ms. Stickney agreed to return the invoice to Mainstream Engineering.
Amory Engineering Invoices:
MOTION: Mr. Wadsworth made a motion, and Mr. Halligan provided a second, to pay the following Amory Engineers invoices dated June 4, 2008:
§ #12208A in the amount of $656.25 for services related to 454 Franklin Street / Industrial Tower and Wireless LLC
§ #12208B in the amount of $548.75 for services related to Dingley Dell.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
Meeting Minutes:
Ms. MacNab requested more time to review meeting minutes of May 19, 2008.
MOTION: Mr. Halligan made a motion, and Ms. Ladd-Fiorini provided a second, to approved meeting minutes of June 2, 2008 as amended.
VOTE: The motion carried unanimously, 7-0.
Letter from Local Housing Partnership (LHP) to Board of Selectmen: Ms. MacNab noted that Ms.Diane Bartlett, chair of the LHP, had written a letter dated May 8, 2008 to Mr. Witten of the Board of Selectmen, in response to comments made at a Board of Selectmen meeting of May 5, 2008. Mr. Kimball noted that the LHP needs to consider the “big picture” beyond their narrow focus. He stated that there are other ways to achieve affordable housing than the 40B process. Mr. Wadsworth noted that the housing consultant had provided a menu of alternatives to the 40B process.
Proposed Revisions to Zoning Bylaws Regarding Coverage: Ms. Stickney noted that current members on this study group include Ms. Sara Wilson of the ZBA; Mr. J.R. Kent, business owner; Dr. Scott Oliver, business owner; Mr. Joseph Grady, Conservation Administrator; Mr. Scott Lambiase, Director of Inspectional Services; and Ms. Stickney. She noted that Mr. Bear had volunteered to serve as a Planning Board representative. Ms. MacNab offered to serve on this group also.
Bongi’s, Kingstown Way: Ms. Stickney noted that the Administrative Site Plan Review construction deadline had passed on May 16, 2008. Board members directed staff to write a letter to the applicants inviting them to attend a future Board meeting to discuss their intentions.
Bay Farm Montessori Academy, Loring Street: Ms. MacNab reported that construction appears to be moving forward, with the access roadway under construction. She asked Ms. Stickney to inspect the site and to alert Mr. Lambiase, Director of Inspectional Services that a construction sign has been posted, which is against Zoning Bylaws.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board meeting adjourned at 9:53 PM. The next meeting of the Planning Board will take place on Monday, June 30, 2008 at 7:30 PM at Duxbury Town Offices, Small Conference Room, lower level.
| 
