Wellfleet Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting and Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Senior Center Long Pond Room, 7:00 p.m.
Present: R. Dennis O’Connell, Chairman; Barbara Gray, Ronald Harper, Griswold Draz, David Rowell, Gerald Parent, Alfred Pickard, Rex Peterson
Also Attending: Town Counsel Elizabeth Lane
Chairman O’Connell called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ANR #08-09
Chester Lay of Slade Associates came forward to explain ANR #08-09 at the Town-owned sandpit at 145 Pole Dike Rd. (Map 12, Parcel 224). The Conservation Commission is to administer the property separated by the 81-P.
Barbara Gray moved to deem the plan an ANR. O’Connell seconded and the motion carried 7-0.
Chapter 91 License Application
O’Connell announced that there was a Chapter 91 License Application from Felco for a revetment 975 Chequessett Neck Road for Albert P. & Nathalie H. Moore. (Parent disclosed that the owner has rented through his firm.) One signature, which it was agreed O’Connell will provide, was needed from the Planning Board.
Zoning Bylaw Revisions Discussion
The amended August 19, 2008 draft of the Selectmen’s proposal was under consideration. O’Connell explained advertising deadlines for a public hearing and the deadlines for the Special Town Meeting Warrant to be held October27, 2008. Rex Peterson gave the specific dates for Articles and recommendations to be printed in the Warrant.
David Rowell asked if Planning Board was to accept the document as a whole or make changes. O’Connell expressed his opinion that Planning Board go ahead with advertising the Articles as presented. Rex Peterson discussed making suggestions for amendments to the Articles. Town Counsel Elizabeth Lane discussed the difference between advertising specific details in the Articles vs. giving general descriptions of the Articles.
Gerald Parent questioned Article E that had been rewritten according to the Selectmen’s directions so that it applies to the Seashore District only. Parent asked about changing Article E before advertising for a public hearing because the introduction for Section 6.1.5 still applies to the whole town. Town Counsel made suggestions for changing the introduction for the section, but she said Planning Board was free to make its own proposal at Special Town Meeting. Ron Harper suggested adding a 6.1.6 section meant solely for the Seashore.
Barbara Gray said she’d like to go forward with advertising what the Selectmen presented and also proceed with PB’s own proposal for Site Plan Review with Special Permit.
Lane discussed Section 6.1.5.3 which is problematic because it refers to a section that doesn’t exist. She also discussed the non-conforming issues. She asked what PB intended to do to clean up those particular problems.
O’Connell reviewed the Selectmen’s goals for their proposal. He said that the proposal was inaccurate because of the way Article E was presented. Parent said there were two options: try to fix it or advertise everything but Article E because it is wrong. O’Connell said that Article E did not make sense because it had taken out an entire section.
Lane said that the Articles did not have to be verbatim in the advertising phase. The advertisement just has to cover the concept, she said. Draz asked if there was a way to isolate the final section on the Seashore District in Article E and add the language that is needed to keep the essential material for Section 6.1.5.
Barbara Gray said the role of the Planning Board is not to fix up what it doesn’t think is correctly done by the BOS.
Lane challenged the idea that 6.1.5 doesn’t make sense. She said it does cover how to deal with non-conforming structure first, and then it states what happens in the Seashore District. She said that the narrative paragraphs of 6.1.5 tell what to do. Harper said using text is not beneficial for a building inspector trying to make a decision.
O’Connell said the language presented is more than what the Selectmen said they were going to do. Parent said he was troubled that the Selectmen’s proposal to be advertised was not clear and that there wasn’t time to make it accurate because of the deadlines. Lane said Planning Board needs to advertise even if they do not agree with the proposal.
PB members discussed advertising the document. O’Connell repeated that Article E goes way beyond the scope of what the Selectmen intended it to do.
Gray moved that PB not publish Article E as presented. Parent seconded.
Harper suggested that the motion be amended, but Gray said that was her motion. Parent asked about not advertising. Lane said that would be highly irregular and PB would have to go to court to be forced to advertise. Lane asked what the specific problems were and Draz discussed the potential for a freeze that would go into effect.
The motion to not advertise Article E carried 7-0.
That returned the meeting to consideration of the other Articles.
Gray moved to publish the other Articles in the August 19, 2008 draft given to Planning Board by the BOS. Harper seconded.
Draz said he thought PB should offer revisions, but O’Connell said that the Board should work on its own proposal. Parent discussed site coverage in Article C. He pointed out flaws in the site coverage chart. His other thought on advertising was to see the proposal stated.
The motion to publish the other Articles carried 5-2.
Gray moved that the Planning Board’s Site Plan Review –Special Permit Draft of August 13, 2008 be submitted for advertising for a public hearing and inclusion at Special Town Meeting. Harper seconded.
Gray said that Article D of the Selectmen’s proposal had taken some of the provisions from this document but hadn’t included everything that PB had presented. Parent said that he said that lot coverage adjustments still had to be included in the plan. Parent said he would not vote for the motion without lot coverage included.
Gray postponed her motion and Harper removed his second until lot coverage was included.
O’Connell discussed a new spreadsheet on lot size comparisons that he had produced. He explained building envelope sizes. A second spreadsheet presented a comparison of lot coverage controls. He explained the various allowances by current Wellfleet coverage and by proposed lot coverage in the Seashore District and in the rest of the Town’s R-1 District. Parent discussed the importance of coupling lot coverage with Site Plan Review (SPR). He explained the numbers that he had worked with.
Planning Board members discussed: advertising the lot coverage figures, determination of the gradient; offering bonuses for Affordable Housing; provisions for affordable units in the Seashore; and Certificates of Non-Condemnation placed in jeopardy.
Parent moved to put the Planning Board lot coverage proposal on the Warrant for Special Town Meeting. Gray seconded. Peterson explained procedure for referring it to the Selectmen. The motion to put the lot coverage proposal on the Warrant carried 7-0.
Gray moved that Planning Board advertise and sponsor the Site Plan Review – Special Permit bylaw draft dated August 13, 2008. Harper seconded.
O’Connell said there were some adjustments needed. Gray said that the Selectmen’s first three Articles were nearly identical to the PB Site Plan Review draft. She discussed Site Plan Review throughout the Cape and the state with planning boards as the agents for issuing the Special Permits. O’Connell said a basic difference in the proposal of the BOS and PB is that Selectmen had named ZBA as the Special Permitting agents.
Gray said Special Permitting is vested to planning boards and zoning appeals boards. She sees it as a Planning Board function. ZBA would not be taking into consideration some of PB’s concerns. ZBA concentrates on what is less detrimental to a neighborhood as criteria for a Special Permit.
O’Connell suggested deferring which board would be the agent until PB reviewed the criteria. Moving to Section B Applicability, O’Connell said he would like to see lot coverage instead of site coverage. PB discussed lot coverage both inside and outside the Seashore. Most of the small lots in the Seashore need SP anyway, Planning Board members believe.
Further discussion concerned: ZBL Section 8.3.1 in, notification to the National Park Service of building permits within the Seashore District; existing and proposed coverages for the Seashore District with Affordable Housing allowances; lot coverage that had the effect of pushing buildings upwards; and use of lot coverage and living area as SPR triggers; gross floor area is the trigger; and advantages of the Site Plan Review process
Gooz Draz said he needed more time to consider the Site Plan Review proposal with site coverage in the equation. The Board still sought a trigger for SPR. Lane discussed smaller trigger numbers within the Seashore. She said the numbers could be challenged, but if they could be tied to scale that is being preserved, the proposal might work. Parent discussed the 1975 zoning differences between the Seashore and the rest of the Town. If the same percentage was followed for the triggers, the plan could be substantiated, according to Lane.
Parent moved a site coverage trigger at 2,250 for lots within the Seashore. Harper seconded for purposes of discussion.
O’Connell asked about changing other Articles that PB intends to advertise for the Selectmen. The public hearing will be the next opportunity to change Articles.
Draz requested holding an additional PB meeting next Wednesday, August 27, 2008. O’Connell said the Board would deal with Site Plan Review – Special Permit (August 13, 2008 draft) and lot coverage. There were a number of changes that Lane, Draz and Parent would like to see made in the draft.
Rex Peterson discussed the number of meetings that have been scheduled. He said he understood that the Selectmen had suggested that PB prepare a proposal for Annual Town Meeting. O’Connell concurred. Harper said the non-Seashore part of town needed to be protected from McMansionization as well as the Seashore.
In a roll call opinion as to whether ZBA or PB should be the agents for Site Plan Review-Special Permit, O’Connell and Rowell said ZBA. Harper, Gray, Pickard and Parent chose Planning Board. Draz expressed no preference. A majority of four (4) Planning Board members indicated they would like to have Planning Board as agents involved in the Site Plan Review process.
Minutes of 8/6/08
Gray moved to approve the amended minutes of August 6, 2008. Parent seconded and the motion carried 7-0.
Mail
The Local Comprehensive Implementation Committee had sent a request for a meeting to go over the Planning Board goals outlined in the LCPC plan. This will be an agenda item for a future meeting.
Adjournment
Gray moved to adjourn. Parent seconded and the meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________ ____________________________
Mary Rogers, Committee Secretary R. Dennis O’Connell, Chairman
________________________ Date
Planning Board approved these minutes at the meeting held 9/3/08.
| 
