MARSHFIELD DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD

Approved Minutes of July 26, 2006

Board Members present: Paul Brierre, Tom Daley, and Martin Johnson. Also attending: Planning Commission member Mike Fritz, Zoning Administrator Bob Light, Scott Prosser, Brad Washburn, Rob Townshend, Judith Aiken, Catherine Cerulli, Daniel Dolan, K. Ondis Eardensohn, Gregory Sanford, William Fitzpatrick, Paul Garstki, Donna Thomas, Leslie Koehler, Mike Raker, Patty Morgan, Fred Wilber, Karen Murray, Tom Pearson, Sandra Pearson, Andrew Perchlik, Dennis Robertson, Andy Russell, Ada Silverstein, Robert Silverstein, Terri Weinstein, Bob Weinstein, Michelle Wallace, and Greg Wallace.

At 7:10 pm the Board re-opened the Preliminary Plan hearing for the subdivision application of

Gruss and Co. Once again, Mike Fritz was sitting as a designated substitute member of the Development Review Board for purposes of this review.

            This hearing had been temporarily adjourned on July 6, and the Board has made a site visit to the proposed development area in the interim. This evening’s hearing began with the introduction of several new documents to the case file. On behalf of the Applicants, Scott Prosser submitted a 7-page letter (dated July 25), with attached exhibits, responding point-by-point to the written letter of concern submitted along with additional oral comment by neighboring landowners Paul Garstki, Donna Thomas, and Richard and Judy Aiken at the July 6 hearing. At Tom’s request, Scott went through the main points of his letter for the benefit of those in attendance.

            The Board then heard briefly from Paul Garstki, who submitted a new 6-page memorandum to the Board (dated July 24), on behalf of a group of neighbors, criticizing numberous aspects of the proposal and urging the Board to reject it. Scott responded to this memo with a 4-page written response, plus exhibits, dated July 26.

            This was followed by a round of questions from members of the Board on some of the points raised. Rob Townshend and Brad Washburn, who had prepared the development plans for the Applicants, addressed the issue of Section 380 of Marshfield’s Zoning Regulations, and their view that this provision does allow for the leach field that serves a given residence to be located on an adjoining (or nearby) lot. Under the present proposal, this would be applicable to lots #4 and #5.

            The Board then took questions and comments from many of the neighboring landowners in attendence. In addition to more specific concerns about individual aspects of the proposal, a number of those commenting stressed that their own enjoyment of the neighborhood would be significantly impaired by the addition of 8 new residences along their road, and hoped that both the Board and the Applicants would be able to see this proposal from their point of view.

            Tom then restated for everyone present that this was the Preliminary Plan review, as required by the Town’s Subdivision Regulations, and that the immediate purpose was to enable the Board to decide whether to authorize the Applicants to advance their plan to a Final Plan hearing. After some discussion among the members of the Board about whether it had enough evidence to render its decision on this, the Board closed the hearing at 9:15 pm. A written decision will follow within 45 days.

Bob Light then brought up to the Board that another case had arisen about whether the owner of a single lot that was bifurcated by Route 2 could sell off the land on one side of the road without benefit of a Subdivision Permit. Bob is in receipt of a letter from Town Attorney Paul Gillies, dated July 12, 2006, offering the opinion that, if the Town brought an enforcement action against a landowner for making such a transfer, it would lose on appeal. Tom stated that he had read the court cases that Paul cited in his letter, and in his (Tom’s) opinion they not only did not imply what Paul thought they implied, but if anything they actually supported the necessity of obtaining a subdivision permit in such cases. Bob asked that the DRB try to come to some consensus on this question, because he would like to be on the same page with the rest of the Town when this question comes before him in his capacity as Zoning Administrator.

At 9:25 pm the Board went into closed session to deliberate on the Gruss application.

At 10:20 pm Martin moved to adjourn the DRB meeting. Seconded by Mike, all in favor.

                                                                                                Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                                Tom Daley