In March, the town received notification of a purchase and sale agreement for 10.38 acres of land on West Street known as the Jaycox or Christmas Tree Farm.  This land is classified as forestry land under state law, which means that in return for local tax benefits to the owner, the town has the first right of refusal on purchasing the land.

At their March meeting, members of the Community Preservation Committee felt that the $600,000 price tag for the land was not a high price to pay given the open space values as well as the land’s location near other town-owned property and wetlands.  They also discussed preserving the farm to sell Christmas trees as a revenue generator for the town.

At Thursday’s meeting, the group heard a proposal by the potential buyer of the land regarding an option she thought could benefit both her group and the town.

Nancy Reed of the West Street Family Trust has a contract for the land with the two trusts that currently own the forest land and said there are several ideas for the use of the property.  One idea she wanted to get feedback from the committee on was to construct two “downsized” homes on three acres of the land and sell the remainder of the property to the town for the continued use of the existing tree farm.  This plan, she said, would come with a much cheaper price tag than the $600,000 the town would have to spend to prevent the land from being sold to her trust.

Chairwoman Holly Morris said that this land has been looked at for preservation for a number of years and the premise of the Community Preservation Act is to preserve the natural characteristic of Duxbury.

“Whether we preserve this land as a tree farm or not, I’m not sureÖbut [the purchase] would protect wetlands and that is why we are interested,” she said.

Conservation Agent Joe Grady added that the conservation commission has been interested in the land dating back to initial negotiations with the owners in 2000.{sidebar id=1}

“This piece fits nicely among the puzzle of land near the West Brook; it’s a key piece,” he said.  “It is along the watershed and [would allow us to] protect water quality, wildlife values and more.”

Grady added that Reed was before the board to present one of various options regarding the land and to see if the committee was even willing to consider something less than purchasing the entire property.

Committee member Tony Kelso inquired whether the housing Reed envisioned on two lots of the land would be affordable, to which she replied that it would not.  Reed said that these would not be “McMansions,” but homes compatible with the traditional styles of the neighborhood.

CPC member George Wadsworth said at an estimate of $300,000 per lot, she would most likely be putting $600,000-900,000 into each home, so these would not be small by any means.

“People don’t spend a lot on a lot and put in a camper,” he said.

Reed reasserted that this was just one option for now and that as a Duxbury resident she understood the need for affordable housing but that she “didn’t know if we can apply to this with the cost” involved.

She added that many baby boomers should have the opportunity to move out of their big houses after their children have grown up and these two houses would be such an option.

“I wouldn’t necessarily call these ëaffordable’Öbut I’d consider them options,” she said.  “We are not considering building big houses here.”

Committee member Art Vautrain inquired about an appraisal on the land, to which Grady replied that one was done years ago but an updated version is recommended.  He suggested the board fund an appraisal he priced at $1,800 and said would be needed to justify the price if they are going forward with recommending a purchase.

Morris said that in addition to knowing the value of the land, it would be beneficial if engineering was done to know if two lots truly existed on the land versus one.  Reed said their sale agreement was contingent on two lots and they could back out if it was determined only one existed.

Vautrain said that if the committee is asking voters to support a purchase of $600,000 they needed to know the value of the land.  Wadsworth made a motion for the committee to fund the $1,800 hinting to Reed that the board hoped she would fund the engineering costs involved in the one lot versus two lot debate.  Reed said it was her understanding that this work is going to be done by her trust.

The committee voted 5-0 to fund the appraisal at $1,800, get a true value on the land and revisit the issue at a future meeting, recognizing the issue would take several gatherings before the June Special Town Meeting to resolve.