Planning Board Agenda for Monday, March 5, 2007
Scheduled: 7:00 PM Continuation of Public Hearings on Proposed Amendments to the Zoning By-Law
Old/New Business:
Minutes/Bills
Form A 175 Beal Street
Central Meeting Room North
Present: Planning Board Members, Susan Murphy, Chair, Paul Healey, Clerk, Judy Sneath and
Gary Torndof-Dick. Also present was Planner Katharine Lacy.
The Board was joined by several members of the Zoning Permit Study Committee.
Ms. Murphy opened the public meeting at 7:20 P.M. at the Hingham Town Hall.
Article A- Special Permit and Site Plan Review Clean Up
The first article discussed was "Article A-Special Permit and Site Plan Review Clean Up" This article was developed jointly by the Planning Board and the Zoning Permit Study Committee with a goal of further streamlining and cleaning up the changes to Section I of the Zoning By-Law, which outlined procedures for Special Permits and Site Plan Review.
Ms. Murphy summarized the general intent of the article, and made note of revisions made to the amendment by the Zoning Permit Study Committee since the last time it was discussed with the Planning Board in January. In summary, the main results of the article would be as follows.
1) It would allow the Planning Board to utilize professional consultants, at the expense of the applicant, to assist with Site Plan Review.
2) It would modify the timeframes and deadlines for Site Plan Review to ensure that the applicant would not "run the clock" by delaying the submittal of requested material.
3) It would modify the Site Plan Review criteria to include a provision for "the adequacy of open space and setbacks, including adequacy of landscaping of such areas." Currently, there is no provision which allows the Board to assess adequacy of landscaping.
4) It would allow the appointment of alternate Planning Board members to act on Special Permits A-3. Associates shall be selected from current associate members of the Board of Appeals, or would be jointly selected by the Planning Board and Selectmen.
The article includes numerous clean-up, grammatical type changes as well.
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, to include this article to amend the Zoning By-Law in the warrant for consideration at the 2007 Town Meeting.
Article B To Re-Zone Land on Fottler Road from Industrial to Residence A
Ms. Murphy explained that this article had originally been part of an article to rezone a much larger area including the Flatley Property, Talbots, and various individual parcels on Beal and Lincoln streets. In response to input from property owners, however, the article had been scaled back, and the only item still under consideration was to rezone several nonconforming residential properties on Fottler Road from Industrial to Residence A, like the surrounding Fottler Road neighborhood.
One of the main reason for pursuing this rezoning would be to better protect the residential properties in question from uses which might develop on the adjacent land owned by Talbots, which is zoned Industrial. Special Condition IV (B) 1 to the Schedule of Dimensional Requirements states that there must be a 100' buffer between any building, parking area or septic system on a property zoned Industrial and an adjacent residence district. Since these properties are not currently zoned residential, this buffer is not now required, but it would be if the properties were re-zoned Residential.
Ms. Lacy informed the Board that Richard Nottebart, the Director of Corporate Services at Talbots, had contacted the Planning Board to let them know that the 1998 approved Site Plan for Talbots included 103 land-banked parking spaces located within 60-100 feet of the back lot lines of the Fottler Road residences. While these parking spaces are not now actually needed the provision of such parking spaces was a condition of Talbot's original permit. Further, Talbots may want to use these spaces if there ever were an increase in the number of employees.
Building Commissioner Richard Morgan confirmed that these additional spaces had never been needed.
Ms. Murphy noted that because the "land-banked" spaces were required in an earlier Special Permit, that they were effectively grandfathered, and that as long as Talbots was operating under that Special Permit they could build out the 103 spaces if needed. She noted that the Special Permit also required the creation of a landscaped buffer so even if the parking was created the neighbors would be somewhat protected. She added, however, that if there ever was a new owner or new use requiring a new Special Permit, that the neighbors would be better protected with the full 100' buffer.
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to include this article "B" to amend the Zoning By-Law in the warrant for consideration at the 2007 Town Meeting.
Article C-To Clarify the Definition of Structure
This article was developed by the Zoning Permit Study Committee and submitted to the Selectmen on their behalf by the Planning Board. The purpose of the article was to include, within the standard definition of structure, "mechanized or motorized equipment..used to ventilate, heat or cool a building or structure, or to heat or filter water." The intent of the new definition is to ensure that structures such as air handlers and pool filters comply with setback requirements in residential districts. The article came about due to the tendency of homeowners to place such structures within the setback, frequently quite close to their neighbors' decks or houses.
Gary Tondorf-Dick noted that the true impact of such structures was actually the noise that they omitted, and not just their appearance. Board members agreed that it would be very difficult to address noise levels, but that if such items complied with setbacks at least they would not be quite as close to abutting properties.
Board members discussed an exception placed in the By-Law for properties with multiple dwelling units. Ms. Sneath asked if this meant that duplexes would be exempt. Mr. Seelen said that he felt this might complicate interpretation of this provision. The Board agreed to modify the article to drop this exception.
A member of the public Jeff Sullivan, 7 Green Street Ct., noted that this change would be much more onerous for the owners of small property than for those with large lots. The Board concurred, but noted that they also felt that the article protected those on small lots.
Building Commissioner Richard Morgan spoke in support of this article.
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to include this article "C", as amended at tonight's hearing, in the warrant for consideration at the 2007 Town Meeting.
Article H-Amend Non-Conforming Use By-Law, or "Hatfield Amendment"
This article was developed by the Zoning Permit Study Committee. Mary Power and Susan Murphy explained that, since 1983, homeowners in Hingham have been allowed, by right, to modify lawful non-conforming structures, including the extension of a non-conforming dimension, as long as such modification does not make the structure more non-conforming. The intent of this article would be to require that property owners seeking to make such modifications would need a Special Permit A-1, including a public hearing with abutter notification, from the Zoning Board of Appeals, before they could get a building permit.
This issue has come to a head in recent years as the Town has witnessed increasing number of tear-downs and additions to non-conforming structures on very small lots, which can have very negative impacts on abutters.
Ms. Murphy pointed out that this change would not stop the problem of "McMansions" or tear-downs, which can still occur if property owners comply with setbacks.
Building Commissioner Richard Morgan stated that he opposed this amendment, stating that it would just require more paperwork, expense and delay for homeowners. He asked how it would help to have the ZBA weigh in through a public hearing. Ms. Murphy noted that the public hearing would allow the abutters to express their concerns and work with the applicant to modify their plans to prevent negative impacts on abutting properties.
Jerry Seelen said that he was concerned that the example raised in the press, and by attendants and the hearings were not, in fact, Hatfield cases, but completely conforming additions that just happened to be big. He noted that it would place an additional workload on the ZBA. Lou Alvarado responded that he was also concerned that the ZBA would be placed in the "role of Solomon" between neighbors, but noted that this would be less restrictive than creating an absolute prohibition on such additions as happens in many towns.
Gary Torndorf-Dick reiterated the point he had made at earlier meetings that it might be better to look at an absolute standard or dimensional requirement such as a maximum floor area ratio or lot coverage requirement. Susan Murphy responded that the committee had considered this, and found it to be less flexible than the Special Permit process proposed in the article. She said that this By-Law change would be kind of like taking the pulse of Town Meeting on how they felt about such growth control restrictions. If it succeeded, then perhaps the Town could proceed to a more absolute standard.
Paul Healey asked the Board to hold off on voting on this article, noting that he wanted more time to consider it. The Board members agreed and the vote was postponed to the next meeting on March 12 at 8:00 PM.
Article D-Enforcement
This article was developed by the Zoning Permit Study Committee. The purpose of the By-Law was to revise the current enforcement provision in Section I (C) 3 to better reflect the two state statutes, M.G.L. Chapter 40, Section 21D and M.G.L Chapter 40A Section 40A, which give cities and towns the power to enforce ordinances and By-Laws through non-criminal and civil processes.
As with the current By-Law, this provision would not require the Building Commissioner to exercise enforcement, but gives him clear authority to do so at his discretion. The enforcement provision currently in the By-Law does not clearly reference the state statutes.
Members of the Zoning Committee and the Planning Board made a few grammatical revisions to the draft article
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to include this article "D", as amended at tonight's hearing, in the warrant for consideration at the 2007 Town Meeting.
Article G-Parking Requirements for Multi-Family Housing
As originally submitted to the Selectmen, this article would modify Section IV-E of the Zoning By-Law to allow Special Permit granting authorities the ability to require a limited amount of guest parking at multi-family developments if the design does not provide for such off street parking. Board members noted the need to put a limit on the amount of guest parking that could be required, such as 10% more than would be required using the standard of two spaces per dwelling.
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to include this article "G", as amended at tonight's hearing, in the warrant for consideration at the 2007 Town Meeting.
Old New Business
Minutes
It was moved, seconded, and SO VOTED, to accept the minute of February 12, 2007 and February 15, 2007.
Form A
It was moved, seconded, and SO VOTED, to endorse the form A entitled, "Plan of Land for 175 Beal Street In Hingham, MA", dated August 25, 2006, prepared by Ross Engineering Company, Norwell, MA for The Talbots Inc., 930 West First Street, Suite 303, Fort Worth, TX 76102, owner and applicant.
The meeting adjourned at 10:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Katharine Lacy
Town Planner