Link back to department page

Minutes Monday, May 14th, 2007
Regular Meeting
Planning Board Agenda for Monday, May 14th , 2007

 7:00 PM           Continuation of Hearing-Samuels and Associates

                        Proposed Modification to the Mixed Use Special Permit for the Hingham Shipyard

Central Meeting Room North                                                                                        

Present: Planning Board Members, Susan Murphy, Chair, Paul Healey, Clerk, Sarah Corey, and

Judy Sneath.  Also present was Planner Katharine Lacy.

Ms. Murphy opened the public meeting at 7:00 P.M. at the Hingham Town Hall.

Present for the Applicant:          Joel Sklar, Samuels and Associates; Richard Cook, Scott Turner, BSC; Jeffery Tocchio and Kelly McCarthy, Drohan, Hughes, Tocchio and Morgan; David Manfredi, Elkus and Manfredi; Ed Hodges, DiMella Shaffer.

This was a continuation of the joint Planning Board/ZBA Site Plan Review hearings on the proposed modifications to the 2003 approved plans for the Hingham Shipyard.

Mike Fitzpatrick of BSC presented two Form A plans relating to lot line changes in the Shipyard. These changes were suggested by consultant John Chessia during his peer review when he determined that some of the proposed buildings were located on more than one lot.

It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to endorse the plan entitled "Hingham Shipyard Lincoln Street and Shipyard Drive in Hingham Massachusetts (Plymouth County) Approval Not Required Plan, Lots P6A and P6B", dated May 6, 2007, prepared by BSC Group, Norwell, MA, for Samuels & Associates Inc., 333 Newbury Street, Boston, MA, applicant and owner.

It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to endorse the plan entitled "Hingham Shipyard Lincoln Street and Shipyard Drive in Hingham Massachusetts (Plymouth County) Approval Not Required Plan, Lots P11, P12, P15, and P17", dated May 7, 2007, prepared by BSC Group, Norwell, MA, for Samuels & Associates Inc., 333 Newbury Street, Boston, MA, applicant and owner.

Mr. Fitzpatrick went on to present a plan titled "Shipyard Drive Roadway Easement Modification" dated May 7, 2007. This plan showed a modification to the easement boundary for Shipyard Drive intended to accommodate the urban roundabout at Shipyard Drive and Essington Drive. This change in the roadway layout came about in response to findings that came up during the Site Plan Review hearings for the Shipyard.

Ms. Murphy reported that since the last hearing the Board had received final peer review memos from traffic consultant Jeffrey Dirk of VAI, Civil Engineer John Chessia, and design consultant Steve Heikin of Icon Architecture.

John Chessia stated that his review was effectively complete, though he made note of the fact that the plans needed to be revised to show the correct location of the drain pipe between DMH1 and DMH 1A.

Jeff Dirk stated that his review was largely complete. Ms. Lacy reported that she had met with the applicant and the Hingham Police to review the proposed loading and delivery plan, and that based on that meeting the applicant had made a few revisions to the plan. Jeff Dirk stated that he had reviewed these revisions and they were acceptable.

Samuel's architect, David Manfredi, described how a few of the buildings had changed since the last time the applicant was before the two Boards. Specifically, he discussed changes to buildings B and D involving the roof lines, and changes needed to screen air handling equipment.

Consultant Steven Heikin noted that he had reviewed recent changes to the architectural design of the building on site. He pointed out that two of the buildings (B and H) have been actually lowered in height. He expressed concern that lowering the height took away some of the industrial strength of their original appearance.

Residential architect David Hodges provided an overview of changes to the Residential Building that he had been experimenting with including changing the design of windows, cladding materials, and relative heights of portions of the roofline.

Paul Healey noted that they had received a copy of a letter from the Police and Fire Chiefs requesting various capital items including portable radios, a new boat for the Harbormaster, and a satellite radio receiver. The letter included a long discussion of the impacts that ongoing development, and the Shipyard in particular, would have on the workload for the Police and Fire departments.

Joel Sklar responded that he had seen the letter and was not prepared to respond. He noted that it had come late in the permitting process, and that the project was already significantly over budget. He stated that the Shipyard development would generate significant tax revenues. He also pointed out that the project would have its own private security.

Susan Murphy pointed out that this was a request letter, not a demand letter.

Steve McLaughlin, ZBA Chairman, suggested that the two chiefs meet with the development and representatives from the ZBA and Planning Board to conduct a direct dialogue, and determine exactly what was needed and what was being provided in terms of public safety, and what additional resources were needed.

Ms. Murphy went on to discuss the DPW's request, outlined in a letter dated March 13, 2007 for improvements to Beal Street. Specifically, the letter had stated the following request:

"Given the projected increase in volume on Beal Street, we are requesting that, as a condition of the approval, the applicant work with the Town to increase pedestrian safety on Beal Street from Fottler Road to Route 3A. Specifically we are asking the applicant to reduce the width of Beal Street from Route 3A and Fottler Road from 43 ft. to 34 ft., accommodating two twelve foot travel lanes, 5 ft. bicycle lanes along both sides of the roadway, and 5 ft. sidewalks along both sides of the roadway separated from the travel way by a landscaped planting strip."

This work had been suggested as part of study of the Beal Street/Fort Hill corridor prepared by VAI in 2006. The estimated cost of the work requested by the DPW was $500,000, or approximately one half of the total cost of all of the improvements suggested for Beal Street in the 2006 study.

Joel Sklar responded that this seemed to be an unreasonable demand, in that it did not accurately reflect the proportional impact of the Shipyard development on Beal Street. He pointed out that the Shipyard would only be creating a 25% increase in the traffic on Beal Street in the future. Board members responded that in fact the increase on Saturdays was closer to 51%. Further, this is a significant increase that will have direct impacts on the quality of life and pedestrian safety for Beal Street residents.

Board members spent the remainder of the meeting going over proposed conditions to the Site Plan Approval. The hearing was continued to Thursday, May 17, 2007.

The meeting adjourned at 11:45 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Katharine Lacy

Town Planner