7:00 PM Site Plan Review for a Special Permit A2-114 Derby Street
Applicant: Shulman Realty Co. (Descenza Jewelers)
7:45 PM Site Plan Review for a Special Permit A2-191 Beal Street
Applicant: James & Susan Drew (Hingham Toy Storage)
8:30 PM Site Plan Review for a Special Permit A2-60 Sharp Street
Applicant: 60 Sharp Street LLC
Old/New Business
Minutes/Bills
Request for Extension-Prospect Court
East School Site Plan Review-Vote and Sign
Central Meeting Room South _______
Present: Planning Board Members, Paul Healey Chair, Sarah Corey, Clerk, Judy Sneath
and Gary Tondorf-Dick. Also present was Planner Katharine Lacy.
Mr. Healey opened the public meeting at 7:10 P.M. at the Hingham Town Hall. Before beginning the regular meeting, Mr. Healey expressed regret for the passing of Chief Carlson last week and expressed the Board's condolences to his family.
RE: Site Plan Review for a Special Permit A2-114 Derby Street -Applicant: Shulman Realty Co. (Descenza Jewelers)
Present for the Applicant Greg and Neil MacIssac (owners of DeScenza), Attorney Jeffery Tocchio, Kelly McCarthy, Paralegal, Attorney Al Carolan, John Cavanaro (Cavanaro Consulting), Joe Onorato and Mike Blanchette (both from Newbury Design).
Attorney Jeffery Tocchio described the project on behalf of the applicant. The Applicant seeks Site Plan Approval for the conversion of the existing building at 114 Derby Street (formerly Dae-Woo) from an automobile dealership (formerly a drive-thru bank) to a high-end retail jewelry store. They will also need a use variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals as Section III 4.1 prohibits a retail use in the Industrial District. Mr. Tocchio noted that there has been a strong history of granting use variances for non-Industrial uses in the Town's industrial zones to the low demand for new industrial space.
Mr. Healey asked Mr. Tocchio how the ZBA was leaning in terms of granting the variance based on their July 26th hearing. ZBA member Steve McLaughlin, who was in attendance at the hearing stated that the ZBA looked on the application favorably.
The 2.79-acre site includes .75 acres of Wetland Resource Area. They have applied for a Determination of Eligibility from the Con Com, and received a Determination of Ineligibility, which means that the work as proposed does not need an Order of Conditions.
The applicant proposes to renovate the existing 4,000 s.f. building to accommodate a store building with a landscaped, 47-spot parking lot (22 are required). A small amount of paved area in front of the building facing (now used to store extra cars) will be removed and landscaped. A portico with appropriate security locks will be added to the western side of the building. The parking lot has an existing, functional drainage system, though minor drainage work is proposed for the site as well. Roof run-off will be diverted away from the building to a nearby manhole that discharges to the adjacent wetland.
The site drive consists of a one-way, counter clockwise loop in from Old Derby Street, around the building, into the parking lot, and back out. Access and egress will ideally occur via the main driveway at Derby Street Shoppes, with no access to the west towards Derby Street. The applicant is planning on working with the Town to post "Left Turn Only" signs at the site driveway's intersection with Old Derby Street. Additionally, the applicant plans to landscape the site so that it looks as much as possible like a part of the Derby Street Shoppes, which would further encourage use of the Derby Street access. Since this is a retail use, the applicant wants as much exposure from Derby Street as possible, and would like to clear some of the under-story vegetation (if approved by the Conservation Commission) and add some landscaping along the site's boundary with Derby Street, to enhance views of the store from the adjacent roadway. In particular, they are planning to remove the small row of evergreen screening trees that were put in place to screen views of the car dealership from Derby Street.
Glen Olsson of the Hingham Police stated that encouraging that customers enter and leave the new store via the Derby Street Shoppes, and discouraging cars from exiting via Old Derby Street to Derby was the Police Department's biggest concern. Paul Healey asked whether the Police Department was concerned about the fact that the jewelry store would be so highly visible from the Highway. Mr. Tocchio noted again the security system that will be installed in the building.
Paul Healey noted that when the Special Permit for the automobile dealership issued in 2000, it included a requirement that pruning and/or removal of trees along Derby Street be limited, and screening put in place. This was done, in part, in an effort to screen the car storage areas as best as possible, but also to create an attractive "gateway" into Hingham from Route 3.
Mr. Tocchio responded that it was his understanding that the screening was put in place because the car dealership used the lot to store as many cars as possible through "stacked parking," which created an unsightly view from Derby Street. The new use would be an attractive, landscaped store building. Ms. Corey noted that the issue was to protect the "woodsy" look of Derby Street at this entrance into Town. She noted that the 2001 Master Plan encouraged the preservation of attractive view corridors, and enhancement of entry points into Town.
Jeff Tocchio reiterated that the applicant's goal was to keep the view of Derby Street as attractive as possible. He clarified that clearing would be limited to cleaning out understory vegetation, selective pruning of existing deciduous vegetation (mainly Oaks) and removal of unsightly evergreen screening trees. He also pointed out that a significant portion of the site was vegetated wetlands, and this would remain untouched.
Gary Tondorf-Dick noted that while he understood the desire to remove the smaller evergreen screening trees, that the larger ones provided an excellent buffer in the winter months, and should be kept in place. Mr. Tondorf-Dick asked why the adjacent wetland swale was lined with plastic, and Mr. Tocchio explained that was put in place per orders of the Conservation Commission to kill the phragmites.
Judy Sneath asked whether is would be possible to actually remove some of the paved parking area, since they were providing more than twice as many spaces as they needed in accordance with zoning. Mr. Healey asked about the condition of the existing parking lot. Mr. Tondorf-Dick suggested that the applicant consider removing the small western tail of the parking lot, which only includes nine spaces, and planting it with grass or trees to reduce impervious surface, and provide a strong buffer on that side of the property. In exchange, the Board could consider permitting additional clearing directly into the site from Derby Street to provide views of the retail store from the adjacent roadway.
Mr. Healey asked about the condition of the parking lot. Mr. Cavanaro responded that it was currently functional, and included two subsurface leaching fields and a series of catch basins and manholes.
Mr. Tocchio conferred with his client, and noted that one of the reasons that they wanted to maintain all 47 parking spaces was that it was possible that during the holiday season all spaces would be full. He noted that jewelry customers tended to take a long time making a selection, which resulted in low turnover in the parking lot.
Mr. Cavanaro showed the architectural plans for the building. The basic footprint would stay the same, but security would be improved, and the outward appearance upgraded to create a more attractive façade.
Mr. Healey noted that the scheduled time for the hearing was over. He asked the applicant to return with a more detailed landscape plan showing exactly which plants would be removed, which would be pruned, and what would be added in terms of new landscaping.
The hearing was continued to August 20th at 7:00 PM.
RE: Site Plan Review for a Special Permit A2-191 Beal Street - Applicant: James & Susan Drew (Hingham Toy Storage)
Present for the Applicant: Jeffery Tocchio, Attorney, Kelly McCarthy, paralegal, Jerry Seelen, Architect, and applicants James and Susan Drew.
Mr. Tocchio spoke on behalf of the applicant. The Applicant seeks Site Plan Approval in association with an application for a Special Permit A2 for the construction of a 2-story addition, and partial reconstruction of the existing industrial building at 191 Beal Street. The project will rectify an existing non-conformity, and will comply with setbacks. This is a by-right use in the Industrial District, but the addition will increase the Floor Area ratio (FAR) from .342 to .494. (.35 is allowed by right, with up to .5 allowed with a Special Permit A2). Overall site coverage will be 39.3% (maximum allowed is 40%). 60 parking spaces are required, and 61 will be provided.
The facility has a relatively new septic system. Stormwater run-off to adjacent properties will be reduced through the combination of new and existing catch basins, with the result of removing Total Suspended Solids (TSS) consistent with the requirements of State Storm Water Management requirements.
Architect Jerry Seelen presented plans for the building. Plans showed the demolition of the southwest corner of the building, and its replacement with a two-story addition. A loading ramp leading from the outside to the second story will be located on the western side of the building. The height of the new addition would be approximately 35 feet tall. The new addition will increase the size of the building from 33,000 sf to 38,120 sf. The purpose of the new addition was to provide additional interior storage space, which would allow them to place many of the items now stored outside within the building. As noted above, the new configuration of the building would bring it into compliance with setback requirements.
Sarah Corey asked how tall the current building was, and Mr. Seelen responded that the front of the building was 25' high, and the back portion was 18-19' in height.
The area around the perimeter of the building will be cleared for the creation of a fire lane and parking aisle. The perimeter of the site will be secured with a fence, and site-wide camera surveillance is also provided. 61 parking spaces will be provided, which complies with the off-street parking regulations, though Mr. Drew said that his guess was that very few of these outside parking spaces would be used. Board members asked whether he planned to store vehicles outside, and Mr. Drew said that he did not. Outside parking would be reserved for customer and employees parking, though perhaps a stored car might be temporarily located outside for service or pick up. Judy Sneath asked whether it would be possible to reduce the number of parking spaces, and thus the amount of impervious surface, but Mr. Drew pointed out that there had to be a fire lane around the building anyway.
Steve McLaughlin spoke in favor of the project as an abutter and a customer at Toy Storage, where he stores his motorcycle. He also noted that, as an abutter of Hingham Woods right across the street, he had never been disturbed by loud noises coming from the facility or vehicles leaving the facility late at night.
Mr. Healey asked about hours of operation, and Mr. Drew responded that he was open on Monday, Fridays and Saturday, but would meet clients to get their cars out of the facility on an on-call basis as needed. He noted that the bulk of his business is cars, along with a few motorcycles and some boats. The plan is to have everything stored inside when the addition is complete.
Sarah Corey asked Mr. Drew how often he was asked to provide access to the facility for vehicle pick-up late at night. Mr. Drew answered that they tried to accommodate their customers in any way possible, but that in the two years since he had been in operation they had never had a customer request pick-up after 10:00 PM.
Residents of the Beals Cove Condominium expressed frustration about the presence of shrink-wrapped boats currently located in front of the property, but acknowledged that the proposed addition would rectify the problem by providing internal storage. One resident objected to the presence of the antique red car in front of the building. Mr. Drew offered to move the red car. Board members stated that they preferred the red car to a sign. Gary Tondorf Dick asked about the proposed drainage for the site. He expressed concern that the exterminator on the adjacent lot had experienced basement flooding and water damage in the past, and noted that the topography sloped away from the storage building towards the adjacent building. John Cavanaro, engineer for the project, stated that there would be curbing all around
the site to ensure that water would not run onto the adjacent property. That, combined with the catch basins should ensure that drainage stays on site.
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, to approve the proposed Site Plan for Toy Storage at 191 Beal Street with the following conditions:
Vehicle storage shall be limited to the interior of the building, and no cars, boats or other vehicles shall be stored outside of the building. Other vehicles (customer and employee) shall not be left in outdoor parking areas visible from Beal Street for longer than 7 days.
Prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the applicant will provide the Board with an as-built site plan stamped by a licensed professional engineer showing topography and drainage infrastructure (curbs, catch basins, manholes, and drain lines).
RE: Site Plan Review for a Special Permit A2-60 Sharp Street - Applicant: 60 Sharp Street LLC
Present for the Applicant: Josh Bowes of Merrill Associates, and Garth Hoffman, 60 Sharp Street LLC.
Mr. Bows stated that the applicant seeks Site Plan Approval in association with an application for a Special Permit A2 under III-E (5) b for the creation of a Medical/Professional Office in the Industrial Park District in the South Hingham Development Overlay District. The project involves converting the existing 34,000 SF building at 60 Sharp Street (Eldred Wheeler) to a medical office building, enlarging the parking area, upgrading the septic system, and constructing a new drainage system for the property. The existing building footprint would stay the same, but the building would be completely renovated and upgraded from a manufacturing and warehouse building to a two-story, modern, handicapped accessible office complex.
The Site Plan shows 147 parking places including five handicapped spaces, with 15 arborvitaes planted around the perimeter of the parking area. Building coverage would equal 9.3%, with 40% permitted in this district. 29.3% of the site will be impervious surface. There will be three external lights and several building-mounted lights shown on the plan.
The parcel, which is approximately 6 acres in size, is located in an "Outstanding Water Resource Zone" and includes almost 50% wetlands. The existing building is located, in part, in the buffer zone. For that reason, the project will need review and approval by the Conservation Commission. Additionally, a limiting factor on how much of the 34, 000 building can be used is septic capacity. In order to fully utilize every square foot of the building the he applicant would have to actually acquire additional land to meet BOH's Title V requirements. At this point the applicant does not yet have Board of Health approval.
Mr. Healey stated that his impression was that the applicant was coming before the Board prematurely. He noted that the Conservation Commission needed to verify the wetland boundary and issue an Order of Conditions, and that would very likely have significant impacts on the Site Plan. Board of Health approval would also have a significant impact on the intensity of use on the site, which would, in turn, impact the amount of parking required. He asked the applicant to return once they had Board of Health and Conservation Commission approval.
Mr. Bows noted that he was aware that these issues were outstanding, but asked the Board for their initial reaction to the proposed use. Board members responded that the proposed use seemed appropriate, but that due to the extensive wetlands on the site they did not want to proceed with the review without further input from the Conservation Commission.
One abutter, Mr. Daniel Byrne, stated that he owned the property at 70 Sharp Street, where he ran a small fabricating operation. He expressed concern that the proposed new development might have negative impacts on his well. He also noted that it was his impression that 60 Sharp Street was also served by a well. The engineer representing the project didn't know anything about it, and he wasn't sure how water was to be provided to the new facility.
Board members noted that they would contact the Board of Health to make sure that they were aware of these issues when reviewing the project.
The hearing was continued to August 20th at 8:00 PM.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 PM
Respectfully submitted,
Katy Lacy
Town Planner