Scheduled:
7:00 PM Continuation of Public Hearings on Proposed Amendments to the Zoning By-Law
8:00 PM 74 Abington St-Continuation of Site Plan Review Hearing
9:00 PM Samuels and Associates Request for Determination of Minor Modification
Old/New Business
Minutes/Bills
Gardner Terrace-Request to extend time for completion
Central Meeting Room North ___________________
Present: Planning Board Members, Paul Healey, Chair, Susan Murphy, Judy Sneath and
Gary Tondorf-Dick. Also present was Planner Katharine Lacy.
RE: Continuation of Public Hearings on Proposed Amendments to the Zoning By-Law
Board members continued the discussion of proposed amendments to the Zoning By-law. Mr. Healey read the actual text of the two proposed Articles as follows:
ARTICLE C Will the Town amend the Zoning By-Law of the Town of Hingham, adopted March 10, 1941, as heretofore amended, as follows:
At Section IV-G (9) (a), “Site Area Requirements”, change “25 acres” to “200 acres”.
ARTICLE E Will the Town amend the Zoning By-Law of the Town of Hingham, adopted March 10, 1941, as heretofore amended, as follows:
Item 1 At the Section III (A) 4.17 (Retail Group), insert the words “two or more” between the words “consisting of” and “uses”, or otherwise define “retail group”.
Item 2 Change the letter “P” under Industrial and Industrial Park to “A2”.
Article C
Ms. Murphy explained that the intent of Article C was to increase the minimum acreage required for a Mixed-Use Special Permit in the Industrial District, such as the Hingham Shipyard, to ensure that a similar mixed-use development could not occur in the land zoned Industrial across Lincoln Street from the Shipyard, including the Talbots parcel.
Attorney Jeffery Tocchio, representing the Talbots Corporation, stated that they had studied the article carefully, and determined that it would not have a negative impact on the company’s future plans, and that they had no objections. Attorney Devin, on behalf of the Flatly Company, stated that although his client’s land would not be affected by the change, he felt that the requirement for a Special Permit provided the Town with sufficient discretion, and that the by-law change was not necessary.
Jerry Seelen pointed out that the by-law did not take into account the possibility that the Shipyard owners might want to expand across 3A by adding acreage to their property. Ms. Murphy concurred that the By-Law should be revised to include a maximum acreage for such mixed-use permit as well as a minimum acreage. She asked Ms. Lacy to contact the Attorney General’s office to determine whether such a change would require re-advertising. The Board decided to hold off on a final vote until they had received such feedback from the Attorney General.
Article E
Ms. Murphy explained that Article E would require a Special Permit A2 for “Retail Group” (such Derby Street Shoppes) in the Industrial and Industrial Park District. Despite the fact that most of the uses allowed in a “Retail Group” require a Special Permit A2, or are not even permitted. The “Retail Group” use is currently permitted as-of-right in the Industrial and Industrial Park Districts. The article also aims to better define “Retail Group” by clarifying that, in order to be a “group” more than one business would be required. This has caused confusion in the past with individuals assuming that because the “Group” was permitted as of right, that the
placement of a single business permitted in such group (such as a stand-along pharmacy, would also be permitted as-of-right).
Mr. Devin spoke on behalf of his client, and requested additional time to determine the potential impacts of this change. Mr. Healey agreed to postpone the vote until February 25.
Article B
Board members had already voted to approve Items 2, 3, and 4 of Article B, and to not consider Item 5 (addressing drive-through pharmacies). After a long discussion, Board members voted to approve the one outstanding Item, #1 as follows:
Item 1 At Section III-A, Schedule of Uses, at subsection 2.4 “Seasonal sale of cut Christmas trees subject to Special Condition 6 of Section III-B” under Official and Open Space, change the letter O (prohibited) to P (permitted by-right).
Article E
Board members continued their discussion of Article E, and Voted to submit it for inclusion on the Town warrant as follows:
“Will the Town amend the Zoning By-Law of the Town of Hingham, adopted March 10, 1941, as heretofore amended, as follows:
Item 1 At the Table at Section V-A (2) Off-Street Parking Requirements,
a. Change the entry in the column entitled “Requirement” at the row for Medical and Dental offices from “6 Spaces/Doctor or Dentist” to “1 space per 175 SF of GFA”.
b. Change the entry in the column entitled “”Requirement” at the row for Warehousing and Wholesaling from 1 ¼ space per 1000 GFA to 1 space per 1000 SF GFA
c. Delete the entry for “Hospitals, Public Buildings, Private Schools, Museums, Stadiums, Arenas, Transportation Terminals” in its entirety.
Item 2 At Section V-A (3), Parking Dimension Requirements, in the “Table of Parking Dimensions”,
a. Under “Parallel Parking Spaces” change the minimum required width from 9’ to 8.5’.
b. Under “Aisle Width”, change the required minimum aisle width for parallel parking from 24’ to 14’.
Item 3 At Section V-A (5) l, add a new sentence after the second sentence as follows: “In addition to the foregoing, pervious paving materials may be permitted at the discretion of the Planning Board.
Or act on anything related thereto?
The Zoning hearings were continued to February 11 at 8:00 PM-8:30 PM with the goal of voting on Article A and C.
RE: 74 Abington St-Continuation of Site Plan Review Hearing
Present for the Applicant: John Barry, Mike Richardson, owners, and Greg Morse, Mackenzie Engineering.
This was the continuation of a hearing initiated on November 26, and continued on January 14. Greg Morse from MacKenzie Engineering spoke on behalf of the Applicant. The Applicant seeks Site Plan Approval in association with an application for a building permit in accordance with Section I-H of the Zoning By-Law for the construction of a 15,000 s.f. light industrial/office building on approximately 10.2 acres in the Industrial Park District and South Hingham Overlay District. The building will include 7,500 s.f. of General Business Office/Sales showroom, and 7,500 s.f. of Warehouse/Industrial.
Mr. Morse explained that since the last hearing the plans have been revised in response to Board concerns focused on site landscaping/screening, lighting, internal circulation and parking. The revised plan shows that the western driveway has been narrowed to reduce visual impacts and save the 30” caliper tree, and includes a 15-foot landscaped strip in front as required. To accommodate this strip, the building footprint has been reduced, and the 2,800 basement previously shown as unfinished will be finished off (floor plans included). The stone wall along Abington Street will be maintained. An additional one-way egress has been added on the eastern side of the front parking lot. They are planning on leaving existing trees in the right-of way except where the driveway cuts in. The Board received a memo from Joe Stigliani indicating that a grant of location will be needed for the water line, a Shade Tree Hearing for removal of trees in the right-of-way, and curb-cut approval for the actual driveways.
In terms of site grading, drainage, and stormwater management, the Conservation Commission and their consultant have taken the lead because the property is within their jurisdiction. They are near completion of their review, the scope of which includes compliance with the Wetlands Protection Act, and DEP Stormwater Management Standards and Best Management Practices (BMPs) for both the construction phase and post-development phases of the project. As a result of Conservation Commission the post-construction Operations and Management Plan has been revised extensively to ensure ongoing maintenance of all drainage structures.
It was moved, seconded, and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to approve the Site Plan for 74 Abington Street as shown on the plans prepared by Mackenzie Engineering and dated September 21, 2007, with revisions through January 31, 2008, subject to compliance with all other permits and approvals. If, in the course of review by other Boards or Departments, the plans should change significantly, the applicant shall return to the Board for approval.
RE: Samuels and Associates Request for Determination of Minor Modification
Leslie Cohen and Mike Fitzpatrick of Samuels Associates came before the Board to request for a Minor Modification to shift square footage from Building B to Building K for the development of a 20,900 sf specialty grocer (Fresh Market). As detailed in the request, the proposed modification will have no affect on the overall square footage of building on the site, and will comply with all dimensional requirements and use limitations set forth in Section IV-G of the Zoning By-Law. The site plan has been adjusted accordingly with the revised building layout, and provides for an increase of five (5) parking spaces in the area between Building B and K. In total, there will be 271 spaces in Lot 8, which serves Buildings K and B, which total 32,000 s.f. together. (For comparisons sake, the Fruit Center is a bit smaller than that at 17,500 sf., with 91 parking spaces). The applicant represented that area landscaping, and building architecture for Buildings B and K will be consistent with that approved under the Amended Mixed Use Special Permit.
Board members reviewed the proposed modification to identify potential changes in the scope or level of project impacts, including demand for water and sewer service; parking, boat and snow storage; off-site traffic; and loading, delivery and circulation.
To further clarify on- and off-site traffic impacts, the Board had hired Jeffrey Dirk of Vanasse and Associates to review the proposed modification with a focus on 1) trip generation, 2) parking adequacy, and 3) loading, delivery and emergency vehicle access and circulation. Mr. Dirk’s findings are included in a report submitted to the Board and dated February 1, 2008, which includes the following conclusions:
1. The Modified Project will generate comparable traffic volumes to those of the approved development.
2. The Modified Project will continue to provide sufficient parking to accommodate the anticipated parking demands of the development during the peak parking demand period.
3. The overall findings recommendations and conditions of approval with regard to the transportation infrastructure and the operations of the site remain valid for the Modified Project.
Board members determined that the proposed changes shown on the plan titled “Modified Buildings B and K Layout” dated 1/24/08 and included in the applicant’s submittal of the same date constituted a minor modification to the approved Site Plan, and VOTED unanimously to approve the proposed minor modification subject to the following condition:
Prior to the issuance of Building Permits for Building B and K:
1) The Applicant shall return to the Planning Board to review the proposed building elevations during the design development phase to ensure consistency with those previously approved.
Further review by the Planning Board shall be limited to exterior design of the proposed elevations.
2) The Applicant shall verify the design vehicle used to determine the adequacy of the loading area for Building K and shall modify the “Truck Circulation Plan-WB-50” to show an alternate truck access to Building K from Shipyard Drive East.
RE: Old/New Business
2. Application for Special Permit A2 for internal Wireless Communication Facility at 7 Thaxter Street
Omnipoint Communications is planning on placing an internal wireless communication facility inside the steeple at 7 Thaxter Street (Faith Church). In accordance with Section V-E of the Zoning By-Law this requires a Special Permit A2, which, in turns requires Site Plan Review, despite the fact that the facility will be located completely inside the steeple, and will have no impact on the site. The Historic Districts Commission has reviewed and approved the application.
Following a determination that the proposed project would not “materially or adversely affect conditions governed by the site plan review standards set forth in Section I-I (6)” the Board VOTED TO WAIVE the requirement for Site Plan Review.
3. Gardner Terrace-Request to extend time for completion
Ross Rosano has requested an extension to the time of completion for the Gardner Terrace Subdivision. Ms. Lacy noted that he has indicated that he is planning on squeezing in another lot on the right hand side of the roadway that was not shown on the approved subdivision plan. Board Chairman Paul Healey asked that Mr. Rosano come back before the Board in person to request the extension and discuss plans for modification of the Subdivision.
4. Inactive Accounts
It was moved, seconded, and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to close the following inactive accounts: Old Derby Animal Clinic, Recreation Park Drive Roadway, 198 Whiting Street, and 36 Talbot Road Definitive Subdivision.
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Katharine Lacy
Town Planner