8:00 PM Old/New Business
_____________
Present: Planning Board Members, Chair, Judy Sneath, Clerk, Paul Healey, Sarah Corey,
Susan Murphy, and Gary Tondorf-Dick. Also present was Planner Katharine Lacy.
7:00 PM 405 Lincoln Street, CVS @ Weber Dodge Parcel
This was a continuation of a joint hearing with the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing initiated on September 17, 2009.
Present for the Applicant: Frank A. Marinelli, Attorney for Gershman Brown Crowley, Inc; Ryan Gershman, Asst Vice President, Gershman Brown Crowley; A.J. Barbato, Asst Vice President, GBC; Jason Plourde, Traffic Engineer, Greenman Pedersen, Inc. ("GPI"), Matt Wozniak, Civil Engineer (site plan); RJ O'Connell, Civil Engineers and Land Planner; Kevin Paton, Architect, BKA Architects.
On September 17, 2009, Attorney Frank Marinelli came before the Planning Board and Board of Appeals on behalf of the applicant, G.B. New England 2, LLC, to request Site Plan Review and a Modification to the Mixed Use Special Permit for Hingham Shipyard to demolish the 21, 000 square foot Weber Dodge building and construct a 13000 square foot, one-story CVS Pharmacy with drive thru facilities and 84 parking spaces. At the close of the hearing, issues remaining to be resolved included potential problems with the proposed on-site circulation and loading scheme; excessive amounts of parking, and the architectural design of the building itself.
Following the September 17 hearing, the Town’s consulting engineer, Jeff Dirk, prepared an email dated September 18, 2009 and sent to both the Town Planner and the project’s traffic engineer, R.J. O’Connell, in which he summarized outstanding concerns relative to on and off-site traffic flow. The applicant responded to Mr. Dirk’s comments in a memo dated October 1, 2009, and the Site Plan was modified accordingly. On October 5, 2009, Mr. Dirk provided the Board with a final comment letter indicating that the bulk of his concerns had been addressed, and identifying a few suggested conditions for inclusion in the Board’s Site Plan Approval.
Mr. Marinelli summarized how the plan had been revised in response to the comments of Mr. Dirk and the Board. As revised, access to the project will be provided by way of two driveways that intersecting Essington Drive and located in the northeast corner of the Project site and along the west side approximately 210 feet north of Lincoln Street, respectively. Sidewalks are proposed along the project frontage on Essington Drive, with pedestrian connections to the customer entrance from the existing sidewalk along Lincoln Street and the proposed sidewalk on Essington Drive. On-site parking is proposed for 71 vehicles (a reduction of 8 spaces from the original plan), including 3 handicapped accessible spaces. The loading and delivery area was modified and will be accommodated in a separate defined area just north of the CVS Pharmacy building and the attached drive through prescription facility. With the reduction of 8 parking spaces, the overall amount of open space on the site increased to 38%.
Paul Healey expressed concern about the existing bus station located at 3A and Essington Drive, and asked whether it would be possible to create a pull-in area on 3A so that the bus would not continue to block traffic. After discussing the matter it was determined that the best course of action would be to take this matter up with the Town Traffic Committee.
In terms of the building architecture, Kevin Patton, project architect, presented a revised design scheme incorporating comments from the Board. Prior to the meeting, on Sunday, September 27, Mr. Patton had met with Planning Board members Gary Tondorf-Dick and Paul Healey, as well as Town Planner Katy Lacy on Sunday, September 27 to seek input on how the original building design could be modified to better fit in with the surrounding context of the Shipyard.
As revised, the building was clad partially in brick divided by pilasters, with the upper portion of the building clad in tan clapboard. The south and west elevations feature triple window bays topped with a decorative pediments. The front entrance, located at the buildings’s southwest corner, features a small glass atrium with pyramid-style roof. Mr. Marinelli stated that he had spoken with Whitney Perkins, who designed the interpretive display in the rest of the Shipyard, and had recommended that the interpretive panels for this building be located in the 3-bay window on the western side of the building near the front entrance, where it would be seen by anyone entering the building.
Members of the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals indicated that the design had improved, but still was not appropriate for the surrounding Shipyard development. Board members offered a variety of comments, and Mr. Patton agreed to revise the plans for further review. In terms of the historical display, Mr. Healey suggested that it would be better to place a larger visual panel on the east side of the building facing the back of Building A, where it would be clearly visible from 3A. Board members encouraged the applicant to display an enlarged version of the “before and after” images of the Hingham Shipyard from 1943 (currently on display at the Planning Board office), showing the site before and after the original Shipyard was developed in less than 8 months. Mr. Marinelli said that he would consult with his client to see if this would be possible.
Prior to wrapping up the hearing, Ms. Sneath reviewed the Site Plan Criteria contained in Section I-I (6). The one issue that had not yet been resolved was snow storage. The applicant explained that in light of the fact that more than 60% of the site was open, and the amount of parking actually exceeded the amount required by zoning, that snow storage would no impact site circulation or parking.
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED to approve the Site Plan for the CVS proposed for 405 Lincoln Street, and recommend that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the requested modification to the Special Permit A2 for the Hingham Shipyard Mixed-use Development. This approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit,
A. The Applicant shall return with revised building elevations, including the proposed placement of interpretive panels, for review and approval by the Planning Board.
B. The Applicant shall provide the Town with copies of all plans and correspondence relating to the State Highway Access Permit for the Project.
C. The Applicant shall revise the plan to show the height of the island separating the drive through prescription facility from the adjacent travel lane increased from 3” to 6” in height.
D. The Applicant shall revise the plan to show the mid-block crosswalk across Essington Drive removed and relocated to the intersection at the north end of Essington Drive (northwest corner of the project site).
2. Delivery Trucks serving the project should be limited in size to a WB-50 design vehicle as defined by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and that deliveries by such vehicles be limited to off-peak hours consistent with the delivery hours for the redevelopment of the Hingham Shipyard.
3. Snow removed from the site may be stored on site as long as there are 66 parking spaces available. If snow removal cannot be accommodated without taking up additional parking spaces, it must be stored off-site.
Old/New Business
Minutes
The Board approved the minutes of September 28, 2009.
Update on the Comprehensive Waste Management Plan (CWMP).
Gary Tondorf-Dick provided an overview of the recent presentation on the draft CWMP. The goals of the plan are to assess existing wastewater disposal practices in Hingham and recommend a plan for future disposal needs. It divides the Town into several distinct zones, and, based on a variety of criteria, identifies priority areas for further consideration in terms of the expansion of sewer. He noted that at the next meeting the committee was going to vote on which of the areas to identify as the highest priority for further study, though, in fact, there are currently no funds available to pursue further study. Board members present (Judy, Paul and Gary) all concurred that the highest priority was the non-residential area in the southern corner of the Town, where expanded sewer could result in increased non-residential development and greater revenues to the Town.
During the course of Mr. Tondorf-Dick’s explanation, Selectmen John Riley joined the meeting. Mr. Riley informed the Board that, based on the Town’s current efforts to promote economic development opportunities, they were focusing their efforts on working with Weymouth and the MWRA to provide sewer service to the non-residential areas of South Hingham (such as the Industrial Park). To that end, the Selectmen and Town Administrator wanted to expand the CWMP to include a detailed study relative to the creation of a new “South Hingham” sewer District. John reported that Kevin Paicos had met with the Town’s consultant on the CWMP, Camp Dresser and McKee (CDM), who had indicated that the cost of the expanded study would be approximately $50,000. At this point AW Perry and the Bristols had each offered to provide a portion of the funds, but the Selectmen felt that it was important that the Town contribute as well, to ensure that they retained a “seat at the table” as the project progressed. One of the funding sources identified was the Planning Board’s consulting budget, which was created using a portion of the funds previously used to pay for a full-time Administrative Assistant for the Planning Board. These funds were intended for use for special planning related studies and consulting services. Board members acknowledged that this project was, at its core, a planning project, and noted also that it did seem important that the Planning Board be at the table as this process goes forward.
At this point, Selectmen Riley and the three Board members present got into a long discussion about the specific study boundaries. John Riley felt strongly that the study itself should include the entire portion of Hingham south of Whiting Street, while the Planning Board members felt strongly that the study should be limited to the non-residential areas south of Whiting Street. Mr. Riley noted that just because an area was included in the study does not mean that it would be sewered, and he pointed out various areas in North Hingham that remained without sewer simply because of lack of public interest. Ultimately, the decision would be up to Town Meeting. That said, his sense was that the Town should get the larger study done while they can, and while the funds were available. Judy and Paul conceded that unless the zoning were changed to non-residential, or higher density residential, that simply studying the area would have little impact, but Gary Tondorf-Dick remained steadfast in his concern that to consider the possibility of sewering the residential areas south of Whiting Street set an unfortunate precedent. It was moved, seconded and so voted by the Board to contribute $10,000 from the Planning Board’s consulting budget to support a feasibility study for providing sewer to the entire portion of the Town south of Whiting Street.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 PM
Respectfully Submitted,
Katharine Lacy, Town Planner