April 3, 2007
Regular Session 7:35 pm
Mr. Edmundson, Mr. Riley
Proposed Redesign of the intersection of Shipyard Drive and Essington Drive
Mr. Cook explained that Essington Drive would intersect the relocated Shipyard Drive. When Samuels Associates submitted a plan for an amendment to the original program there was a great deal of discussion that the intersection would not be satisfactory without traffic signals or some other alternative. The three alternatives considered were signals, an urban roundabout or traffic islands to redirect traffic. Mr. Cook advised the Board that the roundabout would function effectively and has the ability to adapt itself over the years as changes occur but this alternative does require an alteration to the Shipyard Drive layout. This modification is slight and the MBTA has verbally indicated that they would not oppose this. Mr. Riley said that he is a proponent of roundabouts and sees this as a great alternative to the four way stop. A roundabout on a more heavily traveled road would have a greater diameter. This is a smaller diameter because of the lower speed on the approach. It will reduce speeds to 5 or 10 miles per hour. The roundabout will have a barricaded center with a shoulder close to the center and then a paved area is for passenger vehicles.
Voted - to support the revised design of the intersection of Shipyard Drive and Essington Drive.
Voted - to sign the warrant for the 2007 Annual Town Meeting.
The Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve has requested that the Town of Hingham join in a statement support for the National Guard and Reserve.
Voted - to sign the statement of support for the National Guard and Reserve.
Overview of Zoning Articles
Mr. Baltera explained that the Zoning Permit Study Committee was created at the 2006 Annual Town Meeting. The Committee met approximately twice a month, made a number of recommendations and five articles have been proposed by the Committee for this year's Annual Town Meeting. Article 25 deals with Site Plan review. Article 26 initially sought to rezone several parcels on Lincoln Street and Fottler Road. After much discussion the scope of this article was narrowed to rezone properties on Fottler Road from commercial to residential. Article 27 seeks to redefine Structure under the By-Law. This would deal with air handling units etc. and makes them subject to set back requirements like any other structure. The focus is on items that would provide noise such as pool equipment, air conditioning equipment, etc. Article 28 deals with enforcement and through ticketing gives the building commissioner more flexibility by the non-criminal process. Article 32 deals with the "Hatfield" amendment, which allows the property owner to extend the existing non-conformity along the same line as long as the non-conformity was not increased. The original amendment was to include site plan review but that provision was omitted before passing town meeting. The Committee has proposed that a special permit process be followed for these cases and it will provide a forum for neighbors to be heard. Mr. Baltera said the Committee had looked at other items such as project mitigation and impact fees, etc. He also noted that the Town Meeting article did not set a life span on the Committee and the Committee would like feedback as to whether or not to continue working. Mr. Edmundson said that if the group believed there is more work to do that is consistent with the mission then he would encourage the Committee to continue. Mr. Riley said that it is important that it does continue.
When the Planning Board voted on the Hatfield amendment Mr. Healy voted against the amendment because it took away rights that had been granted and opened homeowners to the appeal by the cranky neighbor. Ms. Murphy said that of those towns that allow extension of a non-conformity, most require a special permit. The Board asked if there had been discussion even higher dollar amounts for fines on enforcement matters. Although the statute allows up to $300 the rate of $100, per diem seems to have worked.
Mr. Ramsey said the fine seemed adequate since it was a daily fine. Ms. Murphy said that the Planning Board had talked about the fines for residential and commercial and did not feel that a higher number would make a significant difference. Mr. Edmundson said he was in favor of our zoning enforcement officers having more tools because he does not feel that they have enough.
Ms. Murphy said Article 29 amends the Flexible Residential Development By-law. There are two projects in Town that have been permitted under the FRD, one of which is Ridgewood Crossing. This article fine tunes the dimensional requirements under the FRD. Article 30 Item 1 is more clarification and wordsmithing and Item 3 is a typo clean up. Item 2 is about the parking requirements for marinas. One space per berth is more parking than is really needed. One space for every two berths would offer sufficient parking for everyone. Article 31 would amend the multifamily development provision because of concern was that there was not sufficient guest parking in multi-family developments. In order to get rid of any ambiguity the guest parking is being spelled out. Article 33 would allow for the permitting of a distributed antenna system by way of a whip antenna on telephone poles. This would permit reaching the goal of broad cell phone access without another cell tower.
There was a petition article submitted by the Montessori School which would rezone the residential parcel to business A. A rezoning would allow the school to sell the property for a higher price and then move. Given the surrounding commercial properties they felt it would be appropriate. The zoning map zones the four corners of Gardner and Derby Street as commercial and then everything else is residential. Given that Montessori is an educational use with a lot of flexibility the Town would be willing to work with them without rezoning.
Beal Street Fields and Field House
Mr. Edmundson explained that there is an article on the warrant this year to lease out the fields and field house. It is expected that a lease would be arranged with representatives of local youth sports. This is to be as open as possible as to the expectations of what an arrangement would look like between the Town and the two major sports groups: Hingham Youth Football and Little League. The Selectmen would issue an RFP.
This plan is to clarify the major terms and conditions of such a lease. Mr. Harlow said that the Sports Partnership had received a revised form of the lease this afternoon. The draft of the lease tries to make the situation as similar as possible as to what is there now. The youth sports organizations would schedule the fields. This lease attempts to balance what the Town does and what the sports organizations do. The rights and use that the two major sports organization would have is addressed in the lease including priority use during certain time periods. The sports groups would like to see a commitment from the Town that the use of their organizations would not conflict with the schedules of the of the two major organizations. Mr. Harlow noted that control of the field house needs to be addressed from a security basis. Although the organizations do not have exclusive use of the fields all the liability is shifted to the sports organizations. The responsibility for the day to day maintenance and irrigation system would be that of the sports organizations. Major maintenance, such as the roof, is beyond what the organizations are equipped to handle.
There was concern expressed that soccer and football could conflict as could Little League and some other baseball leagues. The organizations plan to absorb costs in return for priority scheduling and Town could charge for any use that does not conflict with the priority use times. Presently youth sports teams have been given priority and it is felt that this should continue. The field house itself will offer storage space to other youth sports organizations and they would pay a fee for such space and the money would go to upkeep of the building.
Housing Partnership Recommendations
Mr. O'Brien advised the Board that the Housing Partnership Committee had narrowed the finalists for development of the Selectmen's parcel to South Shore Housing and Affirmative Investments. He reported that the candidates were excellent and there Had been a lot of discussion of grant programs, Community Preservation Funds, etc. Affirmative Investments' proposal was to build duplexes which are more in keeping with the neighborhood. Affirmative also had alternates for garages, etc. In the initial submission this proposal relied on CPA funding. The Committee felt that this could be moved toward other funding sources. South Shore Housing would apply for $1.5 million in grants but those are awarded on cycle. Affirmative Investments can do the project on their own funding but increase affordability through grant or CPA programs. They listed $400,000 from Community Preservation in the initial proposal. Unit sizes range from 1100 sq. ft to 1800 sq. ft., providing a wider range of product type. Mr. Edmundson said he would like to have the Board take this under advisement and, hopefully vote on it next week.
Voted - To appoint the following residents to the Fourth of July Parade Committee for the ensuing year:
Rebecca Wetzel, 35 High Street
Wendy Lorenson Wilson, 8 New Towne Drive
Selectmen/Town Administrator's Reports
Mr. Cristello advised that he attended the meeting for the Route 228 Phase 2 design. The traffic signal at South Fire Station is no longer an approved design. There will be a signal that fulfills the need of the Fire Department to get out and there will be a pedestrian light. Mr. Cristello also requested that everyone who has been asked to sign a right of entry form, please sign them and return them so the job can go forward.
Meeting adjourned 9:25 pm.
Betty Foley, Clerk