Scheduled:
7:00 PM Christina Estates at Baker Hill Request for Bond Reduction
7:30 PM Form A - Gardner Terrace
7:45 PM Meeting on Potential Zoning Article for 2007 Town Meeting
Unscheduled: Old/New Business
_______________
Present: Planning Board Members, Susan Murphy, Chair, Paul Healey, Clerk, Tod McGrath, Judy Sneath. Also present was Planner Katharine Lacy.
Ms. Murphy opened the public meeting at 7:00 P.M. at the Hingham Town Hall.
RE: 36 Talbot Road Subdivision
The Board held a brief discussion about the 36 Talbot Road Subdivision, which had been previously scheduled for this time on the agenda. Ms. Murphy reported that the Board has received a formal request to withdraw the subdivision application. At this point the applicant has submitted a plan to the Open Space Acquisition Committee (OSAC) showing a single estate lot with access from a hammer-head turn at the end of Simmons Road. All of the land to the south of the former location of the road leading down to Foster and the fields would be preserved.
Ms. Lacy explained that she spoke with Peter Rosen of the OSAC today, and he said that the OSAC has not yet met to review the plan and decide if they want to proceed. If they do, the next step will be to get an appraisal of the value of 1) a permanent conservation restriction, and 2) outright acquisition of the land leading up from Foster and the fields to the proposed roadway location. Mr. Rosen stated that they will stay in close communication with the Planning Board, and steer clear of any discussion of possible waivers without consultation with the Board.
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to close the hearing for the proposed Talbot Road subdivision with no further continuation.
RE: Christina Estates at Baker Hill Request for Bond Reduction
Present for the Applicant: Jeffery Tocchio Attorney, and Kelly McCarthy, Drohan, Hughes, Tocchio and Morgan
Also present were Hilltop Road abutters Alice King (Lot 15) and Paul Leen (Lot 20).
In accordance with a Certificate of Action issues in January 2006, the applicant submitted a Tripartite Agreement providing a surety of $370,000 for the portion of the roadway leading from the lower bridge near Lot 3 to the Emergency Access Drive (Sta. 20+00 to Sta. 29+00). Chairman Murphy signed this agreement.
Mr. Tocchio went on to say that the developer would like to lower this bond by approximately $125,000 to $206,000 based on near completion of the bridge. This amount is based on "cost to complete" prepared by consulting engineer Nick Lanney based on conditions as of 9/8/2006.
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to reduce the amount of the surety for Station 20+00 Baker Hill Drive to Station 29+00 from $370,000 to $227,336 effective upon delivery of a new Tripartite Agreement in the amount of $227,000.
Mr. Tocchio presented schematic plans prepared by Steve Silva of Coler and Colantonio showing proposed modifications to the grading around the bridge. These modifications reflect changes intended to lessen the impact of the bridge grading on the abutting properties. The applicant is seeking approval of these modifications contingent upon final approval by the Conservation Commission and Nick Lanney. Paul Healey asked what impact these changes would have on the amount of drainage heading to Town Brook. Mr. Tocchio said that he would have to consult with the engineers to determine the answer. Board members responded that they would like to have Nick review the plans, and then have the applicant come back to the Board for a formal vote to modify the plans on October 16.
Ms. Lacy reported that the owners of the last house at the end of Hilltop Road (Semjen) have asked if it would be possible to stop the sidewalk in front of their house. Apparently they put in a lot of landscaping in the right-of-way that would have to be removed if the sidewalk were to be installed. Board members replied that they were reluctant to consider requests to modify subdivision plan from individual residents.
Jeff Tocchio noted that he had written a letter to the Nordins in response to information that they were preventing people from walking on the dedicated walking paths. Ms. Murphy asked them is this easement language was included in their deed, and he assured the board that it was.
RE: Form A - Gardner Terrace
This Form A would enlarge one of the lots in the Gardner Terrace Subdivision by approximately 3000 s.f. in response to Board Of Health requirements for 12,500 SF of lot area per bedroom. The house plans include a suspect "study" that could be used as a bedroom.
It was moved, seconded, and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to endorse the Form A entitled, "Approval Not Required Plan of Land Gardner Terrace Hingham, Massachusetts", dated September 8, 2006, prepared by SITEC, Inc., New Bedford, MA for Bosworth Homes L.L.C., 9 Rocky Lane, Cohasset, MA, owner and applicant.
RE: Meeting on Potential Zoning Article for 2007 Town Meeting
Jerry Seelen joined the Board to discuss proposed zoning articles to be considered at the 2007 Town Meeting. Ms. Murphy started by discussing the progress of the Zoning Permits Study Committee, which was created by a vote of Town Meeting in 2006 to look at the issue of special permits and, more generally, growth management.
She stated that the group was working on a variety of "clean-up" changes for Section I-I related to the procedures for applying for and conducting hearings for Site Plan Review and Special Permits A2 and A3. These changes would be consolidated into one or more articles and be submitted in the next month or so. At that time the Planning Board would begin the formal hearing process for the modification of zoning articles.
Ms. Murphy reported that, along with the changes to Section I, the committee was aiming to pursue one or two zoning changes that would address growth management. One possibility would be to take a look at the Hatfield amendment, which allows non-conforming properties to expand as long as they don't become more non-conforming.
Jerry Seelen presented the following ideas for modifying the dimensional requirements for Flexible Residential Developments as set forth in Section VI-D.
. Sidewalks: Sidewalk requirements should be included in the FRD section, perhaps similar to the requirements for minor streets in the Subdivision regulations. These requirements could be tailored to the size of the development, e.g., no sidewalk required for very small developments (less than 8 dwellings).
. Street landscaping: Consider a requirement for street trees.
. Parking: How are parking requirements determined for the residential units? Depending on the nature of the development (detached, town house, etc.), the basic proposed design for accommodation of cars on individual "lots" within the development, and the roadway width (i.e., wide enough for on-street parking?), consider establishing guidelines for dedicated guest parking areas.
. Front setback: The basic front setback standards should be carefully considered, depending on the design of the development. Assuming garages are entered from the main street, the setback should be increased to 20 ft. for FRD's with conventional streets and individual lots; this would help to assure that driveway parking could be accommodated without cars sticking out into the street or over the sidewalk. For condo style developments with garage access from the street, the setback could be defined from the edge of pavement, either street edge where there is no sidewalk, or inner sidewalk edge. For developments with garage access from rear alleys (e.g., Marina Bay), the original 15 foot setback might still be appropriate.
Board members noted that sidewalks and street trees would be addressed through the Subdivision Regulations, because all FRD's require subdivision approval as well as a Special Permit A-3. For example, in the case of Ridgewood Crossing, appropriate waivers had been granted permitting walking paths instead of sidewalks. In terms of parking requirements, Board members agreed that guest parking was a critical issue in multi-family housing. They noted, however, that it might be preferable to modify the parking requirements for multi-family housing
in Section V-A of the By-Law rather than to put a special parking requirement in to the regulations for the FRD.
Board members and Mr. Seelen agreed that, instead of modifying the front setback requirements, there should perhaps be requirements put in place for a minimum driveway length.
Other articles considered:
At V-E Personal Wireless Services (Proponent-Selectmen)
Modify to permit the installation of DAS type wireless facilities on utility poles. This could be done by changing the definition of "structure" in this portion of the By-law or the entire By-Law.
Define specific height limits for Business A
Now the article specifies three stories-add a specific height limit.
At Section V: Off Street Parking Requirements
Change Parking Requirement for Marinas
At Section III (A) 1.2
Modify to expand ability to create accessory housing units/duplexes (proponent: Housing Partnership)
Historic Preservation Incentive By-Law (Proponent: Historic District Commission)
16' Light Poles
Dick Morgan would like a 16' limit on the height of outdoor light poles.
Another meeting to discuss zoning was scheduled for October 30, 2006.
Old/New Business
It was moved, seconded, and SO VOTED, unanimously, by those present to approve the minutes of August 7, September 11, and September 19, 2006.
The Board reviewed a letter sent by the marketing firm for Samuels Associates to area residents asking them to write letters of support for the proposed movie theatre in the Hingham Shipyard. The letter included sample letters that could be sent to the Selectmen, as well as "talking points" in favor of the development. Board members expressed surprise that the developer felt that this would be an effective way to build support for the project on behalf of the permitting boards.
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Katharine Lacy
Town Planner