Create an Account - Increase your productivity, customize your experience, and engage in information you care about.
View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
NOTICE OF DECISIONSITE PLAN REVIEW UNDER SECTION IV-B.6.bCertified #7013 3020 0002 2476 7008 IN THE MATTER OF:Applicant: Gerry Rankin5 Triphammer RoadHingham, MA 02043Premises: 901 Main Street, Lot 3 Hingham, MA 02043 Date: June 20, 2017Plan Reference: “Lot 3 Site Plan 901 Main Street Hingham, MA” dated December 17, 2016, prepared by James Engineering, Inc., 2 sheets.Summary of Proceedings:This matter came before the Planning Board on the application of Gerry Rankin for Site Plan Review under Section IV-B.6.b for the grading and drainage associated with construction of a new single family home, property zoned Residence B. The Planning Board heard the application at their regular meeting of June 19, 2017 in the Hingham Town Hall at 210 Central Street. Members of the Planning Board present were: Jennifer Gay Smith, William Ramsey, Sarah Corey, Gary Tondorf-Dick, and Gordon Carr. Mr. Gary James, P.E., from James Engineering, and Gerry Rankin, Applicant, were in attendance to present the application. John Chessia, PE, Chessia Consulting was present as the peer review engineer for the Board. Mr. James explained to the Board that, while the house as proposed was only ~160 square feet larger than as shown on the subdivision plan, it is more rectangular than square as shown now, the house has been rotated on the lot and the foundation is changed. The Board was concerned with the retaining walls and grading as shown on the plan, and the constructability of the same while not disturbing the buffer or impacting trees in the tree preservation area. The Board asked if the floor elevation could be raised to retain more of a gentle slope with stone terraces instead of a large wall, and, the grading for the house could then be pulled approximately 6’ back from the buffer. The Board also asked if, with pulling back the grades from the tree protection area, any additional trees might be able to be saved. The applicant acknowledged that there would likely be additional trees that could be saved, although some would be removed due to proximity to the new house. Board members then reviewed the project in accordance with the Site Plan Review Criteria contained in Section I-I (6) as follows:a. protection of abutting properties against detrimental uses by provision for surface water drainage, fire hydrant locations, sound and site buffers, and preservation of views, light and air, and protection of abutting properties from negative impacts from artificial outdoor site lighting;The Board found that Drainage for individual houses will be managed on-site. They also found that the plan should be updated to show the roof slope and distribution of runoff to each leaching pit, 3 feet of stone around the pits, and roof drain pipe inverts to demonstrate adequate pitch.b. convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent streets; the location of driveway openings in relation to traffic or to adjacent streets, taking account of grades, sight distances and distances between such driveway entrances, exits and the nearest existing street or highway intersections; sufficiency of access for service, utility and emergency vehicles;The Board found that this was not applicable. c. adequacy of the arrangement of parking, loading spaces and traffic patterns in relation to the proposed uses of the premises; compliance with the off-street parking requirements of this By-Law;The Board found that this was not applicable. d. adequacy of open space and setbacks, including adequacy of landscaping of such areas;The Board found that the plan should be revised to show the street tree easement and street trees (as approved in the subdivision), and, noted that the tree preservation area approved with the subdivision approval is shown accurately on this plan. The Board also found that the removal of the retaining wall on the south and east is to help preserve the buffer and the tree protection area.e. adequacy of the methods of disposal of refuse and other wastes resulting from the uses permitted on the site;The Board found that this was not applicable. e. prevention or mitigation of adverse impacts on the Town's resources, including, without limitation, water supply, wastewater facilities, energy and public works and public safety resources;The Board found that the Applicant must provide the sewage disposal plans for Lot 3 and secure final approval from BOH.f. assurance of positive stormwater drainage and snow-melt run-off from buildings, driveways and from all parking and loading areas on the site, and prevention of erosion, sedimentation and stormwater pollution and management problems through site design and erosion controls in accordance with the most current versions of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's Stormwater Management Policy and Standards, and Massachusetts Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines.The Board found that this is not applicable and that the drainage for the overall subdivision was reviewed and approved already. h. protection of natural and historic features including minimizing: the volume of cut and fill, the number of removed trees of 6 inches caliper or larger, the removal of stone walls, and the obstruction of scenic views from publicly accessible locations;The Board found that is not applicable. i. minimizing unreasonable departure from the character and scale of buildings in the vicinity or as previously existing on or approved for the site.The Board found that this is not applicable. DECISION AND VOTE:It was Moved, Seconded and SO VOTED to APPROVE the Site Plan Review for “Lot 3 Site Plan 901 Main Street Hingham, MA” dated December 17, 2016, prepared by James Engineering, Inc. consisting of two sheets, based on the findings and subject to the following conditions:1. Applicant shall provide updated plans to the peer review engineer showing the following revision before the building permit is issued:o The roof slope and distribution of runoff to each leaching pit;o 3 feet of stone around the pits;o Roof drain pipe inverts to demonstrate adequate pitch.o Retaining wall on the south and east sides shall be removed and there shall be a terraced slope with stoneo The tree protection area shall be increased as possible by modifying the grades as discussedo Grades shall be pulled back at the boundary with the drainage loto The floor elevation of the house shall be raised approximately 3-4’o The orientation of the house shall be adjusted with the grades2. Applicant shall revise the plan to show the street tree easement and street trees (as approved in the subdivision)_____________________________Jennifer M. Gay Smith, ChairmanHingham Planning BoardCc: Town Clerk, Gary James, John Chessia, Building Department, Assessor, BOHNOTARIZATIONEXECUTED this _____ day of June, 2017Commonwealth of MassachusettsPlymouth, ss June ____, 2017Then personally appeared Jennifer M. Gay Smith, Chairman of the Hingham Planning Board, and acknowledged the foregoing to be the free act and deed of said Board._________________________ My Commission Expires: March 4, 2022Dolores A. DeLisle, Notary Public