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
TOWN OF HINGHAM
NOTICE OF DECISION
Site Plan Review in Association with a Building Permit for
Weathervane Development Corp.
2 Sharp Street
IN THE MATTER OF:
Applicant: Weathervane Development Corp.
37 Derby Street
Hingham, MA 02043
Premises: 2 Sharp Street
Date: May 7, 2014
Plans titled: SITE PLAN APPLICATION PROPOSED WAREHOUSE FACILITY FOR WEATHERVANE DEVELOPMENT CORP. 2 SHARP STREET HINGHAM, MA, Prepared by CHA 101 Accord Park Drive, Norwell, MA 02061, dated 3/7/14, revised to 5/1/14.
Summary of Proceedings:
In accordance with Section I-H of the Zoning By-Law, the Hingham Planning Board conducted Site Plan Review relative to the application of Weathervane Development Corporation to construct a 5,710 sq. ft., single story warehouse with 6 parking spaces and associated site improvements at 2 Sharp Street, in the Industrial Park District and the South Hingham Overlay Development District.
The application for Site Plan Review was filed at the Planning Board on April 17, 2014. The Site Plan Review hearing on this matter was properly posted and discussed at regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board on May 5, 2014 at Hingham Town Hall, 210 Central Street. The hearing and deliberations were conducted by Planning Board members Judy Sneath, Sarah Corey, and Walter Sullivan Jr., and Acting-Chair Gary Tondorf-Dick.
The Application was represented by Carl Erickson, of Weathervane Development. The project’s technical team was led by Gabe Crocker, PE, of CHA. The Peer Review Engineer was Patrick Brennan, PE, of Amory Engineers.
The subject property is a 4.32 acre site, of which 4.12 acres is in Hingham and the remainder is in Rockland. At the April 28, 2014 Planning Board meeting this lot was created by the merger of Lots 17 & 18 on Map 216, which are under common ownership. This combined a vacant lot on the west with the adjacent lot on which two condominium buildings have been permitted (on the eastern end of the property). With the merger of the properties the common property line was eliminated which allowed the applicant to shift the proposed project away from the wetlands on the west without being constrained by the yard setback that the shared property line created.
The Applicant proposes to construct a 5,710 sq. ft. single story wood frame warehouse. The proposed building will have 4 bays, none of which will face Sharp Street. The elevations are such that it looks like an office building from the front and both sides. The Site Plan will include on-site parking for 6 vehicles, a storm water management system, associated utilities and landscaping. The storm water discharges into an adjacent wetland that is approximately 8 acres in size. Drinking water will be provided from an existing on site well and sewer disposal will be via connection to the Rockland municipal sewer system. Access and egress from the site is to be provided on Sharp Street. The sight distance exceeds 500' in either direction.
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.
All aspects of Stormwater Management were addressed by the Order of Conditions issued by the Conservation Commission dated April 7, 2014. (see Criteria g)
Mr. Crocker met with Hingham Fire Safety Officer David Damstra, who reviewed fire hydrant locations and the emergency access. He requested the fire lanes be posted as "no parking" and Mr. Crocker added that to the plans. Mr. Crocker reviewed the lighting plan with the board which demonstrates no light spillage
The Board then determined that the plans as submitted meet these standards.
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;
Mr. Tondorf-Dick stated that signage indicating the possible reverse flow for truck traffic would be helpful to drivers not familiar with the site so they do not attempt to make a turn that the geometry does not support. The Board found that the site distances were sufficient, and noted the fire lanes had been shown on the plans.
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;
Parking and on-site circulation was reviewed for the Board by peer review consultant Patrick Brennan, of Amory Engineers. The Board discussed that it was difficult to stripe the parking spaces because they were to be gravel. Mr. Brennan noted that curb stops have been shown on the plans to help demarcate the spaces, and prevent encroachment into the storm water basin. Mr. Tondorf-Dick expressed a concern about the trucks scoring the gravel at the end of the paved travel lanes as they make their turning movements and asked the applicant if they had considered installing pervious pavers of some sort to prevent this from happening. The applicant stated that they would be happy to look into it and propose a plan to address the concern.
d. adequacy of open space and setbacks, including adequacy of landscaping of such areas;
The Board discussed the proposed screening with the Applicant and had no other comments. They determined the plans as submitted meet these criteria.
e. adequacy of the methods of disposal of refuse and other wastes resulting from the uses permitted on the site;
The Board noted that a screened dumpster had been shown on the plans and had no other comments. They determined the plans as submitted meet these criteria.
f. 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 Applicant is proposing that water will be provided by an existing well on site. Mr. Brennan noted that if more than 25 people are served by this water supply it would be considered to be a non-transient, non-community well and additional water quality testing requirements would be triggered. The Applicant stated that they are aware of this and that they do not expect to exceed this threshold.
The Hingham Fire Safety Officer, David Damstra, reviewed the plans relative to fire safety, and found the plans to be sufficient in this regard. The plans have fire lanes identified with proposed signage as well. The building can only be used for low hazard materials.
g. 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 determined that the plans as submitted meet the criteria, and further noted that the Hingham Conservation Commission issued an Order of Conditions at their meeting of April 7, 2014 after review of the project by Peer Review Engineer Pat Brennan, of Amory Engineers.
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: and
The Board determined that the plans as submitted meet these criteria.
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 discussed that there was no significant tree removal proposed, the entire facility had been shifted to the east away from the wetland area, and that it had a relatively small footprint. The Board determined that the plans as submitted meet these criteria.
VOTE AND CONDITIONS
It was moved, seconded, and SO VOTED, to APPROVE the Site Plan for 2 Sharp Street, subject to the following conditions:
1. The Applicant will propose and install signage indicating the possible reverse flow of truck traffic to direct drivers unfamiliar with the site.
2. The Applicant shall install honeycomb style or other pervious pavers as discussed to prevent scour of the gravel from the truck turning movements at the end of the travel lanes at the rear of the property.
3. The Applicant shall build in accordance with the Order of Conditions issued April 7, 2014 by the Conservation Commission.
Gary Tondorf-Dick, Acting Chair
Hingham Planning Board
May 7, 2014