View Other Items in this Archive | View All Archives | Printable Version




Site Plan Approval for Hingham High School Athletic Complex Renovations Phase II

Applicant:        Hingham School Committee
                          210 Central Street

Project Site:    17 Union Street
    Hingham Assessor’s Map/Lot:  90-0-112; 100-0-63; 100-0-61; 101-0-8
On November 6, 2012, the Hingham School Committee (“Applicant” or “School Committee”) filed an application (“Application”) for Site Plan Review under Sections I-H and III-B.8 of the Hingham Zoning By-Law, subject to and with the benefit of the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws (MGL) Chapter 40A, Section 3 commonly known as the “Dover Amendment.”
The proposed project included the development of a multi-purpose rectangular game field with artificial turf and associated amenities (including bleachers, a score board, press box, and fencing), complete reconstruction of the varsity baseball field, relocation of the junior varsity softball field, additional parking and pedestrian connections, an amenities building (concessions, rest room and equipment storage), drainage improvements, landscaping, removal of bleachers on the Downing Street side of existing track, and field lighting and amplified sound for the multi-purpose game field (the “Project”).  The project originally included the resurfacing of the varsity lacrosse/field hockey field but this was removed from the scope during the project review process.
A formal public hearing of the Planning Board was duly noticed and opened on December 3, 2012, continued on December 17, 2012, January 7, 2013 and January 14, 2013, and closed on February 4, 2013.  The Applicant was represented by: Caryl Falvey, Chairman of the School Committee and various other School Committee members; Attorneys Jeffrey Tocchio and Jason Morgan of Drohan, Tocchio and Morgan, P.C., William Seymour, PE, Eric Roise, Landscape Architect, and Peter Spanos, Civil Engineer, of Gale Associates, lighting consultants Musco Lighting, and sound consultants Cavanaugh Tocci Associates.  Planning Board hearings were conducted by Judy Sneath, Paul Healey, Gary Tondorf-Dick, Sarah Corey and William Ramsey.  All Board members were present for all of the hearings.  The Planning Board also consulted with Jeffrey Dirk of Vanasse and Associates (traffic, circulation and parking), David LaPointe of Beals & Thomas, Inc (lighting), and John Chessia of Chessia Consulting Services, LLC (civil engineering), who acted as consultants to the Planning Board pursuant to Section I-I (2) of the Zoning By-Law.  Susan Murphy, Special Counsel to the Town, advised the Board during the permitting process. The Hingham Police Chief also attended all of the Planning Board hearings.
As the School Committee submitted the Project as part of the educational use of the Hingham public schools and the high school in particular, the Planning Board took into account the standards of review set forth under the Dover Amendment and related case law.  The Dover Amendment provides in part:  “No zoning ordinance or by-law shall…prohibit, regulate or restrict the use of land or structures for…educational purposes on land owned or leased by the commonwealth or any of its agencies, subdivisions or bodies politic…; provided, however, that such land or structures may be subject to reasonable regulations concerning the bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements.”
In Regis College v. Town of Weston, 462 Mass 280 (2012), the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) stated that Massachusetts courts recognize “two common sense and interrelated limits on the statute's application:”  First, the Dover Amendment protects those uses of land and those structures that have as their bona fide goal something that can reasonably be described as “educationally significant;” and second, the educationally significant goal must be the “primary or dominant’ purpose for which the land or structures will be used.
The purpose of Dover Amendment, as stated in Trustees of Tufts College v. City of Medford, 415 Mass 753, 757 (1993), is as follows: “The whole of the Dover Amendment, as it presently stands, seeks to strike a balance between preventing local discrimination against an educational use [cite omitted] and honoring legitimate municipal concerns that typically find expression in local zoning laws.”  The Tufts court also stated the burden of proof as follows:
“Because zoning laws are intended to be uniformly applied, an educational institution…will bear the burden of providing that the local requirements are unreasonable as applied to its proposed project” (Trustees of Tufts College at 759).
Finally, the Planning Board took into consideration the provisions of MGL Chapter 71 which govern public schools and the authority and obligations of towns and school committees with respect to public school land and buildings.  In particular, the Board took note of Section 68 which states, in part, that “[t]he school committee, unless the town otherwise directs, shall have general charge and superintendence of the schoolhouses,” and Section 71 which provides, in part:
For the purpose of promoting the usefulness of public school property the school committee of any town may conduct such educational and recreational activities in or upon school property under its control, and, subject to such regulations as it may establish, and, consistently and without interference with the use of the premises for school purposes, shall allow the use thereof by individuals and associations for such educational, recreational, social, civic, philanthropic and like purposes as it deems for the interest of the community.
The Project site is part of the 26 acre Hingham High School field complex of fields and play surfaces. The Applicant introduced the project by presenting background information on the overall athletic complex project in order to frame the current application.  An Ad Hoc Committee composed of School Committee members and residents of the Town was charged with continuing the work of the 2006 Ad Hoc Field Study Committee.  Initially, the areas under review by the Ad Hoc Committee were the condition of the bleachers (they were built in 1954 and are no longer safe), drainage issues, and the Title IV concerns regarding the lack of a game facility that could be used by both boys and girls.  The overall project was later expanded to include the tennis courts and track.
At a Special Town Meeting in 2011, the town approved Phase I of the athletic complex renovations, which consisted of the refurbishment of the tennis courts, replacement of the track and funds for the development of a design for Phase II of the athletic complex renovations. 
The Ad Hoc Committee held 25 meetings between August 15, 2011 and November 15, 2012.  The Committee looked at the location and reconstruction of fields, field amenities, drainage mitigation and parking improvements.  The Ad Hoc Committee solicited information from lighting, sound, turf, parking and traffic specialists.  The Ad Hoc Committee’s work, in conjunction with the work of Gale Associates, was reviewed by the full School Committee at multiple public meetings resulting in the Application package as submitted.
The Project site is zoned Official and Open Space.  It is bounded on the west by the Downing Street residential neighborhood and to the southwest by land of the water company.  It is bounded to the north by the high school building and the Pleasant Street residential neighborhood.  The southeastern portion of the Project Site is located on either side of Union Street and, to the northeast, the site abuts another densely-populated single-family neighborhood. The southern boundary of the Project Site is Tower Brook, and right beyond Tower Brook is a multi-family condominium project.  Portions of the residential neighborhoods surrounding the Project site are located in a local historic district.
 The Planning Board held five (5) lengthy, televised hearings ranging from two to four hours each which were highly attended by Town officials, direct abutters to the Project, and residents both in support and opposition to some or all of the proposed Project.  A group of residents with concerns about the Project was also represented by counsel. In addition, the Planning Board received approximately 42 emails and letters from interested parties which were made part of the record of the hearing.
The School Committee stated that the Project is both:  (1) necessary in order to address long-standing drainage and parking concerns, to bring the high school’s athletic facilities up to the standards of other high schools with which Hingham competes, and to better comply with federal Title IX requirements; and (2) appropriate under the educational use protections of the Dover Amendment.  The Committee’s consultants provided testimony that the proposed increase in parking spaces would not only address demand for school-related activities, but for town and community events at the high school.  In addition, expert reports and testimony that were provided stated that the proposed field lights, while highly visible, would not create light-spill into the residential neighborhoods and that the proposed new amplified sound system would significantly improve the quality and control of sound compared to the existing system.
The primary concerns raised by some abutters and residents dealt with adequacy of parking and the introduction of 80’ field lights. Parking has long been a concern in the neighborhood, not only during large sporting events, such as the Thanksgiving Day football game, but also when the high school is used for other large events including graduation, Town Meeting, voting, and dance recitals for the local community center. With respect to the proposed field lights for the multi-purpose field, in addition to concerns about the height, appearance and potential impact of the lights themselves, some residents also voiced concerns about nighttime use of the amplified sound system to be mounted on the light structures and in the bleachers.  Although the existing football field currently uses amplified sound, amplified sound during the nighttime would be new to the Project site and surrounding neighborhoods. Finally, some abutters and residents voiced concerns about the scale of the new bleachers in relation to the surrounding neighborhood.
As demonstrated by the number of hours of the public hearing, the Planning Board spent significant time and care in reviewing all aspects of the Project and allowing for input from all interested parties.  The subject of most discussion and debate involved the scope of use of the proposed lights and associated amplified sound system on the multi-purpose field, and who would be entitled to use the facility (“MPF Facility”).  The School Committee initially provided to the Planning Board a policy on use of the MPF Facility proposed by the Ad Hoc Committee and Policy Subcommittee, and then voted by the full School Committee.  While there was general consensus among Board members and the public that daytime use of the athletic fields complex is not at issue, a number of direct abutters, other residents and members of the Planning Board expressed concern about the number of hours that the lights would be in use, the nighttime use of amplified sound, and whether private sports groups, other than Hingham public school students and teams, should be entitled to use the lights and amplified sound system at the MPF Facility. 
Reference was made during the hearing to existing permits affecting the Project Site, including in particular a variance, dated March 9, 1987, as amended through October 17, 2011, which contains conditions regarding the use of amplified sound at the existing football field.   In addition, arguments were made by the Applicant and residents regarding the scope of the Dover Amendment with respect to certain potential users and uses. Such debate was concerned with whether certain non-Hingham Public School uses, primarily private youth sports organizations, would be considered educational uses, and the applicability of MGL Chapter 71, Section 71 to the Planning Board’s review. 
In response to these discussions, the School Committee worked cooperatively with the Planning Board and residents to address concerns, with the School Committee meeting several times between the public hearing meetings to review and revise their use policy. The Board’s findings and condition related thereto are discussed below.
Upon closing of the public hearing, the Planning Board made the following findings:
A.    The Application involves the use of land and structures at 17 Union Street for educational purposes on land owned by the Town of Hingham at the current site of Hingham High School. The Applicant, the Hingham School Committee, has care and control of the property, pursuant to applicable provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 71.
B.    The Applicant has stated that the primary use of the Project will be for public school use by Hingham public school students for gym class, team sports and school functions such as graduation.  The Applicant, pursuant to the provisions of MGL Chapter 71, Section 71, also intends to make the facilities available to the community to “allow the use thereof by individuals and associations for such educational, recreational, social, civic, philanthropic and like purposes as it deems for the interest of the community.”
C.    The project complies with all requirements of the Hingham Zoning By-law and satisfies site plan criteria, except:
(1)    Proposed Concession Building with snack stand:  The Board found that a Special Permit A1 for an Outdoor Concession required under Section III-A, 3.11 of the By-Law is not required under the Dover Amendment.
(2)    Height: The height of the proposed field lights and amplified sound system exceeds the 35’ height limitation in the Official and Open Space District under Section IV-A of the By-Law.  The lights are to be 80’ tall and some of the speakers for the amplified sound system are to be mounted on the light poles at a height of 50’.  During the public hearing, the School Committee presented a report, and a presentation was made, by Musco Lighting. The lighting plans were reviewed for the Board by David LaPointe, RLA, of Beals and Thomas, Inc.  Based on the information provided to the Board during the hearing, the Board found that the taller pole height serves two purposes: (1) it allows for safer play on the fields by the athletes during nighttime conditions, and (2) to minimize and control light spillage off-site.  In addition, the Board considered the sound study prepared by Cavanaugh Tocci Associates, dated November 28, 2012, and their presentations at the hearings regarding the need to mount the speakers at the height of 50’ to direct the sound down towards the field.    In addition, the sound system would be equipped with a “governor” which would limit the volume to which the sound could be raised.  Based on the evidence provided at the hearing, the Board found that the 35’ height limitation under the By-Law was unreasonable as applied to the Project and that exceeding the height would allow for safer use of the fields and greater mitigation of light and sound impacts, subject to reasonable limitations on the use of the lights and amplified sound as discussed herein.
The Planning Board took note of existing Massachusetts law regarding educational uses under the Dover Amendment and use of school facilities by the community, the advice of Special Counsel to the Town, and the statements made by the School Committee, its special counsel, residents, and counsel for various interested parties. The Board determined that the adoption of a condition to its site plan approval regulating the time of use of the field lights and the amplified sound system constituted reasonable regulation under the Dover Amendment consistent with the balancing of the rights of educational uses and the legitimate municipal concern of preserving the character of the adjacent residential neighborhoods.  In addition, to the extent that the MPF Facility would be used by non-Hingham public school groups that may or may not be educational uses protected under the Dover Amendment, the adoption of conditions that concerns non-school groups is appropriate.  Acknowledging the School Committee’s obligation under MGL Chapter 71, Section 71, to allow use of school facilities by others that is “in the interest of the community,” the Planning Board did not place any limitations on the School Committee’s ability to allow daytime use of any of the athletic field complex by non-school groups, and only limited non-school group use of the amplified sound and field lights.  With minor clarifications, the conditions adopted by the Planning Board with respect to the use of the MPF Facility field lights and amplified sound system by the Hingham Public Schools is consistent with the vote of the School Committee on January 14, 2013.
(3)    Parking:  Section V-A of the By-Law requires one space per three seats for Recreation use.  The School Committee proposed to use all parking located on the high school property to satisfy the parking demand for large-attendance events.  On-site parking areas are located on the east and west sides of the high school building and to the south of the existing fields in what is commonly referred to as the “far lot.”  The Project proposed to expand the paved portion of the far lot to add an additional 89 parking spaces and the easterly lot by 15 spaces, and to provide overflow parking for 88 vehicles adjacent to the far lot on the grassed area that is used as a boys’ lacrosse field.  The total of paved spaces for the entire Project Site will be 626 spaces, including 10 new handicapped spaces, and the 88 overflow spaces. In addition, the School Committee worked with the Hingham Police Chief to develop a Traffic and Parking Plan for Large Events (“Parking Management Plan”) to address parking and circulation issues when large events are scheduled.  Finally, the Project plan provides for the installation of a new lighted pedestrian walkway that will connect the far lot to the multi-purpose field and high school building.  The parking and circulation plans submitted with the Application, and the Parking Management Plan, were reviewed and commented on by the Board’s peer review consultant, Jeffrey S. Dirk of Vanasse and Associates, Inc. (VAI) and his comments were addressed by the Applicant.
The project proposes seating for 1853 persons for the multi-purpose field and seating for 387 persons facing the track.  There is no other seating proposed for the other athletic complex fields.  The number of paved parking spaces proposed would be sufficient for full occupancy of the bleachers of the multi-purpose field.  The applicant has stated that there will not be track events scheduled when the MPF is in use, so, applying the parking standard of one space per three seats to the 1853 seats for the MPF yields a required parking amount of 617 spaces with 626 provided by the plans as presented.  The Board found that that the parking is adequate provided that activities at the high school (both the building and fields) are scheduled so as not to exceed the available parking.  The Board found that the new parking spaces comply with the dimensional requirements, except that the perimeter spaces do not have curb stops at the edge of the surfaced area as a post & cable fence is proposed.  The Board was satisfied with that proposal.  The Board found that the existing spaces are grandfathered as they exist currently even though they do not meet the current provisions of Section V in all regards.  The parking lot grade and number of trees as proposed are in compliance with Section V of the Zoning By-Law.  However, as discussed below, drainage plans for the Project, including the far lot parking area, was not complete.
(4)    Yard sizes, setbacks and open space: 
Yard sizes:  The new Project improvements meet the minimum yard sizes under Section IV-A of the By-Law for the Official and Open Space District.  The Board noted that the existing track and bleachers are within the rear yard and within the setback areas discussed below, however, the track is grandfathered and the existing bleachers will be removed with a smaller concrete or paved area for staging runners put in its place.
Setbacks and open space:  Section IV-B:1, 2 and 5 require certain additional setbacks and buffers for parcels within the Official and Open Space District.  With minor deviations, taking into account existing grandfathered conditions (such as the width of green space buffer between the “far lot” and Union Street, the Board found that the Project substantially complied with the Zoning By-Law with respect to setbacks and open space.  In particular, the Project plans include installation of a new fence acceptable to the abutters along the boundary with the Downing Street neighborhood and significant new plantings along the fence to improve the buffer between the single-family homes and the proposed field lights.  Additional trees will also be added to the east side of the multi-purpose field behind the visitor bleachers to provide more of a visual buffer for the singe-family residences facing the field along Union Street. 
(5)    Drainage:  The Board discussed the status of the submissions for the drainage system proposed for the Project and determined that there was still additional design work to be completed by the Applicant in order to meet state storm water management standards regarding positive drainage and properly drained parking facilities.  The Board also discussed that the Project, including aspects of the drainage design, was also under review by the Conservation Commission.  The Board determined that they were not satisfied with the drainage as proposed and that the approval of the site plan would require a condition regarding drainage. 
(6)    Bulk of structures:  The Board found that except for the lighting and amplified sound system structures, the proposed structures are in compliance with the Zoning By-Law.  However, in response to concerns by abutters that the scale of the bleachers were not in keeping with the scale and character of homes in the neighborhood, the Board discussed the color of the bleacher risers and that they should be a neutral color so as to not further detract from the character of the neighborhood. 
It was moved, seconded and SO VOTED: Pursuant to the applicable provisions of Massachusetts law and the Hingham Zoning By-Law, including the specific requirements of the Dover Amendment under Massachusetts General Laws 40A, Section 3, Site Plan Approval is hereby granted to the Project at 17 Union Street shown on that certain set of plans entitled “Hingham High School Athletic Complex Renovation – Phase II,” prepared by Gale Associates Inc., dated November 1, 2012, revised through January 22, 2013, and the Final Technical Report Sound Study, dated November 28, 2012, prepared by Cavanaugh Tocci Associates, Incorporated, incorporated herein by reference, except as modified by, and subject to, the following conditions:
1.    Drainage:  No work may commence on the Project until the Planning Board has received and approved complete and final submissions related to the positive drainage of the site in accordance with Section I-I,6 and Section V-A,5.l of the Zoning By-Law. Such submissions shall include all information necessary for a full review by the Board’s peer review engineer including without limitation, design plans with full detail of all elements of the drainage infrastructure, calculations, modeling, and related reports, and shall be revised by the Applicant, or its consultants, as necessary to meet those requirements.  Unless otherwise agreed by the Planning Board, such submissions shall not be approved unless they demonstrate that the drainage system will operate without back-up or surcharge onto the property or the public way in no less than a 10 year storm event.   All improvements necessary to construct the drainage system as approved by the Planning Board, including necessary improvements, if any, to pipes or culverts that may be located within Union Street, shall be constructed prior to construction of other elements of the Project and, prior to completion, the drainage structures shall be subject to inspection by the Town Engineer.
2.    Site Plan Revisions/Corrections:  The Applicant shall provide a final plan set including the following revisions:
(a)    Sheet C102 and Sheets BL101-103 shall be corrected to show consistent seating capacity for multi-purpose field home and visitor seating, and track seating, including the addition of a detail of the visitor bleachers on Sheet BL101. Sheet BL101 shall also include a note that the bleachers shall be neutral in color. This color restriction shall not apply to the press box.
(b)    Sheet SE-6 shall be corrected in accordance with original Comment #5 set forth in the letter from Beals and Thomas, Inc., dated November 30, 2013 and noted in their follow-up letter dated February 4, 2013.
(c)    Landscape plan Sheet L106, dated January 28, 2013, shall be provided to the Planning Board and such plan shall be further revised to include evergreen trees outside the fences for the multi-purpose field to screen the visitor bleachers from the residential abutters on Union Street.
(d)    A detail of the scoreboard shall be provided in the plan set.
3.    Setback buffers:  Applicant shall plant and maintain the landscape buffers as shown on the approved plans. 
4.    Parking and Traffic: Installation of curbing along Union Street shall occur in conjunction with the Department of Public Works road construction on Union Street.  The Applicant shall coordinate with the Town Engineer.
5.    Parking and Traffic: The Applicant shall work with the Town Engineer, Director of Community Planning and Police Chief to ensure adequate signage along Union and Pleasant Street in accordance with the policies of the Board of Selectmen.
6.    Parking and Traffic:  Applicant shall adhere to the Hingham High School Parking and Traffic Plan for Large Events, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and shall not schedule concurrent events on the high school property that would exceed parking capacity.
7.    Parking and Traffic:  When school is in session, the nine parking spaces on the field side of the traffic aisle will be parked by staff consistent with the first two aisles of parking.
8.    Parking and Traffic:  The overflow parking area shall be available at all times for overflow parking.
9.    As-Built Plans:  Applicant shall provide a full copy of as-built plans to the Department of Community Planning.  The as-built plans shall be in MA83-NAVD88 format for the track and field and all pipes/structures (hardcopy and Autocad with all available Layers).  The Applicant shall also submit a full (as submitted for site plan approval with all available Layers) electronic copy of final plans (as designed/approved) in pdf and cad with the hardcopy submittal.
10.    Field Lights and Amplified Sound:  The use of the lights and amplified sound shall be subject to the schedule and conditions set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein.  No increased use of lights or amplified sound is permitted unless approved by the Planning Board pursuant to a modification to this approval.
10A. Field Lights and Amplified Sound:  The lights shall not be used unless the Building Commissioner and Town Engineer have tested the lights and certified in writing to the Planning Board that the lights have been constructed, and that they operate, in accordance with the Planning Board decision (based on Site Plan Review and Building Permit documents).  The Building Commissioner shall not issue any permit or certificate of occupancy unless these requirements have been met.
11.    Plan Revisions: The Applicant shall apply to the Planning Board for a site plan modification approval if any aspects of the site plan as previously presented change as a result of review by the Conservation Commission or any other state or local board.
12.    Project Construction and Inspections: The Applicant shall have a pre-construction meeting with the Director of Community Planning and Town Engineer at least two weeks prior to commencing construction. Applicant shall provide a project schedule to the Director of Community Planning and the Town Engineer and shall coordinate with the Town Engineer throughout project. The NPDES SWPP permit shall be submitted on or before the date of the pre-construction meeting.
13.    Post-Construction Review. The Applicant shall revisit the Planning Board by July 15, 2014 to review the performance of the conditions to this approval. 

Judith S. Sneath
Chairman, Hingham Planning Board
EXECUTED this ____ day of March, 2013

Plymouth, ss                                  March _____, 2013
Then personally appeared Judy Sneath, Chairman of the Hingham Planning Board, and acknowledged the foregoing to be the free act and deed of said Board.

                                    My Commission Expires:  ______________

Exhibit A
Hingham High School Parking and Traffic Plan for Large Events
[see attached]

Exhibit B

Schedule and Conditions governing the Use of Field Lights and Amplified Sound at the Hingham High School (HHS) athletic field complex
As approved by the Planning Board February 4, 2013

A. SCHEDULE of allowed use, subject to conditions noted below
1. Fall season, from the 4th week in August through Thanksgiving Day)
Days    Field Lights*    Amplified sound*
Monday –
Friday    Until 8:30pm
Until 10:00pm for 3 Fri. nights only for HHS football games    Until 7:30pm twice per week
Until 10:00pm for 3 Fri. nights only for HHS football games
Saturday    Until 9pm    From 4:00 to 8:00pm twice per season for Hingham Youth Football
For daytime HHS events starting by 4:00 pm
Sunday    Until 5pm    Until 5pm for 6 Sundays per season, starting at 12:00pm in Sept.; 11:30am in Oct.; 11:00am in Nov. for 3 back-to-back games each day

2. Winter season, from the day after Thanksgiving through the 2nd week in March

Days    Field Lights    Amplified sound
 All    None    None

3. Spring season, from the 3rd week in March through the 2nd week in June

Days    Field Lights*    Amplified sound*
Monday –
Friday    Until 8:30pm
    Until 7:30pm twice per week
Until 8:30pm for 3 Fri. nights only for HHS games
Saturday    Until 9pm    From 4:00 to 8:00pm twice per season.
For daytime HHS events events starting by 4:00 pm
Sunday    None    None

*Additionally, lights and sound may be used for HHS tournament or play-off games with the permission of the School Committee
* Notwithstanding this schedule, lights may remain on for 15 minutes after a game to allow for safe egress. 

4. Summer season, from the 3rd week in June through the 3rd week in August

Days    Field Lights    Amplified sound
All    None    None

B. CONDITIONS of allowed use

1.    Field lights at the HHS athletic field complex may be used only by entities recognized as Hingham organizations.  Priority for use will be given as follows:
(a)    Hingham Public Schools
(b)    Hingham Youth Sports organizations
(c)    Other Hingham organizations

2.    Field lights for use during games will be restricted to
(a) Hingham Public Schools;
(b)    Other Hingham Youth Sports.  Each league will be allowed 2 games per season.  A league includes all age groups for either a boys or a girls sport.  For example, for Hingham Youth Soccer, boys soccer and girls soccer shall be considered two separate leagues;
(c)    Hingham Youth Football, as detailed in the Schedule herein.

3.    Amplified sound at the HHS athletic field complex may be used only by (a) Hingham Public Schools, and (b) Hingham Youth Football as detailed in the Schedule herein.

4.    The use of amplified sound for games will follow these guidelines:
a)    HHS Football – Player introductions, national anthem, play-by-play and during halftime in conjunction with a choreographed cheerleading or dance routine.
b)    Other HHS teams – Player introductions and national anthem
c)    Hingham Youth Football – Player introductions, national anthem and during halftime in conjunction with a choreographed cheerleading or dance routine.
d)    For all games, public service announcements will be made as needed.

5.    Rules for the proper use of sound and lights will be posted in the press box and enforced by the HHS Athletic Director or her/his designee.  Additionally, there will be a ‘governor’ device on the sound system to regulate the volume and a timer on the lights.

6.    Field lights will remain off when the field is not in use, except in an emergency situation.

7.    Prior to the first day of the Fall and Spring seasons, the HPS will post on their website the beginning and end dates of the season, the hours of light operation and the dates and times of all games using the PA system.  The HPS may update the schedule as needed during the season to accommodate unanticipated changes, consistent with this policy. Postings are for informational purposes only and shall not limit other use of lights and amplified sound consistent with the foregoing schedules and conditions.