View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
NOTICE OF DECISION
Site Plan Review in Association with a Special Permit A2
and Special Permit A3
IN THE MATTER OF: Certified #7017 0660 0000 9961 1298
Applicant: LCB Berkshire Senior Living Holdings, LLC.
3 Edgewater Drive, Suite 101
Norwood, MA 02062
Premises: 276 Whiting Street
Hingham, MA 02043
Date: December 11, 2017
“SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR: PROPOSED LCB SENIOR LIVING” prepared for LCB Berkshire Senior Living Holdings, LLC., prepared by Bohler Engineering, dated 7/20/17, revised to 11/29/17, 16 sheets.
Summary of Proceedings:
This matter came before the Planning Board on the application of LCB Berkshire Senior Living Holdings, LLC. for Site Plan Review under § I-G and § I-I and a Special Permit A3 Parking Determination and/or Waivers under § V-A and such other relief as necessary to construct a ~90,591 s.f. assisted living facility on 5.13 acres and complete related parking and site improvements at 276 Whiting Street in the Residence C District.
The application was submitted on August 29, 2017, and the Planning Board heard the application at a duly noticed public hearing on September 25 and October 30 jointly with the Board of Appeals, and, December 4, 2017 (Planning Board only). William Ramsey missed the hearing of September 25, 2017 but noted that he reviewed the recording and file, and had completed a Mullins Affidavit for the record. The Planning Board panel on the site plan review was William Ramsey, Jennifer Gay Smith, and Gordon Carr. Paul Brogna, Seacoast Engineering, and Jeffrey Dirk, Vanasse and Associates, were the peer review consultants on this project. The Applicant team included Walter Sullivan, Attorney, Lee Bloom and Ted Doyle from LCB Senior Living, Jesse Johnson, Bohler Engineering, Anthony Vivanto, Architect, David Fomato, On-Site Engineering, and Erin Fredette, McMahon Associates
The project site is located at 276 Whiting Street the proposal is for 90 units of senior housing and memory care. The project is a rental model providing apartments with services, similar to Allerton House. This is a low intensity use. The average age of resident is 85 years old. There are 54 full time employees total, and the largest shift is 7 am-3 pm with 25 full time employees. Of the 90 units 64 are assisted living and 26 are memory care. The site is 5.1 acres and is already mostly developed. There is a grade change of 12-13’ from front to back which lends itself to providing a walk out at the rear. The building has a footprint of 46,500 square feet and is 2.5 stories tall. The wastewater treatment plant is at the front of the site and there are 60 parking spaces proposed. For landscaping there are 80 trees and 400 shrubs proposed. A sidewalk is proposed along Whiting Street. The applicant has already met with MA DOT about the permitting required for the project. There are three major improvements for traffic related to this project. First, the trip generation is lower than for the current garage and farm use combination. Second, the site access is being consolidated and finally, the driveway is located where there is the maximum site distances at the crest of a vertical curve. The team met with DOT about the access permit and no significant issues were raised regarding the design. Mr. Dirk explained that there would only be the equivalent of one vehicle every 3 minutes added to Whiting Street as a result of this project (15-20 vehicles in the peak hours). Sightlines are adequate – both the stopping sight distance, and the intersection sight distance. This means that cars can safely stop for vehicles exiting the site, and cars can pull out of the site without interrupting traffic on Whiting Street. Mr. Fomato explained the wastewater treatment plant and noted that it required local approvals as well as a state discharge permit. He explained the building and that the subsurface leaching system is under the parking lot. Odors are mitigated by an activated charcoal air filter, and the proposed membrane bio-reactor system is the best available technology for this type of project. During the hearings the Board reviewed several revisions of the plans, and, received comments letters from Jeffrey Dirk and Paul Brogna regarding the adequacy of the proposal and suggested conditions to be considered with any approval. The Board reviewed the drainage, landscape screening, and circulation internal to the site in great detail. The Board received and considered extensive public comment on the proposal also.
Findings and Decisions:
Board members then reviewed the project in accordance with the Site Plan Review Criteria contained in Section I-I (6) as follows, making findings and identifying conditions:
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:
• Fire Department comments have been addressed; an additional hydrant was added to the project plans.
• Photometric plans show that light levels are minimal at the property lines.
• Additional screening has been added on the north west side.
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:
• Common driveway was previously approved.
• The entry driveway is in the best location along the frontage for vehicular safety.
• Sight lines are adequate per peer review engineer.
• Fire Department and Peer Review Engineer are satisfied with the project design.
• The Applicant is providing a sidewalk along the frontage, with a pedestrian connection into the site as part of the Traffic Demand Management strategy. The Applicant has indicated an intent to keep the sidewalk clear of snow as part of their operations until such time as there is a continuous sidewalk network in that area.
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:
• The parking spaces provided exceed industry standards according the 9/22/17 memo provided by Jeffrey Dirk.
• The applicant has agreed to implement a Traffic Demand Management plan.
d. adequacy of open space and setbacks, including adequacy of landscaping of such areas;
The Board found that a complete landscaping plan has been provided as part of the application set.
e. adequacy of the methods of disposal of refuse and other wastes resulting from the uses permitted on the site;
The Board found that a dumpster is located on site.
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 Board found that the HMLP requires an easement for the electric service, and the Board of Health has approved matters under their jurisdiction.
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 found that:
• The drainage design has been peer reviewed and there are no outstanding issues.
• The applicant is responsible for implementing the drainage O&M plan.
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 this 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 this not applicable, this is a mixed use area.
DECISION AND VOTE:
It was Moved, Seconded and SO VOTED to Approve Site Plan Review in association with a Special Permit A2 and A3, as shown on plans titled “SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR: PROPOSED LCB SENIOR LIVING” prepared for LCB Berkshire Senior Living Holdings, LLC., prepared by Bohler Engineering, dated 7/20/17, revised to 11/29/17, 16 sheets, based on the findings and subject to the following conditions:
1. Exterior light fixtures shall be dark sky compliant (full cutoff fixtures with recessed lenses).
2. Prior to issuance of the building permit the applicant must provide a copy of the common driveway easement and cross drainage easement & maintenance plan for the driveway, with proof of recording.
3. Applicant must file the O&M plan for the LCB site with the Planning Board decisions at the Registry of Deeds. This O&M Plan should also address snow plowing operations, as well as snow clearing on the pedestrian walkways, and maintenance of the drainage system. Prior to filing the final draft shall be reviewed by the planner and the peer review engineer.
4. Prior to the start of construction the Applicant shall re-review the fire lane configuration with Chris DiNapoli, HFD, and make any changes required.
5. The applicant shall add the sidewalk along the frontage back onto the plan.
6. Police Details may be required during construction at the discretion of the Police Chief.
7. The applicant shall implement a Traffic Demand Management plan inclusive of the measures detailed in the August 30, 2017 memo from Jeffrey Dirk.
8. Applicant shall provide the HMLP the required easement prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy.
9. LCB Senior Living shall maintain records on-site regarding completion of the required maintenance detailed in the O&M Plan.
10. A SWPPP must be provided at least one month prior to the start of site work for review by the peer review engineer.
11. Two weeks prior to the start of work the initial erosion control devices shall be installed, and, there will be an on-site preconstruction meeting including the Conservation Agent, Director of Planning, peer review agent, and Police Chief, as well as the team that will be in charge of the site during construction. The purpose of that meeting is to ensure everyone understands the project, has all the necessary contact information, the erosion controls are satisfactory, and, the schedule or need for police details is understood by all parties. Any final changes needed in the SWPPP material will be discussed at that point if still outstanding.
12. Development shall be in accordance with the approved plans and representations during the hearings.
Jennifer M. Gay Smith
Chairman, Hingham Planning Board
In favor: Gay Smith, Ramsey, Carr
Cc: Town Clerk; Paul Brogna; Jeffrey Dirk; Building Department; Assessor; ZBA; BOH; R. Fernandes; T. Molinari; R. Sylvester; S. Girardi, HMLP; Police Chief; Fire Chief; Fire Prevention; S. Olson, Aquarion, Jesse Johnson, Bohler Engineers; Walter Sullivan.
EXECUTED this _____ day of December, 2017
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Plymouth, ss December ____, 2017
Then 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: October 29, 2021
Mary F. Savage-Dunham, Notary Public