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

TOWN OF HINGHAM

Planning Board

Site Plan Review-Notice of Decision

Applicant: Mad River Realty Trust Certified Mail #701303020000099902641
PO BOX 327
Watertown, MA 02471

Premises: 74 Abington Street
Hingham. MA 02043

Date: August 4, 2015

Summary of Proceedings
In accordance with Section I-H of the Zoning By-law, at the meeting of August 3, 2015, the Hingham Planning Board conducted Site Plan Review in association with a Building Permit for a one story 3,200 square foot building for mixed use: office & warehouse, on property knows as 74 Abington Street, zoned Industrial Park and South Hingham Overlay District. Planning Board members Sarah Corey, Chair, Judith Sneath and Gary Tondorf-Dick were in attendance, as was Paul Brogna of Seacoast Engineering, who did the peer review for the Board on this matter. Walter Sullivan Jr, Clerk was recused and did not attend the hearing.

Background
In 2008 the Planning Board approved a 15,000 s.f building on this property (7,500 s.f Business Office/Sales showroom and 7,500 s.f. of Warehouse/Industrial). That approval has expired, so a new application process is required. The corresponding Conservation Commission approval had been granted an extension and is still in force. The scope of this project (3,200 s.f. building) is much less than the previous approval so they did not require a new filing.

The project which consists of the construction of a one story mixed use building with a storage yard for large scaffolding and construction materials and a paved parking lot for trucks and office vehicles. The majority of the site will be undisturbed. There will be a bioretention swale to capture runoff from the storage area, and a detention basin for the drainage from the impervious area. A well permit is needed as well as septic system approval. A shade tree hearing and street opening permit are needed for the work in the public way. Mr. Brogna reviewed his findings and noted that most of the items raised were resolved during the review period, and, that some items could be conditioned. He noted that the project as designed meets the storm water standards. After discussion with the agent and the peer review engineer the Board asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment. As there were no other comments the Board then reviewed the Site Plan Review criteria and made the following findings:

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 submittal shows three wall packs. Finding that the "lighting as proposed is appropriate". Condition Applicant shall provide cut sheets of fixtures to the Planner, or, verify that the fixtures are shielded, etc.

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;

Finding: The sight distances will be improved with selective clearing of vegetation in the right of way. This will require a shade tree hearing and street opening permit. The site has been engineered with the turning movements of the largest vehicles in mind.

Condition: The Applicant shall improve the sight lines as possible and practicable with selective clearing of vegetation prior to issuance of CO.

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;

Findings: There are only five employees of this business and they are not all on site at the same time, so there is adequate parking available. Customers do not come to this site. The spaces meet the standards. The dumpster is accessible for emptying, and the turning movements on-site will accommodate tractor trailers.

d. adequacy of open space and setbacks, including adequacy of landscaping of such areas;
Finding: The site is mostly vegetated. The setbacks meet or exceed the requirements. proposed fence has not been shown on the plan. Site plan showing location of fence will be provided to Town Planner.
e. adequacy of the methods of disposal of refuse and other wastes resulting from the uses permitted on the site

Finding: The Dumpster is located appropriately and screened.

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;

Finding: Board of Health Approval is required for the septic system and proposed well.

g. assurance of positive storm water 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 storm water 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 Storm Water Management Policy and Standards, and Massachusetts Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines.

Finding: The design meets the storm water standards.

Condition: The Applicant shall do 4 more test pits and have the results reviewed by the peer review engineer.

Condition: The Contractor shall submit the final SWPPP at least two weeks prior to the preconstruction meeting to allow time for the peer review engineer to review the plan. The peer review engineer shall or may be required to attend the on-site pre-construction meeting which will also include the Town Planner and Conservation Agent/Assistant Conservation Agent. The Applicant is responsible for the peer review engineer's fee for this review. The FINAL SWPPP must be in the Planning Department File, and on-site before the construction may begin.

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;

Finding: The project as proposed is greatly reduced from the previous site plan approval here. The amount of disturbance to the site is far less than what is permitted under the regulations. This is a one story building proposed, and the stone wall will be preserved. The site will be fairly well screened from the roadway with the exception of the driveway openings.

i. minimizing unreasonable departure from the character and scale of buildings in the vicinity or as previously existing on or approved for the site.

Finding: This is a one story building proposed on industrial property.

The Board then made, seconded and so voted to APPROVE the proposed one story 3,200 sf building and associated infrastructure as presented and as shown on the plans "SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 74 Abington Street (Assessors Map 211, Lot 6) Hingham, Massachusetts" dated June 25, 2015, revised to July 31, 2015, prepared by McKenzie Engineering Group, Inc., prepared for Mad River Realty Trust, PO Box 327, Watertown, MA 02471, consisting of 8 sheets, with the following conditions:

1. The Applicant shall do 4 more test pits and have the results reviewed by the peer review engineer.
2. The Contractor shall submit the final SWPPP at least two weeks prior to the preconstruction meeting to allow time for the peer review engineer to review the plan. The Peer review engineer shall or may be required to attend the on-site pre-construction meeting which will also include the Town Planner and Conservation Agent/Assistant Conservation Agent. The Applicant is responsible for the peer review engineer's fee for this review. The FINAL SWPPP must be in the Planning Department File, and on-site before the construction may begin.
3. The Applicant shall improve the sight lines as possible and practicable with selective clearing of vegetation prior to issuance of CO.
4. Applicant shall provide cut sheets of fixtures to the Planner to verify that the fixtures are shielded.

For the Hingham Planning Board

Sarah H. Corey, Chairman