These minutes are not verbatim – they are the secretary’s interpretation of what took place at the meeting. – Open Meeting Law – Section III.
Board Members: Malcolm MacGregor, Marc Garrett, Loring Tripp, III, Paul McAlduff and Larry Rosenblum
Planning Board Alternate: Timothy Grandy
Staff Members: Lee Hartmann and Valerie Massard
Recording Secretary: Eileen Hawthorne
Administrative Notes:
Minutes:
March 31, 2008
April 14, 2008 all:
Marc Garrett requested that his name be added to the attendance of the minutes of March 31, 2008 as he was present at the meeting.
Larry Rosenblum moved to approve the minutes of March 31, 2008 with Mr. Garrett’s name added to those in attendance and April 14, 2008; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Public Hearing
Movie and Entertainment Production Overlay District (MEPOD)
Malcolm MacGregor read the public hearing notice and opened the public hearing.
Steve Newbold, Gensler, presented images of existing movie studios and explained how the sound stages and support buildings are constructed fairly close together. The proposed studio would have a New England flavor to the architecture. There would be a total of 14 sounds stages in warehouse type structures with each pod consisting of two sound stages and an office building. The size of the sound stages would be either 18,000 sq. ft. or 24,000 sq. ft. The height of these buildings is 40 ft. from the floor to the bottom of the grid, with the area above the grid utilized for HVAC, cables, lighting, etc. There would be a mill building centrally located to supply construction and electrical supplies for the sound sets. The studio/office spaces would be rented to television and movie production companies.
Other structures would be erected for post production, editing, catering, offices, screening, etc. A back lot would be constructed for outdoor filming. The back lot would have a street layout with building facades constructed as needed. Mr. Newbold presented cross sections showing the limited visibility of the sites from Route 25 and Bourne Road.
Larry Rosenblum asked about the marketing and the contractual process for the rental of the spaces and how it relates to the bylaw.
Mr. Newbold replied that the contracts between the studio and the production companies would define what would be allowed in accordance with the bylaw. The bylaw applies to permanent buildings. Temporary structures would be under the purview of the Building Commissioner.
Atty. Edward Angley stated that the bylaw requires that the Building Commissioner would have to issue a permit for special circumstances regarding the noise and lighting. The production companies would be contractually required to adhere to state and local ordinances and bylaws.
Malcolm MacGregor asked for an explanation of need for the proposed school/dormitory.
David Kirkpatrick explained that the school would be a performing arts school, grades K-12, for approximately 500 gifted and talented students. The private academy would comply with state regulations for academics.
Mr. Newbold presented the proposed site plan for the overlay district. The studio complex, school, and village center would be on the southern side of Bourne Road with the recreation fields on the northern side of Bourne Road. The studio complex would be accessed from a new interchange off Route 25 with two access/egress points on Bourne Road. The north/south orientation will allow for future expansion if additional sound stages are needed. A buffer has been provided around the perimeter of the overlay district.
Larry Rosenblum suggested adding provisions for a helicopter landing area to the proposed bylaw and site plan.
Mr. Newbold stated that their preference would be to utilize Plymouth Airport for any air transportation. The noise of a helicopter could disrupt production.
Atty. Angley began the review of the proposed MEPOD bylaw. The structure of the bylaw was based on the structure of existing bylaws (similar to the OSMUD).
Loring Tripp suggested that the entire 1000 acres should be defined as the overlay district as the state would include the entire acreage in its review of the project. The overlay district can include public and private ownership.
Larry Rosenblum stated that MEPA would deal with a prescribed site for a dedicated use; the remaining land belongs to the Town of Plymouth. He felt there was no reason to include the entire area in the MEPOD.
Marc Garrett supported including the entire 1000 acres in the overlay district.
Paul Luszcz was concerned that the “back lot” was close to an existing neighborhood.
Malcolm MacGregor suggested tightening up the bylaw in regards to the subsidiary uses and providing some noise evaluation data.
Loring Tripp requested a cross section of the visibility of the studio complex to the existing neighborhoods.
Bill Wynne stated that the have to present detailed noise analysis as part of the MEPA process.
Atty. Angley stated that the definitions outlined in the proposed bylaw were dictated by the need of the development. Atty. Angley stated that they have no objection to Atty. William Abbott’s suggestion of using “ancillary” instead of “subsidiary”.
Mr. Garrett asked for clarification of the proposed theaters.
Mr. Wynne replied that the studio complex would include a private 600-900 seat screening theater and that the village center may include a small movie theater for public access.
Mr. Rosenblum asked whether studio tours were intended or should they be prohibited.
Atty. Angley stated that it was not intended to open the studio complex to the public on a regular basis.
Mr. Kirkpatrick explained that the screening theater and complex would be large enough to accommodate something like a presidential debate and could be opened for particular events.
Atty. Angley reviewed the next few pages of the bylaw which include the requirement of a Master Plan Special Permit; defines the allowed uses, the dimensional requirements, and site plan approval requirements. Construction of the proposed interchange would be required as a condition of granting the master plan special permit.
Malcolm MacGregor wanted to insure that the preferred interchange option would be presented for the State’s review process.
Atty. Angley felt that the proponents would be able to make a case for the preferred alternative. He also stated that there is a provision in the bylaw that if the permit gets appealed, they can seek approval from Town Meeting, which would require a 2/3 vote.
Lee Hartmann stated that the proposed bylaw creates a special permit process that requires a master plan to define the whole project at build out, what the impacts to the community would be and a negotiated mitigation package.
William Abbott was concerned that opening the studio complex to visitors would have a significant impact on traffic and that the paragraph in the proposed bylaw that allows a bypass of the Planning Board would not provide enough protection for the existing neighborhoods. Prior to the meeting Mr. Abbott had submitted several suggestions to tighten up the language in the bylaw.
Helen Hapgood suggested that there should be written guarantees that protect the Town from infrastructure costs if the development is not built.
Mr. Hartmann stated the infrastructure costs would be the responsibility of the developer. Cornelius Baker was concerned with the traffic impact to Lunn’s Way, which is a private road.
Mr. Rosenblum did not support the language that would allow the project to go to Town Meeting if appealed.
Mr. Tripp stated that the traffic issues and Mr. Baker’s concerns about Lunn’s Way would be addressed during the permitting process as the Planning Board will negotiate a mitigation package. Mr. Tripp felt that if the project had to go before Town Meeting for approval in addition to being reviewed by the Planning Board, it would be reviewed by the Board of Selectmen, the Advisory and Finance Committee, as well as, the precinct chairs.
Mr. Hartmann stated that the Planning Board decision can be appealed, but that Town Meeting action cannot be.
Malcolm MacGregor stated that the Board should see a business plan before any decisions are made. He wanted assurance that the Town would be selling part of a valuable resource for a viable project. Mr. MacGregor asked if the plans have been presented to the towns of Wareham and Bourne as they will be impacted traffic.
Atty. Angley replied that they have not contacted the other towns in regard to the traffic that will happen if the bylaw and land transfers are approved by Town Meeting.
The Board took a short break.
Mr. Wynne informed the Board that the business plan is confidential, but he would present it to the Board during an executive session as long as a nondisclosure agreement is signed.
Mr. Luszcz asked what determined the allowed uses such as a house of worship that does not necessarily relate to a movie studio.
Mr. Hartmann explained that under a master plan, if a use is not listed it is prohibited.
Mr. Garrett suggested that the duplications in the proposed bylaw were not necessary.
Atty. Angley stated that he would look at tightening up the language.
Malcolm MacGregor asked what the maximum 100,000 sq. ft. of retail could entail.
Atty. Angley stated that the retail might include restaurants, a convenience store, service businesses, gift shops, etc.
Mr. Tripp and Mr. Rosenblum again suggested designating an area for helicopter landings.
Mr. Rosenblum felt that the village center should be tied to Bourne Road rather than the proposed interchange.
Mr. Tripp suggested at least a 200 ft. buffer from Bourne Road for the village center.
Mr. Newbold stated that there is a minimum of 300 ft. from any abutting home for the outdoor studio area.
Mr. MacGregor and Mr. Rosenblum were not supportive of a 75 ft. allowed height for the proposed hotel. They were supportive of a lower allowed height of 55-65 ft. with the option to request a waiver for a higher height.
Mr. Luszcz suggested that the buffer in the area of the back lot should be increased.
Ken Beuchs stated that the helicopter landing area would increase noise for the neighborhoods.
Mrs. Hapgood suggested adding language that would prohibit cell towers.
Mr. MacGregor suggested reviewing the language regarding site plans at the next meeting.
Loring Tripp moved to continue the public hearing to Wednesday, at April 30, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. in the Harbor Room; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Public Hearing
Subdivision Rules and Regulations Modification
Malcolm MacGregor read the public hearing notice and opened the public hearing.
Valerie Massard presented the proposed changes to the Subdivision Rules and Regulations.
Larry Rosenblum raised the issue of not allowing pinch points because roundabouts have pinch points.
Ms. Massard stated that pinch points would not be encouraged within a TRVD subdivision but could be utilized for off-site mitigation. Ms. Massard stated that the revised pavements widths in the TRVD would eliminate most of the issues with emergency vehicles that exist in the Pinehills Development.
Loring Tripp moved to close the public hearing; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Loring Tripp moved for the Board to approve the amendments to the Subdivision Rules and Regulations as presented.
Marc Garrett requested that the plant listings under the landscaping section should have the name first and the Latin identification listed second and italicized.
The vote to approve with the Subdivision Rules and Regulations with the change requested by Mr. Garrett was unanimous (5-0).
Paul McAlduff moved to adjourn at 10:25 p.m.; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Respectfully Submitted,
Eileen M. Hawthorne Approved: May 12, 2008
Administrative Assistant
| 
