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: Marc Garrett, Malcolm MacGregor, Paul McAlduff, and Bill Wennerberg
Planning Board Alternate: Timothy Grandy
Staff Members: Lee Hartmann, Valerie Massard and Howard Coppari
Recording Secretary: Eileen Hawthorne
Marc Garrett read a statement to the public regarding a change in the proposed MEPOD bylaw that would divide the project into two components: a special permit for traffic and access which will be peer reviewed and an allowed use development on the Waverly Oaks site. The change allows for continued public input during public meetings and workshops while working together to create an acceptable traffic solution. Everything within the studio development will be an allowed use subject to site plan approval.
Karen Buechs asked if it means the project was going through “as of right” and would be built.
Mr. Garrett explained that the Board will continue preparing a draft bylaw for the development of the site as an allowed use and the access and traffic will be reviewed under a special permit process. This will allow Jeff Dirk to do a thorough analysis of the proposed access and traffic. The Board will still have to make a recommendation on the proposed bylaw which will be presented to the Board of Selectmen and the Advisory and Finance Committee before going to Town Meeting. Town Meeting will vote on the overlay district for an allowed use and there will be a special permit process for the traffic.
Alan Lyons stated that the priority for this project is access because nothing can be built without the access. Mr. Lyons asked for a timeline for when the access would be done and when everything would be approved.
Mr. Garrett explained that construction of Plymouth Rock Studios (PRS) would not begin before the summer of 2009 because once the bylaw is approved by Town Meeting, they will still have to go through the State permitting process and they will still have to get a special permit for access which will require additional public hearings. The projection is that the State permits would be issued by July 2009.
Atty. Edward Angley (PRS) stated that they plan to file for the special permit sometime in November with the public hearings beginning sometime in January 2009.
Richard Silva felt that the compromise was reasonable and helps the process to move forward.
MEPOD Workshop
Bill Wynne, PRS, identified four issues that for the studio that have been deemed significant and need to be addressed: traffic, sound and audio impacts, visual impacts (especially from Long Pond Road) and the jurisdictional question of as of right vs. special permit. Mr. Wynne stated that all the issues will be able to be mitigated as demonstrated with the solutions agreed to for the visual impacts. In regards to traffic it is clear that the access road off Clark Road is essential to the project and is the best solution for the site. It would be unacceptable to bring the studio traffic in to the site through Long Pond Road. There are issues with Long Pond Road related impact to the homes in the area and the way the road is designed. Mr. Dirk, working with the projected numbers for traffic that the studio
would generate is working to address the concerns of the citizens. Some of the suggestions made by citizens have been added to the draft traffic report. They are taking another look at the proposed mitigation for Clark Road.
Mr. Hartmann reviewed a summary of the language changes from the original bylaw to the current draft bylaw as follows:
To avoid confusion in the bylaw the project is referred to as the “development” instead of complex and the language regarding “complex” vs. “campus” has been cleaned up.
The housing cap has been reduced from 200 to 125. 100 of the residential units are referred to as rental artist housing.
Definitions for screening and buffers have been added.
The overall development cap has been reduced from 2.1 million gfa to 2 million gfa.
The language limits the development to a single day spa and a single hotel.
The studio campus has been reduced from 1.5 million gfa to 1.25 million gfa
The amenity campus maximum gross floor area has increased from 510,000 to 530,000
The maximum development size has increased from 100 acres to 200 acres.
Overall lot coverage has been reduced from 30% to 25%.
The exemption for the height of structured parking has been modified.
The requirement for an operational, functioning movie studio has increased from 100,000 sq. ft. to 400,000 sq. ft.
A provision has been added that would require occupation of twice as much studio space for every square foot of amenity or educational space.
Abutter notification process and public hearing process is required.
Design guidelines have been removed and have been put into the Design Guidelines.
The language regarding the review of traffic impacts has been added.
Mr. Hartmann summarized changes that will appear in the next draft of the bylaw. They will include a definition of gross floor area; housing is now allowed in the amenity and educational complex; a table has been added for minimum lot sizes and lot widths; numbering and formatting will be changed to be consistent with other sections of the bylaw; there are several minor technical clarifications which clean up the draft language; and they are working on the language the require a special permit for access. During the public hearing, the Board will look at language regarding caps and definitions. Each draft of the bylaw is a little stronger. The special permit for access will improve the process. Mr. Hartmann stated that the three documents; the draft bylaw, the design standards and the MOU will all work
together.
Bill Wynne presented a summary of last Thursday’s meeting with Mass Highway. Mass Highway had some concerns about the potential solutions for traffic mitigation. Originally Mass Highway wondered what was wrong with using Long Pond Road for access, which the studio is not in favor of as they would like to reduce the traffic on Long Pond Road. The studio reviewed with Mass Highway the site, how the site works, the residential component on Long Pond Road, the emergency access and the proposed traffic mitigations. They presented a copy of the PowerPoint presentation and drawings that included the Route 3/Clark Road interchange with and without the boulevard; the ramp off the ramp design with the off ramp southbound on Route 3 with an additional ramp off that ramp which would stay as a continuous lane and loop around
into the studio; the slip ramp only off Route 3; the slip ramp version had a southbound access and used the access road to enter back onto the highway. The full access ramp plan requires a land taking of private property on the east side of Route 3. There were six alternatives and Mr. Rosenblum’s three alternatives presented. When asked about Long Pond Road, the studio stated that using Long Pond Road didn’t solve the school traffic issues or the issues for the residents south of the school entrance to Clark Road and would just add to the issues at the Clark Road/Long Pond Road intersection. Mass Highway understood why Long Pond Road would not work and asked for solutions for the Clark Road intersection. They asked for a design at full buildout of the Clark Road/Route 3 south and northbound interchange. Given Mass Highways input, the studio wanted to rethink the location of the access road onto Clark Road and design
a more comprehensive plan.
Mr. Garrett clarified that Mass Highways suggestion was the starting point for analysis should be a design and analysis which includes Clark Road east to Route 3 south and Clark Road west to Route 3 north, completing the slip ramp scenario and the two quadrants of the interchange.
Mr. Wynne stated that their desire is to show what that full design will look like to make certain that if the improvements are put in, they won’t interfere with any future highway improvements. Mr. Dirk’s design stayed out of the limits of the State’s right of way, but the design has to be able to handle the weaving and lane changes and then work out from there. Some items were identified as a potential issue: one being the proposed northbound slip ramp might interfere with future improvements; the slip ramp off the south bound ramp would require State and Federal permits. The existing Route 3 interchange would have to be completed before adding another interchange north of Exit 3. Mr. Rosenblum’s alternatives were presented, but there were issues with the permitting time frame. They talked about eliminating the traffic signalization once the interim solution is no longer necessary. Mr. Dirk is looking at a variation of the boulevard that widens the boulevard and pulls the
roundabout away from Long Pond Road. The final traffic report will be submitted to the Town and Mass Highway next week.
Paul McAlduff stated that during the site visit last Saturday it was interesting to see where the road might go. Suggestions were made regarding placing decorative lighting 200 ft. apart along the road and providing emergency call buttons. Safety on the road could be improved by dividing the road by putting a natural berm in the center at several locations to slow down traffic.
Mr. Hartmann stated that the MOU will speak to traffic and required improvements; MEPA will make a 61 finding with a binding list of improvements that are required; and there will be a special permit process.
Richard Nealey asked if the curb cut onto Clark Road was non-negotiable.
Mr. Garrett stated that Mass Highway may require an access road.
Mr. Nealey thought that Waverly Oaks was required to create easements to connect Long Pond Road with Route 3.
Mr. Hartmann stated that to his knowledge no such easements exist.
Mr. Garrett stated that the only known easements through Waverly Oaks are for infrastructure not roadways.
Mr. Wynne stated that the title work has not shown any easements. If there was an approval for an off ramp, it would have to access Long Pond Road. He stated that the access road onto Clark Road is the best place to meet the vision of the studio, but if there is a better solution, it would be considered.
Phyllis Troia was not supportive of the plans. She felt that there were better alternatives. Ms. Troia felt that traffic on Route 3 is already outrageous on the weekends and there are already backups at the Exit 3, 4 and 5 ramps.
Mr. Wynne replied that it is the studios intention to provide lane widening and traffic controls and improvements with respect to the proposed signalization and timing of the signals to eliminate backups. The mitigation will be designed for full buildout of the Pinehills, Makepeace and the studio projects. If the mitigation is insufficient, there will be further study and mitigation required.
Loring Tripp stated that the roads entering the Pinehills are the same distance from the interchange as the proposed access road would be. He was supportive of putting the school traffic onto the access road. He felt the special permit process would give the Town more time to evaluate the proposed mitigation and build in the necessary protections. Mr. Tripp was concerned with the existing stormwater runoff that is polluting the pond at the State boat ramp.
Mr. Wynne stated that stormwater runoff at the proposed roundabout and intersection would be addressed to prevent murky water from getting into the pond.
Paul Luszcz thanked the parties that worked on the agreement that addresses the concerns of the as of right vs. special permit process. He felt that the character and quality of the intersection needs to be resolved and taking the extra time to review all alternative is prudent.
Mr. Silva suggested that parents of students at the middle and high school should become involved with making the access road safe for both entities. He suggested limiting the trucks from accessing the studio site during the arrival and dismissal of students and that security cameras might help to provide a safer road.
Kevin Doyle stated that the highway engineers are telling us that the Clark Road improvements can work to mitigate the traffic issues.
Mr. Garrett stated that Mass Highway will have to review the road designs to evaluate whether they are feasible.
Mr. McAlduff state that the student privilege of having a parking pass can be revoked if necessary. He suggested having different color stickers for students that use different access to the schools.
Carly Stevens, Nicole Orchard, Sara Walski and Kristen, students at Plymouth South High School Spoke in support of the studio project. They stated that the majority of students are supportive and they are considering having a ballot survey of the students to determine the level of support. They were supportive of the studio’s involvement with the Tech Program.
Bill Wennerberg stated he was supportive of the proposed access road, but suggested adding pullouts in several locations. Mr. Wennerberg stated he was not supportive of Mr. Rosenblum’s proposals.
Mr. McAdluff was not supportive of Mr. Rosenblum’s proposals. He stated that if this project is designed properly, it will ease the traffic at Clark Road and Long Pond Road and will be a benefit to the Town.
Richard Quintal, Chair of the Board of Selectmen thanked Mr. Garrett and staff for their time and input into this project. He felt the project was moving in the right direction. The community wants the project to succeed. He stated that he will be traveling to California at his own expense to view Paramount Studios and will present his impressions at a later date.
Mr. Garret reminded the viewers about the upcoming meetings. The next meetings will be held at 7:00 p.m. on September 8, 2008 and September 15, 2008 in the Mayflower Room at Town Hall.
Paul McAlduff moved to adjourn at 8:35 p.m.; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Respectfully Submitted,
Eileen M. Hawthorne Approved: September 15, 2008
Administrative Assistant
| 
