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, Paul McAlduff, Tim Grandy, and Bill Wennerberg
Planning Board Alternate: Ken Buechs
Staff Members: Lee Hartmann
Recording Secretary: Eileen Hawthorne
Administrative Notes:
B437 – Pinehills LLC – Purchase Street – Endorsement of Plan
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to endorse the plan for B437 – Pinehills LLC - Purchase Street; the vote was (3-0-1) with Bill Wennerberg in abstention.
B509 – The Trails RDD (a.k.a. Fox Hollow Farm) – Termination of Phasing Covenant
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to approve and endorse the Termination of Phasing Covenant for B509 – The Trails RDD (a.k.a. Fox Hollow Farm); the vote was unanimous (4-0).
B560 Hillside Estates – Lot Release
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to release lots 15-4 and 15-10 in the B560 Hillside Estates subdivision; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Discussion
Site Design Guidelines
Marc Garrett introduced the draft site design guidelines as a conceptual document intended to standardize and/or codify site design guidelines for various non-residential zones. Mr. Hartmann and Mr. Garrett drafted the current version and would like the Board’s comments to incorporate into the document.
Lee Hartmann noted that Beals and Thomas, the Town’s peer review consulting engineers, also reviewed the draft, offered their guidance and submitted some edits. There are two issues in regards to the standards. The first issue is to draft comprehensive guidelines and the second issue is how to apply the standards, whether as guidelines or something binding that would be incorporated into the bylaw or be voluntary.
Mr. Garrett suggested that the Board begin with a discussion and then move on to specific edits and comments within the document.
Tim Grandy felt that the draft was a step in a positive direction and felt that most of the document would be voluntary, but some areas should be incorporated into the bylaw.
Paul McAlduff agreed with Mr. Grandy and stated that we need an action document that details development expectations.
Bill Wennerberg thought that the Town needs to make a decision about what Plymouth should become. Plymouth is a historic town and we are open to becoming a modern progressive town, but there is a fine line of how that occurs. Mr. Wennerberg felt if we want Plymouth to be distinct, iconic, and have its own brand we need to define what that should be in the guidelines.
Large corporations should be encouraged to build in Plymouth, but their structures and logos should be incorporated into Plymouth’s identity.
Ken Buechs felt that the draft was well written and will be a great guideline for those who don’t know what is required.
Mr. Garrett agreed with Mr. Wennerberg. He suggested that Plymouth could have a unique identity like Nantucket, St. Augustine Florida, New Orleans, Lexington, Williamsburg, and San Antonio. Each of these towns has a different style, with a distinct vision. Mr. Garrett stated that the WalMart in Cordage Park worked with the Town to incorporate their design into the existing, surrounding mill complex and that the Freeport Maine boutiques and outlets have a quintessential New England look. The town should encourage national brands to locate here while maintaining a look and style that is appropriate for Plymouth.
Mr. Grandy cited the CVS in Cedarville vs. the CVS in Manomet which have two distinctive looks. In Manomet, a corporate design was altered to fit a New England style.
Mr. McAlduff noted that the CVS in Cedarville used a brick façade to fit in with the surrounding buildings.
Mr. Wennerberg stated that Mashpee Commons has a Cape Cod feel in its architecture and that Plymouth needs to define its identity.
The Board began a page by page review of the draft design guidelines and made the following suggestions:
Section 1 – Preamble
Relate the tone to building a brand specific to our town recognizing the historical value and why Plymouth is unique, special, and different.
Include the Village Master plans
Section 2 – Introduction
No Changes
Section 3 – Review Thresholds
Determine appropriate sq. ft. threshold for projects that would require pre-application review
(Check with other towns for their review process)
Determine whether different levels of review should be utilized for certain areas of town (i.e. lower in an industrial park and higher in village centers, mixed commerce and highway commercial areas)
Use the language “Applicants are encouraged” in regards to engaging in a pre-application process
Separate the site plan review process for allowed uses from the special permit process and determine when and where the pre-application applies
Add views and the relationship to surrounding neighbors and neighborhoods to the information that should be provided during the pre-application review process
Under Section (D.) - Add to the narrative information that outlines what the applicant is applying for
Page 4, 2, further define “large and more complex projects”
Include contours, general topography and vegetative cover of the area under Site Plan Information
Section 4 – General Site Standards
Require grading to look natural instead of installation of a planted berm while maintaining sight distances
Increase the size of parking spaces from 8’x17’ to 9’x18’
Require public safety measures for buildings with parking spaces perpendicular to buildings
Add language in the advisory section about buildings with abutting parking to be designed with reinforced walls (check with town of Raynham for language)
Encourage terracing of retaining walls or a series of smaller retaining walls when the size of the wall is massive
Correct revision date for Storm Drainage Facilities
Page 10
Remove “only” in regards to native tree types in informal/natural landscape areas
Correct spelling of “trees” to tree under Other landscaped areas
Correct spelling of “soded” to sodded under Lawn areas
Require appropriate seed mixes for appropriate uses
Add language to address mitigation of cuts and fills and land disturbance
Spacing of trees should be 30 ft. around a building
Replace “channels of riprap” with “channels of native round mixed field stone”
The Board agreed to continue the review of the Site Design Guidelines to January 3, 2010.
Marc Garrett asked the Board to submit their documents with proposed changes to staff or to meet with staff so the comments can be incorporated into the next draft.
Bill Wennerberg moved to adjourn at 8:40 p.m.; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Respectfully Submitted,
Eileen M. Hawthorne Approved:_____________________
Administrative Assistant
| 
