These minutes are not verbatim – they are the secretary’s interpretation of what took place at the meeting. – Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A§ 22.
Board Members: Marc Garrett, Paul McAlduff, Larry Rosenblum, Bill Wennerberg, and Tim Grandy
Planning Board Alternate: Ken Buechs
Recording Secretary: Eileen Hawthorne
Administrative Notes:
Minutes:
March 26, 2012
April 2, 2012
April 9, 2012
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to approve the minutes of March 26, 2012*, April 2, 2012* and April 9, 2012* as presented; Larry Rosenblum, second; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
B437 – Pinehills LLC
Discontinuance of Street Name – Greengage Crescent
The Board received the following documentation* for the review of this case:
Letter from Pinehills LLC and GP Pines LLC requesting discontinuance of Street Name
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to discontinue the use of the street name “Greengage Crescent” in the B437 – Pinehills Development; Larry Rosenblum, second; the vote was (4-0-1) with Bill Wennerberg in abstention.
Form A Plans:
A4419 – ADM Agawam Development LLC, Halfway Pond Road, Map 111, Lot 15 (94.0 A) – Divide into lots 1-17 (35.77 A) and 1-18 (58.23 A)
Atty. Richard Serkey – negotiations to preserve the lots in two stages;
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to determine that Form A plan A4419 was entitled to endorsement; Tim Grandy, second; the vote was (4-0-1) with Larry Rosenblum in abstention.
A4421 – Sawyer Builders, Inc and Michael and Elizabeth Sawyer, Sleepy Hollow Drive, Map 100, Lots 39-39 (1.58A) and 39-40 (2.71A) – Divide into lots 39-41 (1.0A), 39-42 (0.93A), 39-43 (0.87A) and 39-44 (1.52A)
Larry Rosenblum moved for the Board to determine that Form A plan A4421 was entitled to endorsement; Paul McAlduff, second; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
A4420 – Pinehills LLC, Landmark Drive, Map 77D, Lots A-176 (6.17 A), S-154 (3.05A), 10-402 (0.51A), 10-403 (0.30A), and 10-410 (0.24A) – Divide into lots A-232 (3.45A), A-233 (3.02A), A-234 (2.10A) and S-199 (1.7A)
Larry Rosenblum noted that the Zoning Requirements on the plan did not refer to the most recent zoning change that was approved by Spring, 2010 Town Meeting for the Pinehill’s development.
Larry Rosenblum moved for the Board to postpone action on A4420 for clarification of the zoning change; Paul McAlduff, second; the vote was (4-0-1) with Bill Wennerberg in abstention.
Workshop
Site Plan Review Guidelines
The Board received the following documentation* for the review of this case:
Draft Site Plan Review Guidelines
Draft Zoning Bylaw Changes
Marc Garrett began the presentation of the Site Plan Review Guidelines by reading the names of the attorneys, engineers, architects, and steering committee and committee chairs that were invited to the workshop. Mr. Garrett welcomed Russell Appleyard and Judy Barber from the West Plymouth Steering Committee.
Mr. Garrett stated that the goals of site plan review are to brand development as unique to Plymouth and to the individual village centers. The guidelines would encourage traditional architectural designs and materials with flexibility for upcoming trends in development. There will be two sections to the site plan review process: advisory (suggestions and guidelines) and mandatory (incorporated into the Zoning Bylaw). The guidelines would only apply to commercial special permit uses and certain allowed commercial uses. The guidelines would not apply to residential development, accessory residential structures, existing uses and buildings, commercial renovations and additions with limited visibility and the OSMUD. The advisory guidelines are divided into general standards, village style development and
non-village commercial development. The general standards that would apply to all locations include:
Complete Streets (accommodate vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists)
Relationship to Surroundings (incorporate nearby architectural elements, use landscaping as a transition, and use landscaping, lighting and other improvements to blend into neighborhoods)
Building & Site Design (shared parking & driveways, include pedestrian access and planted contoured areas)
Landscaping (complement architecture, enhance vistas & provide shade, relocate existing trees, design to conserve energy, and wind breaks in parking areas)
Architectural Style & Finishes (vary building materials, use traditional building materials, massing strategies for large buildings, building articulation, and screen mechanicals)
In Village Style Development the site plan review could include reducing parking area visibility, streetscapes, using established setback patterns, breaking buildings into smaller masses, mixed uses, and using traditional signage materials.
In Non-Village Commercial Development the site plan review could include: using topography to screen development, constructing buildings into slopes, screening large masses with landscaping, and fronting large buildings with traditional storefront, reducing building edges, including overhangs for customers, incorporating pedestrian scaled features, breaking building mass into multiple buildings, and varying façade line, roof line and wall heights).
Mandatory standards would apply to site layout, parking, landscaping, pedestrian access and maintenance. Site layout would be similar to current standards, include 29 ft. drive lanes, central median for projects larger than 100,000 sq. ft., pedestrian and bicycle access to site, four inches of bituminous pavement and working with the topography to minimize retaining walls. Parking standards would include no changes to the parking rations for uses, a maximum of 12 spaces in a continuous row, shared parking, reducing spaces by up to 50%, screening parking lots with landscaping and low impact drainage design. Landscaping would include the use of regional plant varieties, screening of mechanicals, formal landscape areas for projects over 100,000 sq. ft., and plantings along facades. Maintenance would include
compliance with the Stormwater Management Plan and operation of a maintenance plan.
The site plan review process would include a pre-application review by the Planning Board for projects over 100,000 sq. ft. A list of information needed will include criteria of approval, approval with conditions and criteria of denial.
The next steps going forward include: additional public review and comment, Town Counsel review, incorporation enhanced graphics, a Planning Board public hearing, Town Meeting review process and adoption by Town Meeting.
Mr. Garrett announced that the draft document is available on the Town’s website and encouraged further public comment and input.
Judy Barber stated that she was pleased to see the complete street concept included in the site plan review process. Ms. Barber was concerned that there is a lack of sidewalks throughout the Town. Ms. Barber suggested that granite curbing could be considered along major roadways and the developers should be encouraged to consider the off-site impacts of proposed projects.
Russel Appleyard was also supportive of the complete street concept. Mr. Appleyard felt that there is no definition of the qualities of the various communities and the overall qualities of Plymouth that we are trying to maintain. He suggested that the steering committees should help define what the various sections of Town should look like.
The Board acknowledged that tonight’s presentation was an important first step toward the completion of site plan review guidelines and encouraged the public to review the documents and submit comments and suggestions. There will be further community outreach initiated by the Planning Board.
Tim Grandy moved to adjourn at 8:05 p.m., Paul McAlduff, second; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
*On file with the Office of Planning and Development in project case files.
Respectfully Submitted,
Eileen Hawthorne Approved: May 7, 2012
Administrative Assistant
| 
