HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - PB - 01/01/2010 - Planning Board Meeting Minutes 2010 (22) Planning Board Meeting APPROVED MINUTES 1 of 4
September 22, 2010
COHASSET PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
DATE: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2010
TIME: 7:00 P.M.
PLACE: COHASSET TOWN HALL— SELECTMEN'S OFFICE
41 HIGHLAND AVENUE, COHASSET,MA 02025
Board Members Present: Alfred S. Moore,Jr.—Chairman
Stuart W. Ivimey,Vice Chair
Jean Healey-Dippold, Clerk
Clark H. Brewer
Charles A. Samuelson
William Hannon,Associate Member
Board Members Absent:
Recording Secretary Present: Jo-Ann M. Pilczak, Administrator
Meeting called to order at: 7:04 P.M.
7:04 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENT (10 MINUTES) -
Captain Trask: traffic control device for emergency vehicles at Shaw's intersection is not functioning. He
recalled that Shaw's was responsible for installation of the device when the plaza was approved -wants to know if
they are responsible for repair,maintenance etc. Planning Board Administrator to research.
7:10 P.M. AEC—WIND TURBINE BYLAW UPDATE - AEC members Andrew Willard, Conrad
Langenhagen,Jeffrey Patterson and Rod Hobson in attendance. The AEC is ready to go before the Selectmen and
the Advisory Board for review of the bylaw changes. If Planning Board has any future comments or suggestions
they should contact AEC. Not be ready for Nov. Fall STM - should be ready for Spring 2011 ATM warrant.
Noise: no changes since last meeting
Setback: no changes since last meeting
Tower Height: gave Planning Board discretion for additional height if the applicant can prove"essential"need
for going above 80 meters
Visual Impact: stricken based on conversation at last meeting—Board agrees this should be stricken
Shadowing/Flicker: added maximum worst-case daily shadow flicker - shall not to exceed 30 minutes for each
day. This is the only objective measure AEC could find.
Conditions of Permit: added to give Planning Board right to impose conditions and limitations
Member Healey Dippold:
• Is "preconstruction grade"is different from the model bylaw? —NO,the same
• 19.4.2.3 Noise: suggested clarifying 4 points under violations are"OR" and 3 points under ambient are"AND"
• What remedial measures for noise? - up to Planning Board and Town Counsel discretion
• Setback provision: what is a residential structure? - a structure inhabited by people. Healey Dippold suggested
including definition of residential structure
• Visual Impact—if striking Visual Impact, for consistency, it should be stricken from 19.1 also
• 19.3.3.1 -Potential exists for 100 meter tower as a bonus of sorts—should clarify who receives the benefits of
the higher tower—the town,the developer? Patterson explained that this puts burden of proof on applicant to
prove that project is not feasible at 89 meters. Also gives the Planning Board discretion.
• Conditions of Permit: not in the State law? —added so the Planning Board can impose conditions and
limitations. Member Moore suggested changing"shall' to"may".
• Member Brewer: suggests creating an overlay on the zoning map so homeowners can see how the bylaw
impacts them directly and can see where 80 meter towers can and cannot be built.
Planning Board Meeting APPROVED MINUTES 2 of 4
September 22, 2010
Member Samuelson:
• Regarding height, suggested that other technologies that may not have rotating blades might be viable in 10
years. Willard replied that bylaws cannot be written on what might be viable in the future—new technologies
might require amending bylaws.
• Suggested using consistent terms for"permitted residence","occupied residence" etc.
• Asked how this compares to or impacts any legislation that is coming down. Patterson noted that both the House
and Senate passed versions of the Wind Energy Siting Format, but the versions did not match. Differences have to
be worked out before seeing the impact it has on local bylaws.
7:50 P.M. INFORMAL DISCUSSION—GARY GARDNER— PILGRIM BANK CONVERSION &
RENOVATION OF COHASSET HARDWARE- Gary Gardner not in attendance. In attendance: Attorney
Richard Henderson, Frank Campbell, President and CEO of Pilgrim Bank.
Moving entire Pilgrim Bank next door to former Cohasset Hardware to use the space as the new corporate
headquarters. Will file as Site Plan Review and Special Permit under the Section 18: Special Permit in the Village
Business (VB)District. Handicapped access on Elm St. side of building—will not be any closer to the lot line,but
does encroach on an area not constructed upon—will require special permit to expand the non-conforming use.
Under Section 18,Planning Board is SPGA- Board agrees that as the SPGA for the Village Bylaw, this would fall
under the authority of the special permit. Plans are within the maximum end of the floor area ratio formula. Will
go before the Design Review Board and Historic Commission for review and letter for the Board. Would like to
open the public hearing at the Oct. 20, 2010 Planning Board meeting. Plan to file during the week of Sept. 27 .
Pilgrim Bank will maintain ownership of the current Pilgrim Bank building and look for rental tenant. Associate
Member Hannon very concerned about the lack of and kind of traffic that is through the village.Village has
enough real estate offices, offices. At night the traffic and activity are non-existent. He encouraged Pilgrim to seek
businesses that will draw people to the Village after 6 PM as well as during the day.
8:10 P.M. INFORMAL DISCUSSION—HARBOR&VILLAGE REVITALIZATION
Member Moore explained that Board is not sure if they can or should do anything about the Harbor,but thought
that, since almost the entire harbor area is for sale, it might be timely to discuss what the possibilities are for the
harbor. Zoning on the harbor is a complex issue as it includes a variety of zoning districts: waterfront business,
downtown business,residence A,B and C, and, an industrial parcel. A few years ago,Peter Roy was interested in
developing some of his Border St. buildings into waterfront business on the first floor and condos on the second
level It was determined that the land right on the water is extremely restricted in terms of use and the buildings had
to remain waterfront business use and could not include residences. Abutters were also concerned about parking
issues etc. Town Counsel had also advised at this time that towns can turn to the State for help in terms of
developing a harbor plan which might enable a town to do things with a harbor that they could not normally do.
Everyone talks about breathing new life into the Village,but the Cohasset Harbor is the Town's greatest asset and
yet, it is ignored and allowed to stay as it is. It is not very inviting unless you have a boat and can enter by boat and,
even then, it is not easy to enter the harbor,tie up,get around town to visit restaurants, stores etc. So, for all its
inherent beauty, it is not welcoming.
Member Brewer thought some of the uses were"legacy"type uses that don't respond appropriately to 2010 land
use. Might make sense to do a first phase study similar to the process followed by Hingham in developing their
harbor master plan.
Assoc. Member Hannon commented that there isn't a magnet for visitors. Once in the Harbor or the Village, it is
difficult to get around. He suggests a summer trolley system that runs a circuit between Harbor,Village, Sandy
Beach,train station etc.
Laurie Gibbons,Harbormaster so far this season, she had 225 transients(approx. 10-12 per weekend night)
$35/night. Transients have use of 5 town docks,receive welcome packet with maps, shops,restaurants,menus etc.
Not actively marketed,but has been increasing. Harbormaster staff has also provided transportation to Stop&
Shop etc. if necessary. Gibbons added that several years ago,the Harbor Committee approached the State about a
Harbor Master Plan,but were turned down as the State viewed the Harbor as not much to work with and expand.
She also added that, in the past,the Town has not taken advantage of opportunities to buy property around the
Harbor. Gibbons added that currently, it isn't possible to add more moorings in the Harbor.
Member Healey Dippold wondered about potential for green space in return for something else—land,moorings?
Healey Dippold commented that the Town has to think outside the box—for example, could Roy Estate become a
Planning Board Meeting APPROVED MINUTES 3 of 4
September 22, 2010
private institute, such as a Marine Study Center,that could bring people—and revenue—to the Town? She would
like to be sure Town is involved in what happens to property rather just waiting to see what happens with it.
Member Samuelson noted that the services offered in neighboring harbors are hard for Cohasset to compete with—
there are no showers,no laundry, no marine provision store,no fuel. He noted that while valuable property, the
harbor real estate is not necessarily commercially viable and,Cohasset Zoning Bylaws do not allow use variances.
He also added that it can take a very long time to deal with the Army Corp. of Engineers.
Member Ivimey recognized that may residents believe the Harbor should be left alone to remain as quiet and
peaceful as it currently is,but also thought a fundamental question to be addressed is how the Town can improve
access to the Harbor for the town residents who do not access via boat. Trolleys? Acquisition of Harbor front
properties—(e.g., can the small plot of land next to Cohasset Harbor Inn owned by Peter Roy) to be converted to a
parks that could be enjoyed by residents?
Member Samuelson thought the only thing the Board can do is change the zoning/create a zoning overlay etc.—the
Town is not in the position to purchase real estate.
Member Brewer commented that the Cohasset Harbor Inn is a large structure with a lot of potential for
improvement. The things that do not fit into this area and therefore don't work as well as they should are the Light
Industry and Downtown Business Districts (opposite Cohasset Harbor Inn). Brewer suggested that perhaps these
areas could be rezoned residential and add business land elsewhere. He thought this is a good opportunity to make
changes that might work better in this area. Brewer also cautioned that new owners might be more aggressive and
have other ideas in mind.
Member Moore noted that another very real problem in the Harbor area is parking—there isn't any and a reliable
alternative would be needed.
Lisa Hewitt, 27 Parker Ave., agreed that parking is the single largest problem in the Harbor area and agreed that a
trolley would be very beneficial. She also explained that the Chamber has received a grant to create a brochure that
could be distribute at Logan, area hotels etc. advertising the shops,restaurants etc. in Cohasset. The problem is
that when people try to get here,there is no way to get here—we need sidewalks,bikes,trolleys or something to get
people into the Village. She feels that a lot of residents don't have a sense that they live on the water because it is
not readily accessible to them. She thinks it should be more accessible to all.
Darilyn Evans,4 Evergreen Lane, owner of Darilyn's shop in the Village and President of the Chamber of
Commerce noted that marketing is the key and that it must be done formally. She cautioned however that even
with all the advertising and marketing, there are other significant issues that have to be addressed or the marketing
and advertising are useless: there is no way to get from the train station to the Village other than by car; there are
no public restrooms anywhere in the Village area; there aren't any benches etc.where people could rest, enjoy the
sights etc.; there is no signage.
Karen Quigley, Chair of BOS thought the idea of a Harbor Master Plan to help increase interest and foot traffic
between the Village and Harbor was a positive step in the right direction.
Member Moore suggested having Town Counsel DeRensis attend a future meeting to discuss a Harbor Study and
Plan in conjunction with the State. Planning Board Administrator arrange with Town Manager and Town Counsel.
9:20 P.M. ZBA RECOMMENDATION
• 215 CJC HWY. —APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE - RICHARD HENDERSON ON BEHALF OF
CROCKER LANE REALTY TRUST,LLC Attorney Richard Henderson in attendance to represent this
application. Henderson had provided each Board member with copy of the brief (see copy in Planning Board
files) he had prepared for and submitted to the ZBA for their review prior to this meeting. After reviewing the
detailed brief, the Board fully understood Mr. Henderson's explanation of the difference in the lighting provided by
70'vs 45' lighting and understood Mr. Henderson's argument that "the light towers which are permitted by zoning
are a safety hazard and would not function for the intended purpose, facilitating athletic events in the evening.
Under the circumstances, the permitted structure being uniquely unable to function creates a hardship and deprives
the applicant of a portion of its permitted use of the property." However,while fully understanding Mr.
Henderson's position, not all Board members necessarily agree with this position at this point in time. In addition,
the Board had significant technical questions about the lighting (lights seem to be good quality but documents such
as the illumination summary could not be read and analyzed), impact on abutters etc., and felt that they simply
could not make a recommendation based on the information before them. Several members expressed concern that
this filing really requires the review that is found via Site Plan Reviews. Member Moore noted that when a building
permit was applied for, the Planning Board cautioned that a Site Plan Review was not required for the turf field but
cautioned that any other future changes might require a Site Plan Review. Attorney Henderson disagreed stating
Planning Board Meeting APPROVED MINUTES 4 of 4
September 22, 2010
that there are no grounds for Site Plan Review under the Cohasset Zoning Bylaws. Several Sanctuary Pond Rd.
residents were in attendance and expressed concerns about: how late the owners would be allowed to have the
lights lit and if the Town has the jurisdiction over how late at night the lights can be illuminated; how the use of the
fields will be extended in the future because of the lighting capability;what the field owners might apply for next as
they seem to be expanding and applying for permits in a piecemeal fashion rather than as a whole project.
MOTION: By Member Ivimey that the Planning Board recommend that the ZBA deny the variance as the
applicant failed to make argument that they meet the criteria for a variance.
MOTION: By Member Brewer that the Planning Board does not have enough information to make a
recommendation to the ZBA at this time.
SECOND: Member Ivimey
MOTION: By Member Samuelson to amend Member Brewer's motion to: the Planning Board cannot
make a recommendation at this time but believes the issue needs further vetting by way of a Site Plan
Review because of the overall impact of this project.
SECOND: Member Ivimey
VOTE: 5-0 MOTION CARRIES TO AMEND MEMBER BREWER'S MOTION
MOTION: By Member Samuelson to inform the ZBA that the Planning Board cannot make a
recommendation on this variance application at this time but believes the issue needs further vetting by way
of a Site Plan Review because of the overall impact of this project.
SECOND: Member Ivimey
VOTE: 5-0 MOTION CARRIES
• 15-19 LIGHTHOUSE LANE—SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION—HOADLEY MARTINEX
ARCHITECTS ON BEHALF OF TOWN OF COHASSET (LANDOWNER) AND COHASSET SAILING
CLUB(BUILDING OWNER) In attendance to represent this application: Carmen Hudson, Cavanaro
Consulting and Architect Susan Hoadley, Hoadley Martinez Architects. Proposal meets all zoning requirements
except that the structures are within the floodplain therefore requiring a special permit. Ms. Hudson and Ms.
Hoadley provided the Board with a comprehensive description of the proposed construction,LEED registration,
stormwater runoff collection and reuse etc.
MOTION: By Member Ivimey to recommend that the ZBA approve this special permit application.
SECOND: Member Healey Dippold
VOTE: 5—0 MOTION CARRIES
10:00 P.M. ADMINISTRATION
• VOTE TO ACCEPT SEPTEMBER 1, 2010 MEETING MINUTES
MOTION: By Member Brewer to approve the September 1,2010 meeting minutes
SECOND: Member Ivimey
VOTE: 5—0 MOTION CARRIES
• PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL TO PUT COMMON DRIVEWAY REGULATIONS AND PDF OF
2002 ZONING MAP ON PLANNING BOARD WEBPAGE/TOWN WEBPAGE—Planning Board
Administrator would like to put the pdf of the 2002 Zoning Map and the 1989 "Common Driveway—Minimum
Standards" on the town webpage. Board agreed this is a good idea -even though both documents are in need of
update, the most current version should be on the webpage and accessible to the public.
MOTION: By Member Brewer to adjourn at 10:15 P.M.P.M.
SECOND: Member Healey Dippold
VOTE: 5—0 MOTION CARRIES
NEXT REGULAR MEETING: WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2010 AT 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES APPROVED: JEAN HEALEY DIPPOLD
DATE: OCTOBER 6,2010