Safe Harbor Marinas’ proposal to reconfigure the Skipper’s Lot and build a 55,000-square-foot, 50-foot-tall ship-repair facility at 333 Victory Road drew sustained public opposition at the Quincy Planning Board’s Jan. 14 meeting, and the board voted to continue the case to March 11.

The project team, represented by attorney Steve Gard, said the plan is primarily a reconfiguration that would reduce outdoor vessel storage in some areas, add parking and stormwater controls, and move winter maintenance into an indoor, heated facility to reduce onsite debris and noise. Engineer Dana Altobello said the reconfiguration would increase the Skipper’s Lot from about 282 to 321 spaces, reduce impervious area in parts of the site, and install subsurface infiltration systems designed to meet city and state stormwater standards and treat runoff before it reaches Dorchester Bay.

Why it matters: Neighbors and condo owners said the building’s size and siting would dramatically alter the Marina Bay streetscape, block waterfront views and sunlight for adjacent residences, and worsen traffic and quality-of-life impacts. Several speakers also raised legal and operational questions — including a claim that a recorded parking easement benefits 332 Victory Road (Lot 47) and must be protected — and urged the board to require more detailed plans and conditions.

What was said: Paul Bollier of Main Street Architects described the structure as a one-story, Type II steel-and-concrete building with four overhead doors, an interior mezzanine and containment systems (oil-water separators, trench drains) intended to limit on-site contamination. Dana Altobello said the design will meet or exceed TSS (total suspended solids) removal targets and provide subsurface recharge volumes above the minimum required by the stormwater management handbook.

Residents: Public comment was extensive. Thomas Concannon and other Atlantic condominium residents said a 50-foot building of roughly 55,000 sq ft would block views and be out of scale with the neighborhood. Donato Ferrooli read a legal concern about an existing, recorded parking easement affecting Lot 47, asking that any approval explicitly protect that easement and not impair recorded property interests. Multiple speakers raised fears about noise, chemical and solvent use, dust, rodents and decreased property values if the building proceeds as proposed.

Next steps: The planning department recommended, and the board agreed, to continue the case to the March 11 planning board meeting to allow the applicant to address engineering comments, submit a landscape plan, and respond to items identified in written submissions (including tree-shading/landscaping and energy-code/solar-readiness questions).