Town of Carlisle
MASSACHUSETTS 01741
------------
Office of
PLANNING BOARD
66 Westford Street
Carlisle, Massachusetts 01741
Tel. (978) 369-9702
Fax (978) 369-4521
Minutes
November 26, 2007
Minutes 10/22/07, 10/29/07, 10/30/07
Bills
Budget
Highland Building Study Group (Board representative)
MAGIC meeting 12/6/07 – Planning Board host?
Liaison reports
Preparation of Request for Proposals for Personal Wireless Communications Facilities on Town-owned land [Broadcast Signal Lab – Planning Board/joint subcommittee]
Continued Public Hearing on application of Omnipoint Communications, Inc. for a special permit and site plan approval under Sec. 5.9 of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws to install, operate and maintain a personal wireless communication facility at 1022 Westford Street (Map 18, Lot 42A) on property owned by Lawrence A. Sorli.
Continued Public Hearing on application of Sprint Nextel Corp. for a special permit and site plan approval under Sec. 5.9 of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws to install, operate and maintain a personal wireless communication facility at 27 School Street (Map 22, Lot 5) on property owned by the First Religious Society
Continued Joint Public Hearing with Carlisle Tree Warden of a request to remove certain trees within the Town’s right of way along the east side of Concord Street, from Church Street to Bingham Road, a designated scenic road, under the provisions of the Scenic Roads Bylaw (Art. XII & MGL Ch. 40, S. 15C) and the Public Shade Tree Act (MGL Ch. 87, S. 3). The proposed removal of trees is to construct a footpath adjacent to the roadway.
Request for release of security and Certificate of Completion for Carriage Way Definitive Subdivision Plan, (Map 23, Lot 1 and Map 13, Lots 22-2, 22-3, 22-4, 22-5, 22-6, 22-7, 22-8 and 22-10) [Request of William Costello]
Continued Joint Public Hearing for approval of a Definitive Subdivision Plan for Hanover Hill, composed of 35 lots on 167.31 acres at 672 and 872 Westford Street, and five (5) Common Driveway Special Permits under Sec. 5.4.4 of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws, Map 19, Parcels 37, 39, 40 & 41 and Map 20, Parcels 9 & 10A, Wilkins Hill Realty, LLC, applicant
Review of Draft Decision on application of Michael and Bethany Richman for a special permit under Sec. 5.6 of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws to create an Accessory Apartment at Lot 3, Greystone Lane, off Cross Street (Map 7, Parcel 38-3)
Chair Michael Epstein called the meeting to order at 7:34 pm in the Clark Room of Town Hall. Members Greg Peterson, Kent Gonzales, Ken Hoffman, Brian Larson, Marc Lamere, Associate Members David Freedman and Tom Lane, and Planning Administrator George Mansfield were present. Board member Carol Nathan was absent.
Gretchen Caywood, assistant to the Planning Administrator, Dave and Karen Alexander (Westford Street), Nancy Pierce (Westford Street), Billy Coulter (Virginia Farme Lane),Janet and Kristen Murphy (Virginia Farme Lane), Justin Romeo (Virginia Farme Lane), Ed Pare (Brown/Rudnick for Sprint),Joe Pereira (TerraSearch), Bob Koning (Building Commissioner), Alan Cameron (First Religious Society), Sylvia Sillers (Concord Street), David and Estelle Keast (Westford Street), David Friend (Plymouth, MA), Bruce Vienneau (Acton Street), Joseph Steinkrauss (Lexington, MA), Tony Calieri (Billerica, MA), Rob West (Concord Street), Joe Gushue (Cross Street), and Bob Zielinski (Carlisle Mosquito) were also in attendance.
Announcements
Chair Epstein reviewed the Agenda for this meeting, and informed the public that the hearing on the Carlisle Pathways Plan will be opened at 10:00 pm and continued, with no testimony being taken tonight, as the Historical Commission (CHC) has not taken final action on this matter.
Minutes
Associate Member Freedman moved to approve the October 22, 2007 minutes as drafted, Gonzales seconded and the motion was approved unanimously (8-0). Hoffman moved to approve the October 29, 2007 minutes as drafted, Lamere seconded and the motion was approved unanimously (8-0). Chair Epstein suggested that the October 30 draft minutes be held until next meeting to allow sufficient time to review the draft.
Highland Building Study Group (Board representative)
Chair Epstein noted that while the PB has not yet received a request to appoint a member for this Study Group, a request is likely forthcoming, and an appointee should be selected. He added that he and Hoffman have discussed this issue, and Hoffman has offered his considerable experience in this area regarding historic restoration. With no other PB members expressing interest, Epstein moved to nominate Ken Hoffman as the PB’s appointee to the Highland Building Study Group. Gonzales seconded and the motion was approved 5-0-1 with Hoffman abstaining.
Continued Public Hearing on application of Omnipoint Communications, Inc. for a special permit and site plan approval under Sec. 5.9 of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws to install, operate and maintain a personal wireless communication facility at 1022 Westford Street (Map 18, Lot 42A) on property owned by Lawrence A. Sorli.
Epstein turned the meeting over to Freedman, who chairs this hearing. After reopening the continued public hearing, Freedman confirmed that while some had reviewed the draft Decision prepared by Planning Administrator Mansfield, additional review time is needed, as well as feedback from the Police Chief and Fire Chief,. Mansfield reported that the Police Chief had no comment other than a formal, written request, received today, for the opportunity to co-locate an antenna on this wireless site, and on any other wireless site erected in Town. He added that the Fire Chief had not provided feedback yet.
Chair Freedman explained that the hearing must therefore be kept open to include Fire Department input. Grossman, attorney for the applicant, added that making a slot available for both Fire and Police is not a problem for Omnipoint, and the co-location slots would be provided at no cost. He verified that the applicant would agree with a Condition to this effect as part of the Decision. However, he explained to the PB that generally Police and Fire Departments use 10-foot WHIP antennas, which are more difficult to conceal in a monopole, and therefore are best ‘designed in’ up front. Often, these antennas are placed on top of the monopole for that reason. If they are installed later, they must not interfere with Omni point’s technology. Mansfield explained that wireless
facilities for Police and Fire are exempt from the Bylaw, as they are for emergency communication and not personal wireless service facilities (PWSF). He added that the Police have an antenna at the school and at the Anderegg property facility (871 Bedford Road). Larson confirmed that there are gaps in emergency coverage in Town for the Police Department. Peterson suggested inquiring from the Police and Fire Chiefs whether co-location at this specific facility will be needed and, if not, proceeding without this concern for this site only. Epstein concurred with this approach.
Chair Freedman opened the hearing to the public. David Alexander (abutter on Westford Street) expressed concern that the abutters had been assured the monopole would not have additional antennas affixed to it
externally, and now they are hearing for the first time that Fire and Police may require placement of antennas that likely cannot be concealed. Alexander also stated that while others will earn money from it, their property value will likely be reduced due to the presence of the monopole that they will see every day. Alexander asked the PB to seriously reconsider whether the Town really needs this facility. He asked about the predicted noise level of the operating facility, about replacement of any trees that screen the facility, as replacement need arises, and how
visual impact of this and other facilities will be minimized. Chair Freedman explained that any additional facilities would require a special permit application before the PB, as will extension of this facility to 90 feet. Regarding tree cover, he added that a Condition can be placed on the Special Permit Decision that the applicant will protect the screening trees and replace them when necessary, thereby maintaining the natural buffer.
Regarding noise output, Chair Freedman referred to the testimony from the PB consultant that the noise level should be negligible. Grossman added that, at this abutters’ distance of about 550 feet, the noise level should be
less than 35 dB, virtually inaudible due to the vegetation in the area. Chair Freedman offered to verify this with the consultant, David Maxson. Epstein also asked Grossman to provide actual numerical noise level data.
At this point, Epstein explained to the public that the PB has met 8 times publicly on this application since February 2007, and that the various issues have been discussed in detail. Chair Freedman asked Planning Administrator Mansfield to forward the revised Draft Decision on this Special Permit application to the PB members, and that all members forward their comments to him and to Epstein and Mansfield within the week.
Peterson moved and Larson seconded the continuation of this public hearing to Monday, December 10, 2007 at 8:45 pm.
Epstein resumed the Chair.
Continued Public Hearing on application of Sprint Nextel Corp. for a special permit and site plan approval under Sec. 5.9 of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws to install, operate and maintain a personal wireless communication facility at 27 School Street (Map 22, Lot 5) on property owned by the First Religious Society
Chair Epstein reopened this continued public hearing, and Planning Administrator Mansfield reported that Don Haes, a Radiation Safety Specialist, had submitted a detailed report in response to questions from Lamere. Also, Building Commissioner Koning had submitted a list of concerns regarding this application. Both these items had been forwarded to the PB members.
Ed Pare (Brown/Rudnick), attorney for the applicant, reported that Verizon had contacted them about possible co-location, but while there have been a few follow up conversations, recently there has been no further action by Verizon. Therefore, the slot at 82 feet (which Nextel decided not to use now that they have merged with Sprint) should be considered available. When Epstein asked if Omnipoint could possibly move their co-location plans to the 82-foot site (instead of in the four corners of the bell tower), Alan Cameron (FRS) agreed, but indicated he has not heard from Omnipoint recently. Cameron said he saw no reason why Omnipoint could not move into the 82-foot slot, and he will contact the new project manager at Omnipoint to discuss this. He also confirmed that the Historical Commission (CHC)
approved the Sprint application at their October 30th meeting, with written approval forthcoming.
When Chair Epstein asked about the screening of the AC units, Joe Pereira (TerraSearch) said that a concrete retaining wall will be used, capped with a plain board fence, and the entirety will be screened with evergreen trees. This approach was requested by the CHC.
Epstein voiced the PB concern that Sprint may be taking up too much space in the attic, which could adversely affect the opportunities for co-location. Pereira said that Omnipoint has the smallest space requirement for equipment of any of the potential carriers, and that Verizon would require the most space. Sprint has made every effort to safely consolidate its equipment as much as possible, taking 212 square feet, but the low overhead of the attic is a challenge. Verizon may not fit into the attic, depending on their setup, but Omnipoint should be able to fit. The remaining area is somewhat divided due to the configuration of the attic. Cameron added that FRS also requires some storage space.
Lamere, the PB’s appointee to the CHC, confirmed that the CHC had discussed that the Fire Chief or Police Chief has expressed interest in co-location availability for antenna equipment (which is smaller than that of the wireless carriers). Cameron pointed out that the police have an antenna about 500 feet away from FRS. Planning
Administrator Mansfield said that the Police Chief had forwarded a memo formally requesting that the Police Department have co-location availability at any new facilities constructed in Town, and the Police Chief’s memo was presented to the Board.
Chair Epstein asked the Building Commissioner for his comments with the proposed facility. Commissioner Koning reported that there are several items for which he is still waiting for additional information. He had forwarded a list of these items to the Planning Administrator:
· The extension of the existing fire rated stairs to access the new equipment room
· The new equipment room layout for present and future equipment
· Power plan on connections to existing main service and metering
· Cat-walk above the existing ceiling and cable tray
· A detailed plan of the cables that run exposed at the bell level in the belfry. There is concern that the cables can be seen from the street
· Protection of the Town Clock’s mechanical hand drive to the four clock faces
· Is work going to take place near the clock?
· Specifications for all cables including fire ratings
· Fire rating detail of new equipment room, fire stops of cables and conduit entering and leaving the room, and
· Fresh air make-up for the new mechanical room
Commissioner Koning requested a set of drawings detailing these items.
Pare said that all of the items, except the cable run detail, which will be addressed in the CHC decision, are building permit requirements, and that this level of detail is generally determined at a later stage. He agreed that the plans developed for the building permit will show these details. These are mainly code issues. Peterson suggested that it be a condition of the PB Special Permit approval that these items will be addressed in plans submitted for the building permit, and Pare was in agreement with this. Koning stressed the importance of such a condition, particularly for protection of the clock.
Peterson suggested making zoning action enforcement by Commissioner Koning a condition of the Special Permit, to help assure that the plans submitted for the building permit are appropriate. Epstein and Planning Administrator Mansfield agreed that a list of findings and conditions of Special Permit approval will be available at the next PB meeting (December 10th), with the PB then designating two members to review the final decision and conditions in order to file the final decision with the Town Clerk in a timely manner.
This hearing was continued to 9:15 pm on Monday, December 10, 2007.
Continued Joint Public Hearing for approval of a Definitive Subdivision Plan for Hanover Hill, composed of 35 lots on 167.31 acres at 672 and 872 Westford Street, and five (5) Common Driveway Special Permits under Sec. 5.4.4 of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws, Map 19, Parcels 37, 39, 40 & 41 and Map 20, Parcels 9 & 10A, Wilkins Hill Realty, LLC, applicant
Peterson recused himself from the PB for this hearing. Chair Epstein opened the hearing for the Definitive Subdivision, and explained that he will not open the Special Permit Common Drive hearing tonight, as decided with the applicant, as one PB member is out. George Dimakarakos (Stamski & McNary), engineer for the applicant, confirmed that the proper ads were placed and notices were sent to all abutters, and provided receipts to Planning Administrator Mansfield.
Dimakarakos presented this 35-lot subdivision plan, which is an alternative to a 21-lot ANR plan submitted to the PB in September 2006. He explained that following this plan would have resulted in 17 additional driveways onto Westford Street. A Preliminary Subdivision Plan was developed and filed subsequently, and discussed before the PB in March 2007, leading to the Definitive Subdivision Plan now to be discussed.
Dimakarakos described the proposed layout for the Definitive Plan, which includes two subdivision roadways proposed to be named Hanover Road and Johnson Road. Hanover Road would be located opposite Cross Street
off of Westford Street. Johnson Road would be located across from 565 Westford Street. Dimakarakos confirmed that through clearing of some trees in the right-of-way, another 60 feet of stopping sight distance (SSD) has been obtained for the proposed Hanover Road entrance as one heads west on Westford Street. A traffic analysis was prepared and submitted by David Friend, Traffic Safety Specialist, on behalf of LandTech. This analysis was reviewed for the PB by Douglas Prentiss, P.E. of Nitsch Engineering.
In addition to the two proposed subdivision roadways, there are 5 proposed common drives, for which Special Permit applications have been submitted to the PB. Three of these will serve 2 lots each, one will serve 3 lots, and one will serve 5 lots. Sorli Way is the proposed name for the 5-lot drive. The other four drives will not be named. Dimakarakos explained that in this way all lots with Westford Street frontage will be tied in to the common drives of the Hanover Hill plan, and will not have single driveways with access from Westford Street. Also, there would no longer be a driveway opposite Acton Street.
Concerning low impact development (LID), Dimakarakos highlighted the contents of a Stamski & McNary memo previously submitted to the PB, which summarizes LID techniques incorporated into the plan. These include the use of roof drain drywells, infiltration trenches and bioretention areas (infiltration basins) to help disperse drainage throughout the site. He explained that the pitch and layout of Johnson Road have been planned to allow for continued drainage into the existing wetland area. He reported a recent meeting with the Planning Administrator and engineer Sandy Brock (Nitsch) where further LID approaches were discussed. While the 2-acre zoning requirements in Carlisle result in impervious lot coverage of about 9% (less than the 15% limit suggested by LID literature), grading and high
groundwater areas on the site pose some limitations to the use of some LID techniques. However, as a result of the meeting, an LID approach was designed at the entrance of Hanover Road, where it would be possible to provide drainage swales and bioretention areas. Steven Ventresca (Nitsch) explained that the goal would be to collect 90% of the storms which contribute to the majority of pollution, and anything else would go over into the wetland area, therefore using that area as a natural advantage. In this way, smaller swales and retention areas can be used. He added that while some trees will need to be removed for the swales, new ones can be planted directly in the swales. Nitsch engineering also suggested that a T-shaped common drive could be used to replace two of the three smaller common drives. Epstein asked that the engineers continue to discuss these matters, and report at the next meeting as to the areas of agreement and disagreement.
David Friend (Transportation Planning Services) reviewed the report he had prepared for Wilkins Hill LLC analyzing the traffic flow in the area of the Hanover Road and Cross Street intersection with Westford Street, and in the area of the Johnson road intersection (at 565 Westford Street). He described how the directional traffic volumes were collected and the speed analysis was conducted. Traffic projections 5 years out were made considering added traffic from Greystone Crossing, from Coventry Woods, and from Hanover Hill, and the amount of estimated peak hour vehicle trips was estimated for each planned development. Results indicate that the traffic volumes entering from the new roadways will be minimal. For the 4-way intersection that will be created with Hanover Road and Cross Street
intersecting Westford Road, miminal delays are projected, with a
queuing of 1-2 vehicles on Cross Street expected during evening peak hours. Therefore, the analyst concluded that the addition of Hanover Road, and the contribution of traffic generated by its residents, will not have a significant impact on the operation of this intersection. Minimal delays were also predicted for the Johnson Road entrance, exiting and entering, with no operational problems expected to occur, and no significant peak hour delays expected.
Stopping sight distances (SSD’s) were determined to be greater than satisfactory for entrances to Hanover Road and to Johnson Road from both the westbound and eastbound direction. Freedman confirmed that the requested trees and brush have been cleared from the right-of-way on the north side of Westford Road to improve sight distances, and that it will be the Town’s responsibility to maintain these cleared areas.
Epstein expressed concern about the adequacy of intersection sight distances (ISD), the distance required to depart from the intersection and efficiently enter into traffic flow on Westford Street without significantly slowing the traffic. He asked for additional information at the next meeting on whether clearing of vegetation in the right-of-way at the Johnson Road site, as suggested by Nitsch, would sufficiently improve ISD for that proposed intersection. He also asked for recommendations concerning improving sight lines at Cross Street.
Concerning accident data on file for the Cross Street and Westford Street intersection, Carlisle Police records indicate that while there were 9 recorded incidents from 2002-2006, only one was a collision having to do with the intersection. A few were due to icy roads, and most were due to deer crossing the street. Friend’s report concluded that this proposed location is suitable.
Friend concluded that with the addition of appropriate signage for the 4-way and the T intersection , with a 30 mph speed limit, and a sign indicating ‘Hill Blocks View’ for the Johnson Road site, the safety of these sites could be enhanced. Rob West indicated that a new bus stop may be needed, as the high school bus will not use Hanover Road, and there is only one bus stop on Westford Street (at #547).
Epstein noted that the Nitsch Engineering traffic analysis included several recommendations for mitigation, including signage recommendations and a plan detailing their location. Friend agreed to discuss these with the Nitsch engineer. Epstein also asked Planning Administrator Mansfield to request input from the Police Chief on the traffic study.
Deb Belanger (Pedestrian/Bike Safety Advisory Committee) expressed appreciation that pathways are being considered in this development, and that their connectivity with existing paths is important. She suggested providing a connection between the two subdivision roadways, and will continue pathways discussions with West and present detail at the next PB meeting. David Keast (Westford Street) expressed interest in a pathway from Curve Street to Johnson Road along Westford Street as part of the project. He suggested that this would be helpful to the abutters and the community as a whole. Planning Administrator Mansfield added that others from Town had written in to support Keast’s idea.
The PB scheduled a site visit for Sunday, December 9th at 10 am to walk the site. Ventresca and Dimakarakos agreed to meet to further discuss LID. West agreed to an extension of this subdivision approval until February 1, 2008.
Gonzales moved to continue this hearing to 7:45 pm on, December 10, 2007. Hoffman seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Continued Joint Public Hearing with Carlisle Tree Warden of a request to remove certain trees within the Town’s right of way along the east side of Concord Street, from Church Street to Bingham Road, a designated scenic road, under the provisions of the Scenic Roads Bylaw (Art. XII & MGL Ch. 40, S. 15C) and the Public Shade Tree Act (MGL Ch. 87, S. 3). The proposed removal of trees is to construct a footpath adjacent to the roadway.
Epstein confirmed with Belanger that the CHC has not closed this hearing, and that decisions still need to be made concerning Concord Street. Belanger reported that the Ped/Bike Committee is assembling their proposed changes for the CHC, and only a few open issues remain, which should be concluded at the November 27th meeting.
Epstein moved and Gonzales seconded the continuation of this public hearing to 7:15 pm on December 10, 2007, and the motion was approved unanimously (8-0).
Review of Draft Decision on application of Michael and Bethany Richman for a special permit under Sec. 5.6 of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws to create an Accessory Apartment at Lot 3, Greystone Lane, off Cross Street (Map 7, Parcel 38-3)
The PB reviewed the draft Decision prepared by Planning Administrator Mansfield, and all were in agreement with its content. Gonzales moved and Peterson seconded the acceptance of the Decision, as drafted, for this Accessory Apartment Special Permit, and the motion was approved 8-0.
Gonzales moved and Peterson seconded the adjournment of the PB meeting at 11:20 pm, and the motion was approved 8-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gretchen Caywood
Administrative Assistant
Carlisle Planning Board
| 
