Town of Carlisle
MASSACHUSETTS 01741
------------
Office of
PLANNING BOARD
66 Westford Street
Carlisle, Massachusetts 01741
Tel. (978) 369-9702
Fax (978) 369-4521
Minutes
February 25, 2008
Minutes 2/11/08
Bills
Budget, FY09 budget
40B Working Group draft report
Highland Building Study Committee
Liaison reports
Preparation of Request for Proposals for Personal Wireless Communications Facilities on Town-owned land [Broadcast Signal Lab – Planning Board/joint subcommittee]
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
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 27 School Street (Map 22, Lot 5) on property owned by the First Religious Society.
Request for recommendation on proposed amendment to the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws, Sec. 4.7, Intensity and Dimensional Requirements, Height Exceptions, to allow wind turbine facilities by special permit (Request of the Board of Selectmen)
Discussion of potential amendments to Special Permit Rules and Regulations for Accessory Apartments to incorporate zoning bylaw amendments (Sec. 5.6) approved 5/06, DHCD regulatory agreement and LIP guidelines.
Notice of receipt of application for Common Driveway Special Permit for 268 Fiske Street (Map 30, Parcel 11), for setting the date of a public hearing and assignment of a review engineer. (John Ballantine, applicant)
Chair Michael Epstein called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm in the Nickles Room of Town Hall. Members Greg Peterson, Ken Hoffman, Brian Larson, Marc Lamere, Carol Nathan, Associate Member David Freedman, and Planning Administrator George Mansfield were present. Associate Member Tom Lane was absent. Member Kent Gonzales arrived at 7:45 pm.
Gretchen Caywood, assistant to the Planning Administrator, George Dimakarakos (Stamski & McNary), Rob West (Wilkins Hill Realty, LLC), Paul Alphen (Balas, Alphen & Santos, P.C.), and Bob Zielinski (Carlisle Mosquito) were also in attendance.
Minutes
The PB reviewed the draft minutes for the February 11, 2008 meeting, and a few amendments were suggested. Peterson moved and Larson seconded the approval of the draft minutes as amended, and the motion was approved unanimously (6-0).
FY09 Budget
Planning Administrator Mansfield reported that at a recent Department Heads meeting the Town Administrator said that FinCom and the Selectmen are expected to approve no more than guideline budgets for FY09. This means a cut of $15,000 from the PB’s Planning and Professionals budget line, leaving only about $3000 in this
category for consultant funding for the entire year. He added that the Town Treasurer spoke to FinCom about seeking additional funding for consultants through a warrant article, however the warrant closes March 4th.
Mansfield added that the Town Administrator also discussed money now owed by the Town due to its loss of a suit by the Benfield trustees for the refund of rollback Ch. 61A taxes in the amount of approximately $400,000 with interest. While the Town has the funds to pay this debt from a reserve fund, it can only be transferred from the fund by a 2/3 majority vote at Town Meeting, or a decision at that meeting for an override vote. Otherwise there will be further FY09 budget cuts.
Kent Gonzales arrived at this point.
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
Vice Chair Peterson recused himself from the PB for this hearing. Chair Epstein re-opened the hearing for the Definitive Subdivision plan and the hearing for the five Common Driveway special permits. Planning Administrator Mansfield reported that the draft legal documents are with Town Counsel for review.
George Dimakarakos, engineer for the applicant, said that revised plans are being prepared, but there is nothing new to present this evening. Chair Epstein informed him of the PB’s weekend site visit to several Subdivisions, Conservation Clusters and Common Driveways in Town, during which the Board gained a better visual sense of roadway widths and slopes. He then asked for a detailed review of the widths and profiles of all roadways in the proposed development.
Dimakarakos first reviewed the proposed width, slope, grade and shoulder of Hanover Road, one of the two main subdivision roadways, in detail over its entire length. Hanover Road will be 20 feet wide with 4-foot shoulders and 2:1 side slopes on either side where safety permits. This is a reduction from the originally planned 6-foot shoulders with 3:1 slopes at either side, and will result in less tree clearing and should lessen environmental impact. Heading north, from its intersection with Westford Street, this roadway would have a modest grade of 1 to 2.75% for the first 1300 feet, with a bridge crossing wetlands at this point. The bridge design has been lowered to reduce fill. After the crossing, there is a 3% grade for a few hundred feet until the road crests and the proposed Johnson Road
intersects with it. Approximately 200 feet further along Hanover Road after this planned intersection, the grade of Hanover Road is downward at 8% for about 400 feet of roadway, then levels off for a few hundred feet before entering a cul-de-sac.
Chair Epstein asked the applicant to work toward lessening the 8% grade in the northerly portion of Hanover Road for safety reasons, and Dimakarakos agreed to do this, adding that it should be possible to get some reduction.
Dimakarakos then reviewed the course of Johnson Road, the other main subdivision roadway, in similar detail. Initially (from its origin at Westford Street) the roadway grades up 2% then briefly at 4%, levels off, then begins a descent, at an -8% grade, to meet with Hanover Road. Dimakarakos pointed out that the steep downward grade levels off significantly 200 feet before the roadway intersection with Hanover Road, and is only 2% for 55 feet prior to the intersection, thus meeting PB regulations for subdivision roadways. Immediately after the intersection (which will be the end of Johnson Road), Hanover Road is nearly level for about 200 feet before beginning its descent, at -8% grade, to approach the cul-de-sac. Dimakarakos explained that since the site slopes downward as one heads east, it
requires land cuts for Johnson Road and fill for Hanover Road.
Hoffman reiterated the PB’s concern with the -8% grade area of Hanover Road, particularly as there is a gradual S-curve at that section of roadway. He pointed out that if a car loses control in the curve, it is very difficult to recover control on the steep decline. The PB discussed several possible plan alterations with the applicant toward alleviating the steep grade and turn combination at this location, with Chair Epstein requesting that the entire design minimize grades on all curves to less than 8%, and Dimakarakos agreed to address this.
The PB also reviewed the plans for cut and fill areas around the Hanover Road cul-del-sac. Dimakarakos said the plan will take advantage of a natural depression in the center as a detention basin, for which there will be a planting scheme. He added that an overall landscape plan has not yet been developed. When asked if the cul-de-sac could be smaller, Dimakarakos pointed out that the 160-foot diameter was necessary for minimum zoning frontage of the lots on the cul-de-sac. A change from circular to teardrop shape was discussed, as it may be more maneuverable with fire equipment. Freedman suggested that a change to teardrop shape may also help keep this roadway further away from a nearby wetland, thereby possibly alleviating one of ConsComm’s concerns, and Dimakarakos agreed to look into
this. Chair Epstein and Freedman requested that the pavement width be reduced to 18 feet around the cul-de-sac and at the intersection of Hanover and Johnson, and Rob West, agent for the applicant, agreed.
Planning Administrator Mansfield suggested that all of Hanover Road from the intersection with Johnson to the cul-de-sac, could be narrowed to 18 feet proposed width and the roadway would still conform to the Town bylaws, and added that the actual roadway does not have to be centered within the right of way, which would allow more leeway in avoiding wetlands. The applicant agreed to a narrower roadway in this area, and to explore the offset.
The applicant’s engineer then reviewed each of the proposed common driveways in detail. Proposed common drive A (not to be named, as it will serve only 2 lots) would be located near the cul-de-sac of Hanover Road, with a proposed width of 14 feet, and a length of 563 feet. Dimakarakos explained that the applicant has already agreed to lower this proposed drive to reduce potential impact on a nearby vernal pool. Members of the PB pointed out that in their recent site visit to developments within Town, they observed that 14 feet offers no significant improvement over 12 feet in terms of vehicle passing, and asked that on these very limited activity common drives the width be limited to 12 feet per the PB Rules and Regulations. The Board stressed the importance of minimizing the width of common
drive A as it is in an environmentally sensitive area. The applicant agreed to this request.
Proposed common drive B (to be called Gormley Way) would serve 3 lots . While the current design calls for an initial -3% grade followed by a -10% grade, Dimakarakos explained that the downward grade will likely lessen due to the changes to the proposed Hanover Road layout discussed previously. He added that while this drive was initially proposed with a 14 foot width, the applicant now prefers a 16 foot width, seeking to better balance its appearance with the width of Hanover Road. The cul-de-sac pavement width is planned for 20 feet, which the applicant stated is the Fire Department’s preference, and a planted detention basin is planned for its center. While the PB accepted the applicant’s preference, Chair Epstein instructed the applicant that if there is any environmental benefit to
narrowing the drive to 14 feet in certain places to please do so.
Proposed common drives C and D (now to become drives B and C) each will serve 2 lots, and have a similar grade profile, beginning at about -3% grade, increasing to a -10% grade, then leveling off considerably. Both are short driveways of about 400 feet. In both cases, the applicant proposed 14 foot width and 2 foot shoulders, with one T-turnaround on each drive. The Board requested that both drives be 12 feet wide, since they serve only 2 homes each, thereby reducing the amount of impervious surface and reducing runoff. Since the drives are short and have T- turnarounds, the PB agreed to waive the requirement of a turnout at the 300 foot mark. The applicant agreed to the 12 foot width for these drives, but stated his preference for a wider drive.
For Sorli Way, a common drive that will serve 5 lots, the proposed width is 18 feet, with 20 foot wide pavement on the cul-de-sac, and sloped granite curbing. Due to the proposed width, no turnouts were proposed. The PB asked for a width reduction to 16 feet for the drive, and the applicant agreed. The PB agreed to the cul-de-sac pavement width of 20 feet.
Chair Epstein confirmed that the applicant felt they had all necessary information to determine required cut and fill areas, and could proceed with their redesign and the drainage design. West added that the trails easements have been agreed upon.
Speaking as a citizen, Greg Peterson reported that a boundary agreement has been reached between Carlisle Conservation Foundation (CCF) and the landowner (Grant Wilson) as to where the land under Conservation Restriction is located, and that the peer review surveyor has confirmed the locations and recommended boundary markers. He added that the boundary agreement will be provided to the PB for information purposes.
At this point, Nathan moved and Gonzales seconded the continuation of this hearing to March 10, 2008 at 7:45 pm. Planning Administrator Mansfield agreed to provide the applicant a list of the PB’s action items on this project. Chair Epstein summarized that at the next hearing the PB would like to review detail on cut and fill, landscaping, drainage, pathways, and trails. Dimakarakos indicated that drainage info would not be ready for discussion at the next meeting. Previously, the BP had agreed to move their second March meeting from the 24th to the 31st.
Nathan moved to continue this public hearing to March 31, 2008 at 7:45 pm. Hoffman seconded the amended motion, and it passed unanimously (7-0).
Request for recommendation on proposed amendment to the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws, Sec. 4.7, Intensity and Dimensional Requirements, Height Exceptions, to allow wind turbine facilities by special permit (Request of the Board of Selectmen)
Peterson resumed his PB role at this point. Planning Administrator Mansfield had previously informed the PB that the BOS has requested that the PB hold a hearing and make a recommendation on a Bylaw Revision Article placed on the warrant for the May 5, 2008 Town Meeting by the BOS. As currently written by the BOS, this warrant article would amend the Zoning Bylaws to allow wind turbine facilities to exceed maximum height requirements by special permit. This amendment would be to the dimensional requirements section of the Bylaws, and does not establish whether the facility would be considered accessory use in residential districts, or a primary use. It also does not designate the special permit granting authority, which places it under ZBA jurisdiction by default. The PB is required to hold a
public hearing no later than April 14, 2008 and make its recommendation to Town Meeting. Any changes to add specifics to the proposed amendment would be needed by March 11. Mansfield added that he had been informed that bills pending before the legislature might potentially establish a 40B-like status for energy-producing uses for towns with no specific Bylaw in place.
Peterson spoke to this issue, providing written information on windmill bylaws. He pointed out that a model bylaw, developed a few years ago by the State, is under revision to add an architectural component, and is expected to be completed soon. He said that the State has integrated wind maps into the GIS data. According to the State GIS data, for which he provided a web address, Carlisle does not have a single location that the state has identified for even a small scale residential turbine for generation of 5-10 KW. Peterson confirmed that he had spoken with a State office who questioned whether the FAA would allow wind turbine towers within 8 miles around Hanscom airport. Peterson noted that he had read the pending State bills and had not been able to identify sections that would create a
40B like systems for siting wind turbine facilities. Peterson noted that for many years the State’s Energy Facilities Siting Board has had the jurisdiction to overrule local permitting with respect to very large wind turbine facilities and that he was aware of discussions at the State level that might give the EFSB enhanced jurisdictions, perhaps for wind generating facilities as small as 5 MWatts, which will likely not be done in Carlisle because of topographic, wind speed and FAA limitations to which he previously referred.
Peterson concluded that in light of this information, it might not be useful to be deliberate in developing an accessory use wind turbine bylaw. He suggested that the Town Administrator ask the BOS to withdraw this petition and that, if a wind turbine by law is to be developed, the bylaw should take into consideration the Personal Wireless Facility bylaw, aesthetic and property value and neighbor impact issues and its context be thoroughly considered.
Peterson then spoke to the physical requirements of a wind turbine. Since significant wind turbulence is caused by any obstructions, the US Department of Energy is on record as suggesting that the lowest point of the bottom blade rotation of the turbine must be 30 feet above the height of the nearest obstacle within 300 feet. Therefore, given an approximate 70 foot treeline, the bottom of the lowest blade should be at 100 feet, making the overall turbine height well over 100 feet. Also, the tower structure for residential power generation is generally a lattice tower with guy wires to enable lowering of the tower for maintenance, which conflicts with the provisions of the Personal Wireless Facility bylaw.
While the state is organizing a rebate system with the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative (MTC) for up to ¼ the cost of the turbine, if good electrical generating efficiency cannot be demonstrated, the facility owner may not be eligible for a rebate.
Peterson added that the wind farms planned for the Texas panhandle would generate on the order of 25 GW of electricity, and will be the prototype for European offshore (over-the-horizon) grids to be placed in such locations as the North Sea and Bay of Biscay.
Planning Administrator Mansfield pointed out that if the BOS does not withdraw their warrant article, the PB must hold a hearing on the issue by April 14th, with advertising required by March 24th.
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 27 School Street (Map 22, Lot 5) on property owned by the First Religious Society.
The applicant had requested continuation of this public hearing. Larson moved and Peterson seconded the continuation of this hearing to March 10, 2008 at 7:45 pm. The motion was approved unanimously (7-0).
Notice of receipt of application for Common Driveway Special Permit for 268 Fiske Street (Map 30, Parcel 11), for setting the date of a public hearing and assignment of a review engineer. (John Ballantine, applicant)
Chair Epstein asked Planning Administrator Mansfield to schedule the opening of this hearing for 9:15 pm on March 31, 2008.
Discussion of potential amendments to Special Permit Rules and Regulations for Accessory Apartments to incorporate zoning bylaw amendments (Sec. 5.6) approved 5/06, DHCD regulatory agreement and LIP guidelines.
The PB agreed to discuss this item at their next meeting on March 10, 2008.
Highland Building Study Committee
Hoffman will provide an update on this at the next meeting.
At 10:45 pm, Larson moved and Peterson seconded the adjournment of the PB meeting. The motion was approved 7-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gretchen Caywood
Administrative Assistant
Carlisle Planning Board
| 
