Town of Carlisle, MA - Minutes of 3/31/08 PB meeting

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

Chair Michael Epstein called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm in the Clark Room of Town Hall. Members Greg Peterson, Ken Hoffman, Brian Larson, Marc Lamere, Kent Gonzales, Associate Member David Freedman, and Planning Administrator George Mansfield were present. Associate Member Tom Lane was absent. Member Carol Nathan arrived at 7:35 pm.

Gretchen Caywood, assistant to the Planning Administrator, Alan Carpenito (BOS), Alan Cameron (FRS), George Dimakarakos (Stamski & McNary), Rob West (Wilkins Hill Realty, LLC), Paul Alphen (Balas, Alphen & Santos, P.C.), Kim Ahern (Landscape Architect, Littleton, MA), Deb Belanger (Ped/Bike Pathways Committee), David Keast (Westford Street), John and Ann Ballantine (Fiske Street), and Bob Zielinski (Carlisle Mosquito) were also in attendance.

Freedman referred to his written request to the PB dated March 25^th in which he asked the PB for a small amount of funding to cover costs associated with hosting and facilitating this event, such as costs for supplies, custodial fees, and refreshments for attendees. He noted that while the CPC had offered to spread its costs among several donors, it may be preferable to obtain all funding from one source, and asked if the PB could increase their previously agreed to amount of $250 to $500. The work for this event would be conducted entirely

After brief discussion, Chair Epstein confirmed from Freedman that the LCC would report its conclusions to the PB and that any documentation generated by the event would become property of the PB. Treasurer Larson agreed that there are sufficient funds in the Planning and Professional budget line item to cover this amount, and payment by reimbursement was agreed upon. Larson moved and Peterson seconded that the PB approve funding not to exceed $500 for the Livable Carlisle Community’s ‘Day of Community” to be held Saturday, April 5, 2008. The motion was approved unanimously (7-0).

Planning Administrator Mansfield reported that the PB office had requested an extension of time until Friday, April 4^th for the working group to receive PB comments to their draft report. Chair Epstein added that a few PB members had forwarded their comments to him, and that tonight’s goal is to discuss the proposed revisions, and vote on the final response from the PB.

Peterson submitted his comments to the PB in writing, and provided an explanation of these suggestions. He pointed out that since the DHCD is putting a shorter timeframe on 40B review, THAG should have more empowerment to work with the 40B applicant to assure that the application is complete before the official filing date of the application is set.

Peterson recused himself from the PB for this hearing. Planning Administrator Mansfield informed the PB that their review engineer had forwarded his general review of the proposed landscape plan for this project. Rob West had also submitted a revised estimate of pathway costs.

Dimakarakos reported that they have prepared a response letter to all the matters reviewed at the previous hearing and to ConsComm’s issues with the project, and he submitted revised common drive plans, subdivision plans and drainage calculations for the proposed site, all of which would be forwarded to the PB’s peer engineer the next day. The PB engineer will also review the revised landscape plan.

Chair Epstein asked about the status of the pathway plan for this site. West explained that the applicant expects to construct a pathway route from the 872 Westford Street driveway east to 546 Westford Street (Flavin property) on Hanover Hill property. From this point, the applicant will continue the footpath across the front yard at #546 per an easement agreement with the owners, and will proceed easterly within the public right-of-way in front of 514 Westford Street and 19 Virginia Farme Lane. Epstein also indicated that the Selectmen had, at their meeting on March 25th, approved the placement of the pathway within the public right of way at this location. Chair Epstein pointed out that the minutes of prior PB meetings, as well as communications to the Pathways Committee, have indicated that the applicant has agreed to grant an easement for the pathway continuation on Wilkins Hill LLC property westward to the initial section of Curve Street. West indicated that the applicant had agreed to an easement, but with a restriction that no boardwalks would be used to border or traverse wetlands, and said he had pointed out this restriction at a recent BOS meeting.

equipment. She pointed out that Minuteman Park in Concord has several boardwalk structures over wetland areas of the pathway there, and that the boardwalks are made of high strength composite materials that can support heavy equipment. Belanger added that if the applicant were to limit the easement to restrict boardwalks, that limitation could make a pathway continuation impossible in that area, as ConsComm may only allow a boardwalk adjacent to the wetlands. West pointed out that this area is well outside the project, as this parcel (between #872 and Curve) will not be developed. Chair Epstein pointed out that while the applicant is under no obligation to grant an easement in this area, any easement granted should be usable.

Belanger suggested that West visit Minuteman Park in Concord to inspect the boardwalks in that pathway. Planning Administrator Mansfield pointed out that the pedestrian and bike pathways along the Charles River have boardwalks in several areas that are built for equipment use.

Paul Alphen, attorney for the applicant, reported that a pathways easement has been drafted for this proposed pathway at the front of the property, and will be forwarded to the PB. Speaking as a resident, Peterson confirmed from West that the easement area involves both wetland and buffer zone. Belanger said that the particular wetlands involved will be reviewed by ConsComm. She requested that a PB member be tasked out to the Ped/Bike Committee to resolve the boardwalk concerns, and Lamere volunteered. Chair Epstein suggested that the Planning and Conservation Administrators, Gary Davis, and a ConsComm member be involved as well. West agreed to work with this group to resolve the issue.

Belanger reported that the BOS have approved the use of the right-of-way to the east of the proposed site, but they have not yet discussed crosswalks, which may necessitate changes in the pathway depending on their locations. West explained that he had met this morning with TSAC at the site, and that a location halfway between the intersections of Virginia Farme Lane and Munroe Hill with Westford Street is being considered for one crosswalk to cross to the south side of Westford Street. The pathway would then head east ending at the gate at the West edge of Towle Field. This means that an additional 200 feet or so of pathway would be required and, according to West, it would be easy to construct. It would, however, necessitate the removal of 4 trees. Belanger pointed out that the next action item is for the BOS to approve the use of the additional two sections of right-of-way that would be required to extend the pathway to this point. Belanger also pointed out that two additional sidewalks are being considered, but need to be discussed with TSAC Chair Epstein said that the crosswalk sitings are a Town matter, and the applicant need not be responsible for their siting.

Chair Epstein noted that he had reviewed the recording of the March 25^th BOS meeting at which Selectman Hult stressed the importance of assuring that the 3 abutters in this area of the proposed pathway extension are satisfied with the siting of the pathway.. Belanger reported that there are 3 abutters, and that she has contacted each of them. One has responded indicating that they approve of the proposed siting. Another was contacted several times, with no response to date. The third abutter is opposed to the pathway, but at this location there is sufficient room within the Town right-or-way to site the pathway. This last abutter has requested that a leash law be instituted before the pathway is constructed, with signage to reinforce the need to clean up after pets. Belanger added that the residents at 19 Virginia Farme Lane are satisfied with the proposed pathway location in the right-of-way on their property. On the south side of Westford Street, Belanger explained that there is one abutter, and that abutter has recently been contacted.

The PB then discussed the landscape plan for this proposed site. Kim Ahern, Landscape Architect, described that the plans employ the use of native, non-invasive trees and shrubs as much as possible, including red maples, pin oaks and red oaks, tulip trees and birch trees. and other varieties. She added that her plan purposely employs uneven spacing of new tree plantings, and various size plantings for a more natural look. West mentioned that the applicant would like to eliminate the use of certain trees prone to insects and disease, and Ahern agreed to discuss this with him. Freedman suggested substituting another planting for the proposed red maples, as they are prevalent in Carlisle due to the wetlands.

Chair Epstein asked if there are any special plantings that can be used in higher slope areas to mitigate erosion. Ahern will use a slope stabilization seed mix available from New England Wetland Plants, along with a low-growing sumac, in these areas. She also offered that a new set of plans will also show where existing tree removal is proposed. Ahern added that once the PB reviews and approves a particular landscape plan, she will prepare a maintenance plan. Ahern asked the Planning Administrator to provide a copy of a landscape maintenance manual from a prior project to give her an idea of the level of detail sought in the plan. Mansfield replied that the PB had not previously utilized such a manual, except for a site where bioretention design was employed. He suggested that Ahern provide a suggested draft of such a document.

When Freedman asked about plantings along the proposed common driveways, West explained that it would not be possible where the shoulders have been reduced to 2 feet, but in areas of any clearing there will be plantings. He reminded the PB that 2 foot shoulders are proposed to lessen tree removal.

When Chair Epstein mentioned the upcoming Town Elections and potential PB changes, Alphen asked if the PB could vote on the Special Permits before the elections, with a condition that the exercise of the Special Permits is subject to PB approval of the Definitive Subdivision. Chair Epstein reviewed that the remaining PB meetings before elections are: April 14, April 28 and May 12, and one member cannot attend on April 14. Planning Administrator Mansfield said that currently there are 7 members eligible to vote, and after the election there will be 6, unless a member cannot attend on the 14^th. Freedman suggested that if an additional voting member is needed after elections, Gonzales, who will be leaving, could step in as an Associate Member replacing Lane. Chair Epstein agreed to keep Alphen abreast of PB attendees for April 14^th, and of the number of eligible voters for this hearing.

Alphen requested an additional extension of time for PB approval of the Definitive Subdivision plan, and signed a request for extension until Friday, May 23, 2008. Dimakarakos noted that ConsComm will review the plans at their April 10^th meeting. Chair Epstein suggested that it would be helpful if a ConsComm member attend the PB hearing on April 14^th.

Epstein moved and Lamere seconded a motion to accept the requested extension of time for subdivision approval to May 23, 2008, and the motion was approved 7-0. Nathan moved and Gonzales seconded the continuation of this hearing to 8:45 pm on April 14, 2008. The motion was approved 7-0.

George Dimakarakos, engineer for the applicant, provided Mansfield with the mailing receipts for the hearing notices and confirmed the Mosquito advertising dates with the applicant. Mansfield reported that some current PB members had previewed this common driveway in August of 2006 when the Board endorsed an ANR plan creating two lots from this property. That created lot would need its own driveway, or access from a common driveway, to be a buildable lot. In the proposed common drive plan, the common portion (about 265 feet in length) will consist mostly of an existing gravel private drive, with a slight relocation of the entrance to accommodate a new septic system.

Mansfield referred to a memo forwarded to the PB from the Conservation Administrator expressing the Commission’s concern with the closeness of the private drive to the wetlands once it leaves the common driveway easement. The Conservation Commission has requested that the common drive be extended further toward the proposed new house, taking advantage of more of the existing drive, before it splits into two private drives, as this would provide a better separation from the wetlands. Dimakarakos described the common drive plans, indicating where the common drive may be extended.

Chair Epstein asked how the existing drive would need to be altered if it were extended as a common drive. Dimakarakos indicated that it would remain a gravel drive, as the Conservation Restriction on the land requires that the surface be gravel, but that it would need to be widened by a few feet. On discussing driveway width, the

PB said they would be open to keeping the drive at a 10 foot width if the Fire Chief is in agreement. Chair Epstein asked that copies of all Conservation Restriction documents on this property be submitted for the PB file on this application. Dimakarakos will be submitting a revised plan on behalf of the applicant. He added that the Board of Health has held their hearing and has approved the plan.

Planning Administrator Mansfield explained that the applicant has requested a reduction in the $10,000 project review fee, and the PB engineer has provided an estimate of $2500 - $3000 for project review costs, depending on the amount of construction oversight necessary for certain aspects of the project. On discussion, the PB agreed that the risk to reducing the fee is minor, as the applicant must provide more funding if needed. Peterson moved Nathan seconded reducing the project review fee for this application to $3000. The motion was approved unanimously (7-0).

The Board then reviewed a letter from the PB engineering firm, LandTech, detailing their review of this common drive plan. Dimakarakos described that most of the items had been addressed. Regarding drainage mitigation measures, he explained that the common section of the drive is the same as the existing drive, and therefore any increase in runoff should be negligible. Therefore drainage mitigation measures were not proposed on the plan. He agreed to submit a memo to this effect for the PB files. Dimakarakos noted that he did not expect any tree removal along Fiske Street. All were in agreement that the common drive will not be named.

This site appears to be located within a Natural Heritage Estimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife, and this and certain other issues are being or will be discussed with ConsComm. Also, the applicant is working with the Fire Department to assure adequate access of their equipment to the property.

Hoffman inquired about the abutters’ satisfaction with the proposed plan. John Ballantine (applicant) explained that one neighbor does not like the proximity of the septic system to the edge of Fiske Street across from their house. Ballantine had looked into possibly moving the septic fields back 25 feet, but this would have required a waiver according to septic regulations in effect at that time, as it would place the septic/leaching fields in a buffer zone. Ballantine added that while certain neighbors have some other concerns about a new house being built on the new lot, and about possible trail easements and a canoe launch area, they do not have any concerns with the proposed common driveway. Dimakarakos pointed out the location of the trail easement on the plans.

Housing Authority (HA) Chair Alan Lehotsky had forwarded an email to the PB containing their suggestions and comments regarding the PB’s proposed Affordable Accessory Apartment (AAA) Rules and Regulations. Planning Administrator Mansfield reported that he had discussed these comments with Elizabeth Barnett, Administrative Coordinator, in preparation for the Board’s discussion tonight.

Lamere reported on the recent Historical Commission (CHC) meeting, and reminded the PB that regarding the Omnipoint application for a facility at First Religious Society (FRS), Omnipoint has not yet filed an application with the CHC. He added that Sprint had filed an application which was approved by the CHC with specific instructions for screening of HVAC equipment and location of the GPS antenna.

Lamere also reported that he had briefly discussed the Wireless RFP (under preparation) with the CHC. They had expressed concern about sight lines of facilities in the Historic District, and the effect on the character of the town center. Lamere had asked the CHC how the Historic District boundary can be verified, and they felt that this would be difficult. The proposed Town Hall site is near the Historic District, and there is interest in knowing the exact proximity. Chair Epstein asked Lamere to advise the Town Administrator on his discussion with the CHC, and that the Wireless RFP project should continue forward.