Town of Carlisle
MASSACHUSETTS 01741
------------
Office of
PLANNING BOARD
66 Westford Street
Carlisle, Massachusetts 01741
Tel. (978) 369-9702
Fax (978) 369-4521
Minutes
March 8, 2010
Minutes 2/22/10
Bills
Budget
Town Meeting warrant
Review of Town Caucus
State Ethics Law training
Open Meeting Law amendments
Associate Member positions
Liaison Reports
Hanover Hill Definitive Subdivision Plan
Review of recommendations regarding the revision of the Carlisle Zoning Bylaws and various Boards' Rules and Regulations to establish a comprehensive set of regulations and/or a land use and development bylaw [Amendments to Subdivision, conservation Cluster, Common Driveway & SROSC regs.]
Continued Public Hearing for proposed amendments to the Rules & Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land, last revised 6/10/02
Consideration of amendments to Zoning Bylaw Sec. 7.6 and Rules and Regulations for Site Plan Review (Request of Board of Selectmen)
Consideration of proposed amendments to zoning map of Wetlands/Flood Hazard overlay district boundaries to conform with revised FIRM maps effective 6/4/10 (Request of Town Administrator)
Request for review of application for Comprehensive Permit for Benfield Farms, 273 South Street (Map 5, Lots 7-1 thru 7-4) with Zoning Board of Appeals (10/24/09 - Neighborhood of Affordable Housing [NOAH], applicant) (Request of Board of Appeals - 11/5/09)
Request for certification of satisfaction of Special Permit conditions #16 (Conservation Cluster) and #9 (Common Driveway) to complete Trillium Way in Greystone Crossing (Cross Street) to binder course, so to allow building permits to issue for lots served by that way. (Request of Stamski & McNary, Inc.)
Request for release of escrow account to assure the successful completion of street tree planting requirements on Carriage Way (Request of William Costello).
Chair David Freedman called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm in the Clark Room of Town Hall. Members Michael Epstein, Marc Lamere, Tom Lane, Kent Gonzales, and Planning Administrator George Mansfield were present. Member Carol Nathan arrived at 8:02 pm. Member Nathan Brown was absent.
Gretchen Caywood, Administrative Assistant to the Planning Board, Alan Carpenito (South Street), Jeffrey Johnson (Tophet Rd), William Costello (Concord, MA), and Bob Zielinski (Carlisle Mosquito) were also in attendance.
Minutes
The PB reviewed the draft Minutes from the PB meeting of 2/22/10, and a few revisions were suggested. Epstein moved to approve the Minutes as amended, Lamere seconded, and the motion was approved 5-0.
Review of Town Caucus
Chair Freedman reported that town resident Jeff Johnson had contacted Planning Administrator Mansfield expressing interest in running for an elected seat on the PB. Vice Chair Epstein then spoke with him and provided him with the PB's section of the Annual Town Report along with the Summary of PB Work Initiatives that had previously been prepared by Mansfield for submission to the new Town Administrator. There are candidates for all three PB member positions that are becoming available, with members Freedman and Lamere having been nominated at the Caucus to continue for another term, and with Jeff Johnson having been nominated at the Caucus for the third open member position. Chair Freedman pointed out that Johnson is an attorney whose undergraduate studies involved town planning, and who also has experience as a surveyor. Freedman thanked Johnson, in attendance this evening, for his interest in the PB. He pointed out that both Associate Member PB positions are open, and
suggested Mosquito reporter Bob Zielinski might wish to note this in his meeting article.
State Ethics Law training
Planning Administrator Mansfield reminded the PB that the deadline for completing the mandatory on-line Ethics Law training (conflict of interest) is April 2, and that all Board and Committee members and Town Hall staff must complete the training course, and provide a completion certificate to the Town Clerk.
Liaison Reports
Lamere reported on the activities of the Trails Committee. He noted that they are working to complete the Notice of Intent (NOI) approval process with ConsComm to finish the Hanover Hill boardwalks, and anticipate that the process will be complete by the end of April or early May. He explained that the applicant (Wilkins Hill Realty) is seeking to have the Town pay for the costs associated with public hearings on this process.
Continued Public Hearing for proposed amendments to the Rules & Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land, last revised 6/10/02
Chair Freedman explained that on reviewing the proposed amendments to these Regulations, and considering the scope of revisions that can be considered at this time, based on the description in the public hearing advertisement, and the extent of review requested of other Boards and Committees, Town Counsel's opinion is that the proposed changes to the pathways section of the Regulations should not be put forward at this time. The PB reviewed the latest draft of the proposed amended Regulations, and noted that the few other proposed changes beyond the elements specifically advertized were minor clarifications. A few grammatical changes were suggested.
Lamere moved to approve the proposed revisions to the Carlisle Planning Board Rules and Regulations governing the Subdivision of Land, dated January 23, 1989 and last revised this date, 3/8/10, as reflected in the draft reviewed at this meeting, except on p. 13 Section 6 changing the word "consultation" to "consultations". Gonzales seconded the motion.
Chair Freedman asked for comments from the public, and there were none. When voted, the motion was approved 5-0. Administrative Assistant Caywood will finalize the document, providing a copy for certification by the Town Clerk and posting them on the PB's section of the Town's website: www.carlislema.gov.
Chair Freedman proposed that at the next PB meeting (3/22/10), the PB begin general discussion of the next step of Subdivision Regulations revisions, where the PB will outline the points that need to be addressed. The revisions may include a consideration of recent changes to the State's Stormwater Regulations. The PB will then determine whether to begin revisions of the Conservation Cluster, Common Drive and Senior Residential Open Space Regulations at this time, none of which require a public hearing, or to wait until the completion of the second phase of Subdivision Regulations revisions. Vice Chair Epstein said that in his opinion it would be worth incorporating Attachments A-D into these other regulations soon, and not waiting until the completion of further revisions to Subdivision regulations.
C. Nathan arrived at this point.
Gonzales moved to close the public hearing on proposed amendments to the Subdivision Regulations, Lamere seconded, and the motion was approved 6-0.
Consideration of amendments to Zoning Bylaw Sec. 7.6 and Rules and Regulations for Site Plan Review (Request of Board of Selectmen)
Chair Freedman noted that he and Epstein will present proposed Bylaw revisions as well as proposed Site Plan Review Regulation revisions to the BOS at their meeting tomorrow night. Epstein explained that the purpose of the revisions is to take some application requirements out of the Bylaw and incorporate them into the Regulations in order to allow more flexibility when reviewing an application and to clarify process. He recalled the recent Site Plan Review applications for Ferns and for Assurance Technology, and that the application and review process for these projects had illustrated that revisions to these documents would be helpful. Epstein pointed out that if the BOS decides to go forward with the proposed Bylaw revisions, the PB will advertize and hold a public hearing on the changes at which time the public will
have full opportunity to provide comment.
The PB reviewed the proposed Regulations. The revised Regulations require that, where necessary, a Construction Management Plan (CMP) be submitted by the applicant, and also outline its required content. The revised Regulations recommend that an applicant have a pre-application conference with the Planning Administrator, and clearly designate the Planning Administrator as the point of coordination of the application process with and among the various Boards and Committees involved and with the applicant. They also suggest that the applicant submit an informal conceptual plan to the PB before the application is officially filed, and suggest basic content for the conceptual plan. Some application submission requirements have been removed from the Bylaw and incorporated into the Regulations. In this way, listed
requirements that may not be relevant to a specific application can be waived by the BOS.
Regarding the proposed revisions to this Bylaw, Planning Administrator Mansfield pointed out the new Section 7.6.4 which directs the BOS to promulgate new Site Plan Review Regulations as necessary to coincide with revisions to the Bylaw. The revisions also increase the time allowed for PB review of the application (and report to BOS) to 45 days (from 35), and allow for extension of that time by the BOS Chair.
The PB had received comments from the Conservation Administrator on the Site Plan Review Regulations, particularly to Article IV, Sec. 12(a) regarding clarification of types of work that should be limited to the hours of construction. Pertaining to Exhibit A #8 of these Regulations, the Conservation Administrator suggested that the plan requirements include the applicant disclosing whether there is any proposed work within a Priority Habitat or Estimated Habitat for rare and endangered species, or whether the project has been submitted to the MA Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program.
Chair Freedman noted that the public hearing on these Regulations and this Bylaw will be during the April 12th PB meeting.
Request for certification of satisfaction of Special Permit conditions #16 (Conservation Cluster) and #9 (Common Driveway) to complete Trillium Way in Greystone Crossing (Cross Street) to binder course, so to allow building permits to issue for lots served by that way. (Request of Stamski & McNary, Inc.)
Planning Administrator Mansfield reported that Stamski & McNary, Inc., engineers for this project, have requested the PB engineer's certification that the Trillium Way common drive has been completed to binder and the drainage facilities are constructed properly. Per Condition #16 of the Special Permit Decision on this project, this certification will allow building permits to issue on the 4 lots served by that roadway. The other two common drives in this conservation cluster, Greystone Lane and Captain Wilson Lane, are already certified to that level, but this would be the first review of this common drive. Mansfield is expecting a report from the PB's consulting engineer (LandTech). Once he provides his recommendations, the PB will review them. The applicant, William Costello, was present, and explained to
Chair Freedman that this binder course and drainage facilities have been in place for some time. Mansfield will pursue LandTech for their input on Trillium Way.
Costello confirmed to Mansfield that three of the 15 lots in this conservation cluster have been built out. Chair Freedman asked Costello about when the stockpile of soil and rubble on Lot 11, adjacent to this common driveway and to Cross Street, will be removed. Costello explained that this was the only open space on the site available for storage, and that the stockpiled material is to be used on that lot. On discussion, the applicant agreed to reduce the height of the stockpile and to move it farther back on that lot to make it less visible.
Concerning the footpath along Cross Street, Chair Freedman asked Costello when the footpath would be finished, and noted that the pathway has been adversely affected by water runoff. Freedman referred to Finding #6 of the Special Permit Decision, and noted that the footpath was designed to be a benefit to the Town, providing safe passage along the entire frontage of the site, but does not do so until it is completed. He asked whether the runoff affecting the footpath is related to driveway construction, and what needs to be done to assure that stormwater runoff does not negatively impact the footpath. Costello explained that while the drainage facilities have been finalized, the gravel base of the footpath has not been set yet, and that the washout is just from excavation work on the footpath. Costello
added that the footpath is about 60% done and will be finished before the last two lots in the project are released, but that there is no set immediate timeframe for work. Chair Freedman understood that the economic slowdown has delayed the rate of progress on the project overall, and therefore on the footpath work, but noted that the PB had considered but had not set a timeframe for footpath completion in the Special Permit decision.
Costello also informed the PB that a representative of the Fire Department had requested changes to the PB approved plans, and has indicated that the FD will not sign off unless the changes are made, thereby preventing the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for these lots. Costello noted that in his experience in other towns, it is the Planning Board, and not the Fire Department, that has final say on what is built in conjunction with the construction of development roadways. According to Costello, the Fire Department representative has asked for, among other items, different fixtures on the cisterns, certain specific plantings near the cisterns, and increases in the turning radii onto Greystone Lane. Costello was concerned that these changes, since not on the PB-approved plans, would be clearly noted as changes on the final
As-Built plans submitted by Stamski & McNary.
Chair Freedman asked Mansfield if he was aware of this situation, and he said that he was not. Chair Freedman explained that the PB should be informed before any changes are made, and he asked Costello to send to the PB copies of any written requests for changes from the Fire Chief as well as a written description of all such requests for changes. The PB will then discuss this information. Freedman thanked Costello for bringing this to light, as any changes to the approved plans are within the PB's jurisdiction. He noted that it would be too late if the changes didn't come up until the time of the As-Built plan at project completion. In response to a question, Costello indicated that some of the requested changes might be within wetland buffer areas or trigger a scenic road hearing. Chair Freedman also asked
Costello to contact the PB office if there were any further requests for plan changes from the Fire Department. Costello noted that the changes had not yet been made to the turning radii in the asphalt but that some grading had been done in preparation for the change. Freedman instructed him not to make them until the PB has reviewed them, determined if they are acceptable field changes or if they would require amended plans, and then only if the changes are approved. Mansfield confirmed from Costello that the Fire Department had not requested changes to the turning radii for Trillium Way.
Request for release of escrow account to assure the successful completion of street tree planting requirements on Carriage Way (Request of William Costello).
Planning Administrator Mansfield reported that DPW Superintendent and Tree Warden Davis has viewed the trees and reported in writing that they are in acceptable condition. He said that it is therefore appropriate for the PB to release the funds ($5000) held in escrow on 1/25/08.
C. Nathan moved that the PB release the remaining escrow, in the amount of $5000 plus accrued interest, on the Carriage Way subdivision, having received a written report from the DPW Superintendent that the trees are in good health, completing the outstanding requirement of the Certificate of Performance and Lot Release dated January 25, 2008.. Lane seconded, and the motion was approved 6-0. Mansfield will determine the exact amount of the release from the Town Treasurer.
Consideration of proposed amendments to zoning map of Wetlands/Flood Hazard overlay district boundaries to conform with revised FIRM maps effective 6/4/10 (Request of Town Administrator)
Planning Administrator Mansfield explained that, since there had been as yet no further clarification from Town Counsel or the State about exactly how and when this Bylaw needed to be revised, at the PB's request, he sent a detailed memo to the Conservation Administrator, the BOS and Town Administrator Goddard providing the background of communications from the DCR's Division of Water Supply Protection - the agency that initially contacted Town Administrator Goddard about FEMA's new Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). His memo explained that DCR has suggested that both the maps and the language of the Bylaws should be amended to coordinate with these changes, and DCR had proposed some general language to insert into the Bylaws. The BOS has put a placeholder Article on the 2010 Warrant regarding amending this section of the Bylaws. Town Administrator Goddard has asked Counsel for specifics on the language for the Article and on exactly what must be done at this Town Meeting. At a
recent Department Heads meeting, Goddard reported that changes to the text and maps must be adopted at this year's Town Meeting, or Carlisle residents would risk losing their eligibility for federal flood insurance, a point which the Conservation Administrator confirmed from her recent attendance at the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissioners (MACC) Annual Environmental Conference.
The PB's role in this process is that it must hold a public hearing on the proposed amendments, and must file a report with recommendations to Town Meeting. The PB also is allowed by law to be the sponsor of the amendments, along with several other groups, but suggests that the BOS would be the appropriate sponsor, with the ConsComm having a role in review of the bylaw. In his memo, Mansfield explained that in making its recommendations to the BOS, the PB therefore needs to know how the proposed changes to this Bylaw may impact ConsComm. He also stressed the urgency of the matter, since any public hearing would need to be held no later than April 12, 2010, with final Warrant language of the proposed Amendments in place by March 23, 2010.
Vice Chair Epstein asked Mansfield to clarify with Goddard whether the Town Administrator and the BOS will be presenting this matter both at the public hearing and at Town Meeting, and Mansfield agreed to do so. Mansfield also reported that Town Counsel (Ross) has submitted his recommended amendments as two articles: one to amend the text and one to amend the zoning maps. Mansfield expressed concern about the second draft Article, and noted that it will eliminate the Assessors' Maps as the medium where the WFHD overlay district is officially shown, and the only other place it would be shown is on a CD. Therefore there will be nothing official in hardcopy to show residents who want to view the maps. Mansfield noted that the boundaries of the flood hazard district on the 2010 maps and the 1988 maps are the
same, and the Conservation Administrator has confirmed this as she was informed at a conference that only the maps of coastal communities have changed, with our maps having only added information and notations. Mansfield added that on looking in past records, when the bylaw was last amended in 1988 the article and motion were worded similarly to Town Counsel's current proposal, but the article was postponed on the floor of Town Meeting and reintroduced the next night with new language, re-establishing the Assessor's Map sheets as the overlay zoning map for this district. There is apparently no record of why this was done.
The PB reviewed the history of the development of the WFHD, noting that the Wetlands District was defined in 1976, the Flood Hazard District in 1975, and that they were combined in 1980. They discussed the possibility of separating the two districts once again, and whether that would be helpful in this situation, since it is only the Flood Hazard District that will have changes to its maps. Mansfield and Lamere agreed to look further for a reasonable approach and to coordinate with the Town Administrator.
PB Meeting Schedule
The PB cancelled their April 26th meeting, and rescheduled it to Monday, May 3, 2010.
Request for review of application for Comprehensive Permit for Benfield Farms (Map 5, Lots 7-1 thru 7-4) with Zoning Board of Appeals (10/24/09 - Neighborhood of Affordable Housing [NOAH], applicant) (Request of Board of Appeals - 11/5/09)
Chair Freedman reminded the PB about the upcoming continued public hearing on this project this Wednesday, at which time changes to the initial plan will be presented, and the site walk on Friday, March 12th at 8:00 am. He noted that the Land Stewardship Committee and ConsComm have submitted a memo with comments concerning the applicant's original list of requested waivers, as has the Board of Health, but that a revised list of requested waivers is expected from the applicant.
Vice Chair Epstein pointed out that he did not have the opportunity to speak (as a citizen) to the BOS regarding the February 13, 2010 letter from Housing Authority Chair Lehotsky (see Minutes of February 22, 2010 PB meeting), and so, as a citizen, he had written an email to the BOS expressing his concerns about the allegations by the CHA Chair and requesting that the BOS do a thorough investigation. It is now a part of public record with the BOS, and he is awaiting a response from the BOS. Chair Freedman said that he has spoken with Selectman Hult regarding these concerns, and Chair Hult intends to reach out to the Housing Authority Chair requesting evidence for the allegations.
Hanover Hill Definitive Subdivision Plan (Approved 6/9/08)
The PB discussed the applicant's interest in combining lots at this subdivision for tax purposes, the applicant having already requested this of the assessor. Planning Administrator Mansfield informed the PB that he has told Rob West (agent for the applicant on this project) that they must submit a surveyed plan to the PB. After discussion, the PB asked Mansfield to coordinate with Town Assessor Melissa Stamp and then to confirm with Town Counsel via the Town Administrator, as to whether the submission of an ANR plan is required to combine lots for any purpose. Since the Subdivision Plan is recorded at the Registry of Deeds, this may be required. Chair Freedman made the analogy that if a property owner wishes to combine two lots in common ownership, they must submit an ANR plan.
At 10:35 pm, C. Nathan moved and Lamere seconded the adjournment of the PB meeting. The motion was approved 6-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gretchen Caywood
Administrative Assistant
Carlisle Planning Board
| 
