PLANNING BOARD
MARCH 26, 2008
MINUTES
Members Present: Michael Cole-Acting Chairman, Leslie-Ann Morse, Craig Nightingale-Clerk, Peter McDonald, Howard Sandler, Don Andersen (Alternate) and Tom Johnson (Alternate).
Members Absent: Debbie Abbott.
Staff Present: Michael Ferreira-Assistant Town Administrator, Sarah Raposa-Town Planner, Melody Gulow, Appeals Clerk.
Acting Chairman Michael Cole called the meeting to order at 5:00 PM.
Chairman explained the purposes of this public hearing to get public input and to decide if the Planning Board will recommend the proposed Zoning By-Laws be put on the Town Warrant. Any specific changes the public wants to make to these By-Laws must be put in writing to the Town Moderator for discussion at the Town Meeting. This meeting is not a referendum on whether to have wind turbines. The public will be invited to briefly speak, public discussion will be closed, and the Board will then make their decision.
EASTHAM ZONING BY-LAWS - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS -
(Attached and made a permanent record hereto.)
Chairman explained the following as “housekeeping” amendments making administrative changes.
Section XIII.D. - Site Plan Approval
Town Planner, Sarah Raposa recommends we keep the Return Receipt Required cards to confirm the mailing of notices. The concern has been the cost but a fee change can be done through the Board of Selectmen.
A MOTION was made by Howard Sandler and Seconded by Craig Nightingale to Withdraw By-Law XIII.D.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None.
Section XIV -Site Plan Approval
This is the correction of an error in the site reference.
MOTION was made by Leslie-Ann Morse and Seconded by Peter McDonald to recommend amended By-Law Section XIV.C.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None.
Section XIV.G. - Site Plan Approval - Appeal
Leslie-Ann Morse sees no need for this change as Residential Site Plan Reviews are not recorded with the Barnstable Registry which is the reason the 10-day appeal period versus 20-day appeal period was questioned. Town Planner said the Town Clerk feels a 20-day appeal period would be appropriate and consistent.
MOTION was made by Leslie-Ann Morse and Seconded by Craig Nightingale to withdraw the proposed change to By-Law Section XIV.G.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None.
Section II - Submission and Approval of Plans - 2.3.4 Notification of Abutters
MOTION was made by Leslie-Ann Morse and Seconded by Peter McDonald to amend this Article by leaving in Return Receipt Required and accepting the addition of the word “seven” before the number 7.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None.
Chairman announced the following Wind Turbine Bylaws submitted by the Board of Selectmen.
ARTICLE 33
Section III. - Administration - Special Permits
This By-Law makes the Planning Board the special permit granting authority for wind energy facilities.
MOTION was made by Howard Sandler and Seconded by Leslie-Ann Morse to recommend this By-Law with the understanding that it is withdrawn if the Wind Turbine By-Law is not accepted.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None
ARTICLE 34
Section XII.G.
This By-Law empowers the Planning Board with the ability to impose a fee for the contracting of outside consultants.
MOTION was made by Peter McDonald and Seconded by Leslie-Ann Morse to recommend this By-Law.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None
ARTICLE 35
Section III - Definitions
Utility Scale Wind Facility
Fred Kendrick: Concerned it eliminates net metering.
On-Site Wind Facility
Chairman suggested to Mr. Kendrick that this may address his concerns.
Attorney Skiba commented on building regulations.
Height
No Comments.
Rated Nameplate Capacity
Noted these are not in alphabetical order.
Wind Facility
No Comments.
Wind Monitoring and Meteorological Tower
No Comments.
Wind Turbine
No Comments.
Receptors
Fred Kendrick: There is a different way of measuring now by shooting air upwards.
MOTION was made by Leslie-Ann Morse and Seconded by Craig Nightingale to recommend this By-Law.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None
ARTICLE 36 - PRIVATE WIND ENERGY FACILITIES
Section I - Purpose
Henry Fisher: Would like to see the word “encourage” changed to “allow.”
Section II - Applicability
Peter McDonald questioned the change from 25 kW to 60kW that was not in the By-Laws reviewed at the Planning Board’s March 19th Work Session. Suggest a review of this By-Law for misspellings and incorrect grammar.
Section III - Definitions
Safety Radius (Noted misspelling.)
Section IV - General Siting Standards
Special Permit
No Comments.
Height
No Comments.
Setbacks
Paul Lothrop: Concerned a problem might arise when one or both properties change hands.
Joe Bianci: These height and setback restrictions will eliminate most lots in Town and with that in mind the Board should consider pulling this By-Law. Planning Board should work to revise this By-Law and submit it next year.
Fencing
No Comments.
Signage
No Comments.
Noise
Howard Gostin: Referred to recent study costing $10,000 and would an individual be burdened with an expense like that. Chairman referred him to Section 5.2.b.
Abandonment
No Comments.
Section V - Application
1.a. - e.
Pamela Hesse: Questioned setback figures.
2.a. - c.
Joe Bianci: Suggested eliminating or making acceptable to manufacturer’s standards.
Phil Hesse: They need to be certified to withstand 120 mph sustained winds that may occur in a hurricane.
Section VI - Waivers
Robert Alexander: Is there anything presently in place that would prevent someone from experimenting with a small unit below 30 feet? Board directed speaker to the Building Inspector.
Sandra Bayne: Suggest making the period for disconnection 18 months or 2 years rather than 12 months. Board said any request for an extension could be brought before the Planning Board.
Closed public comment portion.
Board discussed the changes in the Board of Selectmen’s Wind Turbine By-Laws not being approved by them prior to this meeting prevents the Planning Board taking any action on them at this meeting. The Board of Selectmen will be meeting tomorrow, Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. The public is invited to attend that meeting.
Town Planner understood that any changes that were not substantive could be made and not prevent the Planning Board from acting on them.
Chairman said the creator of the Article has to vote on the Article and there is no way around that. Board felt some of the changes were substantive. Board can comment on them but will be unable to take any action on recommendation at this time.
Chairman called for Board comments.
Leslie-Ann Morse: Shocked at the change from 25kW to 60kW which is a much greater impact on the neighbors. No concern over the safety radius. Decreased setbacks is a shock and the fencing height of 6 feet is too. The decommissioning is totally inadequate and the Town needs to assure they do not get stuck with anything. Noise analysis includes flicker but needs to include shadow as well.
Peter McDonald: The changes made do incorporate our concerns. The 60kW would power two houses and applicant can apply for smaller from the Planning Board. No problem with setbacks for public safety. Need to consider shadow in noise analysis.
Howard Sandler: This is too complicated and should be made simple with back-up regulations that can be changed as technology and our experience changes.
Don Andersen: Fencing concerns but waivers should cover.
Michael Cole: Regarding safety radius we have to start dealing with the fact that these will be built on structures.
MOTION was made by Leslie-Ann Morse and Seconded by Howard Sandler to continue until the next scheduled Planning Board meeting.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None
ARTICLE 37
Section XX - Commercial Wind Energy Facilities
Lauren Preston Wells: “Property Values” should be left in.
Howard Gosten: Setbacks are low and concerned we are sacrificing safety. Eastham is the only Town that violates safety recommendations. Industrial turbines are very complex and the regulations can not be done in two pages. Many Town By-Laws are copies from samples given by an energy conglomerate in Massachusetts and they want no regulations at all. He gave the Board a letter from the Sierra Club regarding research they have done on commercial wind turbines.
Russ French: Representing the Finance Committee, he read paragraphs that will be going into the Town Report suggesting that the need for more revenue might come from wind energy. Right now the main source of revenue comes from property taxes and if the turbines could be amassed, this might be our second source. They recommend the Board of Selectmen articles but do not recommend the Petition By-Law.
Lauren Preston Wells: The noise analysis is the most important part of the By-Law. Noise may have adversely impact on rentals and that could be a huge financial impact on the Town.
Joe Quinn: Regarding revenue, his calculations approximate only $200 per person per year
Larry Lewis: Gave a visual presentation on his laptop computer and spoke about the incidences of fire and collapse of the towers occurring in Denmark, Sweden, Scotland, North England with a debris field covering 1,000 meters.
Fran Williamson: The Board of Selectmen’s By-Law is really the Ad Hoc Committee’s By-Law with all the safety precautions crossed off. The prime role of these By-Laws should be to protect the citizens.
Andrew Wells: As a member of the Ad Hoc Committee submitting the Petition Wind Energy By-Law, he spoke of the number of hours committed to creating their By-Law to insure that residents are not negatively impacted. The Board of Selectmen’s By-Law leaves the study to an acoustical engineer and their own methodology and that is just not good enough. He made reference to the problems with the noise study already done in Eastham.
Closed public comment period.
MOTION was made by Leslie-Ann Morse and Seconded by Howard Sandler to postpone any recommendations on this proposed Zoning By-Law until the next Planning Board public hearing.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None
ARTICLE 38
Tom Reilly: On behalf of the Ad Hoc Committee, wanted to emphasis that they did not make their By-Law to preclude wind turbines in Town but to include all the safety measures.
Bob Misterka: Concerned that if the Town does not pass something to legislate commercial wind turbines, the State may institute law that would allow exemptions and the Town will be unable to legislate what happens here in Eastham. Putting wind turbines in residential areas will change residential zoning as we know it.
From the floor multiply speakers addressing the Board asked if they would allow a developer to come into Eastham and build wherever they chose should the Commonwealth legislate law permitting such development. Chairman said he could not imagine the Commonwealth would pass a law so ominous to the Town of Eastham. Our Zoning By-Law amendments will require the Commonwealth’s stamp of approval.
Closed to public comment.
MOTION was made by Leslie-Ann Morse and Seconded by Craig Nightingale to postpone the Petition By-Law Article 38 until the April 9, 2008 Planning Board meeting.
The VOTE: 4-1 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale. OPPOSED: Sandler.
Chairman took questions regarding the procedure.
MOTION was made by Peter McDonald and Seconded by Leslie-Ann Morse to adjourn.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR: Cole, McDonald, Morse, Nightingale, Sandler. OPPOSED: None.
Meeting adjourned at 8:11 p.m.
Craig Nightingale, Clerk
Eastham Planning Board
| 
