HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Board Packet 10/14/20 supplementalSPECIAL PERMIT AMD SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPLICATION #2020-10
APPLICANT: DISTRIBUTED SOLAR DEVELOPMENT, LLC
PROPERTY: 1000 FREEMANS WAY
(CAPTAINS GOLF COURSE)
nn St.
From: Bill Barnstead <billbarnstead@comcast.net>
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2020 8:15 AM
To: Lynn St. Cyr
Cc: chuckhansoncc@gmail.com
Subject: solar canopy
Members of the Planning Board:
As a former member of the Energy Committee and past member of the Captains golf course I urge the board to accept
the revised design layout for the proposed Solar Canopies Project at Captains. Approval of this plan represents a small
step in offsetting the dependence and use of nuclear and fossil fuels.
Bill Barnstead
Lynn St. Cyr
From: ginrak5@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2020 1:11 PM
To: Lynn St. Cyr
Subject: Solar Panels
To whom it may concern.-
My
oncern:
My name is Karnig(Karney) Ovian, 16 Sand Bar Ln., Brewster, Ma..
I am in favor of the latest revised diagrams of the installation of Solar Panels on the golf course parking area as presented
by CVEC.
It will give us green energy as well as needed income for our golf course.
Thank you, Karney
Lynn St. Cyr
From: Paul Taccini <ptaccini@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2020 10:27 AM
To: Lynn St. Cyr
Subject: Golf Course Canopies
Dear Sirs:
I am strongly in support of the project to install Solar Canopies in the golf course parking lots. This
renewable energy source will provide income to the town. The canopies do not detract from the site.
It is time to move forward on this project.
Paul Taccini
183 Leland Road
Brewster, MA 02631
508.896.9633
n St.
From: Elliott Jemison <elliottjemison@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2020 10:47 AM
To: Lynn St. Cyr
Subject: Captains Solar Panels
To the Brewster Planning Board: As a Brewster resident and member of Captains Golf Course I urge
you to approve the current version of the plans for solar panels over the west end of the Captains
parking lot. The change to allow cantilevered panels with openings in the driveways will not, in my
opinion, be obtrusive. The landscaping will thrive with the available sunlight and will keep
cars covered from the elements. The whole project is environmentally friendly and enhances
Brewster's goal of being a green town. Finally the additional revenue with no direct investment by the
town is, again in my opinion, a 'no brainer'.
I urge you to allow this project to proceed.
Elliott Jemison
87 Old Bog Road
Brewster, MA 02631
Tel: (5o8) 255-1157
Cell: (617) 596-2668
elliottjemisonPgmail com
Lynn St. Cyr
From: David Walker <davidwalker22@comcast.net>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 6:35 PM
To: Lynn St. Cyr
Cc: Chuck Hanson
Subject: Comment on Solar Panel installation at the Captains golf course
I would like to express my approval and excitement for the Solar Panel project that is under consideration for the
parking lot at the golf course. As a full-time Brewster resident and an avid golfer, I am excited that Brewster is helping to
address the global warming problem through the green energy that will be generated by the panels and am also glad to
see that revenue will be generated for the town. The renderings of the panel system that I have seen show a very
attractive design and no loss of functionality to the parking lot. I believe that the project should go forward as soon as
possible.
Very truly yours,
David H Walker
6 Glenwood Rd
Brewster, MA
Lynn St. Cyr
From: John Kissida <kissidaje@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 11:19 AM
To: Lynn St. Cyr
Cc: Ryan Bennett; Donna Kalinick; Peter Lombardi
Subject: Captains solar array project - Comments on October 9, 2020 submittal
Dear members of the Planning Board,
As you are aware, I was requested to provide some technical assistance on the current proposed solar project at
Captains and I continue to do so on this important project for Brewster and Captains.
This email is a follow up on the previous email I sent to you for the September 9th meeting, which was partially
discussed at the meeting but not fully read into the meeting minutes, which was very disappointing.
The following are my current comments and concerns, on my review of most recent plans for "Brewster Golf Course
Photovoltaic System", as detailed in plans dated 10/9/20. The comments below include new issues, as well as previously
raised items which have still not been addressed by the engineer.
1. First, as requested by the town administrator, I attended a virtual meeting on 10/5 with Ryan, members of managers
office, energy committee, golf commission, other town representatives and developer representatives, to review plans
in process and provide input. The engineer's plans, as presented, included several planting improvements and retention
of 4 more existing trees. The plans also included engineer's initial thoughts on drainage improvements, as a result of
discussions at last planning board meeting. Last weeks plans, at virtual meeting, included the addition of rain gardens, to
replace the previously proposed drainage system. Unfortunately the current plans, as submitted, do not include any rain
gardens, as engineers presented at virtual meeting. Drainage plans, as proposed, are still problematic and in need of
further design and associated supporting calculations, details and other documents.
2. As was the problem on previously submitted plans, there are conflicts on current plans in the location and orientation
of electrical pad and wood fence enclosure. Location as shown on A-100, is not shown on the enlarged plans and shown
on planting plan as different size and in different orientation. The location on the landscape plan should be considered
the preferred location and orientation. As noted in my last email, the purpose of the three new utility poles, as proposed
along the driveway, should be requested, and if they will include any equipment, should be determined.
3. The lighting plan (A-103) now includes lighting of two structures CP -6 and CP -5, with a total of 8 fixtures, to better
address possible night use of the parking lot areas. The engineers should however, confirm that the lighting levels, as
proposed, are in accordance with recommended safe lighting standards for "self -park" parking areas.
4. As previously mentioned and discussed at last planning board meeting, the proposed structures at western end of
parking lot, extend over a drive aisle, with two support posts placed in the open pavement. It was discussed that they
would be protected with raised footings, pavement painting and possibly islands. This is not shown on current
submittals.
5. Although rain gardens were discussed at last weeks virtual meeting, the developer appears to still be proposing to
retain turf in the islands under the canopies, as well as the structures to the north closest to Freeman's Way. They are
now proposing a partial irrigation/underdrain trench to convey water to and thru some of these areas with additional
roof downspout locations that will now discharge above grade. The surface discharge, without a drainage Swale or rain
gardens will not control the runoff. A portion of the existing lawn areas on the eastern end of the structures, is covered
by roof, but has no means of receiving water and the central stormwater/ underdrain is proposed to be flush with
adjacent island grades meaning stormwater flows will not be controlled, or directed and will just run across the surface.
Several stone walkways are proposed, but the purpose without rain gardens or a drainage swale, is questionable and
locations, if installed, need to be coordinated with parking spaces to allow passage between vehicles. The engineer is
also directing a significant portion of the roof drainage at the end of western structures to flow overland on existing turf
now to be covered with structures. This surface drainage should be connected to the existing drainage system. The
dependence on uncontrolled surface drainage is likely to cause erosion and possibly drainage issues in the service area
below the parking lot. The proposed approach for vegetation and drainage under the canopies is questionable and
unlikely to be successful. If the engineer and developer believe that turf will survive and drainage as proposed will work,
the planning board could condition the proposed turf and drainage and evaluate it's success after a year. If the turf has
not survived or drainage as installed has been problematic (as determined by owner), the developer would be required
repair or replace at that time at no additional cost to owner.
6. The plantings, as now being proposed, have been improved over the last planning board submission. The developer is
now proposing seven new shade trees (3 to 31/2 inches in caliper), four which will be in western access aisle to
supplement four existing trees "now to remain" and three along the main access drive. These are a good addition. The
developer is also proposing 7 evergreen trees and 9 small trees all 8-10 ft height. These include small trees in the
southern islands along the proposed structures where no trees currently exist. To create more visual relief/screening of
the large tall structures, small trees and evergreen trees proposed, should be increased to 10-12 feet tall. The proposed
small tree varieties are a good choice. It is recommended however, that all evergreen trees be Leland Cypress instead of
red cedar, since they are easier to transplant, grow faster and also currently exist in parking lot and are doing well. The
planning board, however, should not expect proposed plantings to be able to screen or significantly reduce the visual
scale of the proposed structures, especially at time of planting. It was recommended at the virtual meeting last week,
that the engineer prepare two simulations showing proposed plantings at time of planting and at 10 years showing
anticipated growth.
7. As previously discussed shrub plantings should be limited and if used, pushed closer to structures, to maintain sight
distances along Golf Course main access drive and interior islands. This has not been done. The areas in front of the
proposed tree/shrub plantings in the islands at main driveway, should be turf or possibly low perennial planting beds.
Any shrubs and other plantings should be contained in continuous mulched planting beds, to simplify maintenance.
Current details show individual plant saucers and not continuous beds. Also noted is that at least one of proposed
plants, New Jersey Tea plant, is highly sustainable to deer browsing, and should be changed.
8. The developer continues to propose That the owner should maintain and be responsible for replacement of any
plantings that do not survive. As is standard industry practice, the developer or his contractor should be required to
maintain and guarantee all plantings for a minimum of a full year, as well as replacements, if plants do not survive for an
additional growing season. Also any pruning or removal of plants, which impact solar array production, should be the
responsibility of developer to address, but under review and approval of town. There is currently a tall pine in the south
east island that is dying and should be removed before construction.
9. The developer is now proposing to paint the canopy which is a plus. The potential color samples were not available to
me to review and as I understand it color selection can be delayed. Choice discussions should include golf commission
and possibly other town committees for input. As previously noted, color selection for large structures will be extremely
important, and can increase visibility and visual impact. My recommendation would be a light warm grey (grey beige)
color. Hopefully that is an available color choice. In addition, the planning board should request engineer indicate extent
of structure painting and any elements which will not be painted to better understand what is being proposed.
Overall, I believe the proposed redesign with multiple structures is an improvement over the previous design and could
be integrated into the expansive parking lots at Captains. If requested, I will try to make myself available at
Wednesday's meeting to answer questions, but as noted above would appreciate my entire letter be read into minutes
before discussion.
2
Sincerely,
John Kissida
Registered Landscape Architect,
Brewster Resident and
member of Captains for over 30 years
St.
From:
Ryan Bennett
Sent:
Tuesday, October 13, 2020 1:09 PM
To:
Mark O'Brien
Cc:
Anne O'Connell; Lynn St, Cyr
Subject:
RE: Golf Course Solar project
Thank you, Mark. We will share this with the Board. -- Ryan
From: Mark O'Brien
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2020 11:54 AM
To: Ryan Bennett <rbennett@brewster-ma.gov>
Cc: Anne O'Connell <annie551@m5n.com>
Subject: Golf Course Solar project
Hi Ryan,
This is in response to the comment regarding moving the driving range from its current location in Commerce Park to
the golf course parking lot where the solar canopy project is contemplated. Our current demand at the golf course
requires at a minimum, all of the parking to the east of the secondary entrance (west entrance). That being the case, any
driving range facility constructed in the golf course parking lot would be limited to a "reduced length" range allowing
most likely irons only. This would be less desirable than the current driving range. There are several other factors that
make moving the driving range problematic, but this is the main issue.
Thank you,
Mark O'Brien, Director of Operations
Captains Golf Course
1
n St.
From: Robert Tobias <roberttobias@comcast.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 4:12 PM
To: Lynn St. Cyr
Subject: Solar arrays at Captains Golf Course
I wish to express my support for the revised six section solar array proposal at the Captains golf course.
I believe this is a good opportunity to apply solar and generate a return for the town.
Respectfully,
Robert Tobias
179 Far Fields Road
Sent from my iPhone