Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20201228 - Zoning Advisory Committee - Meeting MinutesZONING ADVISORY COMMITTEE   Monday, December 28, 2020   7:00 PM  REMOTE MEETING  AGENDA     Members Present: Mary Larson-Marlowe; Ron Foisy, Curtis Smithson; Ria McNamara; Ted Barker-Hook; Madhu Chandrasekar; Sundar Sivaraman; Rachel  Rossin   Members Absent: John Coutinho   Also Present: John Gelcich, Principal Planner; Bob Hamilton, HCAM   Ms. Larson-Marlowe called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.    Ms. Larson-Marlowe read through the remote meeting script.     1.Solar Bylaw/Overlay District Discussion    Ms. Larson-Marlowe reviewed the objectives of the proposed changes to the solar bylaw.    Ms. Larson-Marlowe asked the Committee to share information learned since  the last meeting.  Mr. Barker-Hook said he fears the changes to the bylaw are good, but will lack  teeth and therefore still supports the overlay district and possibly what Athol  undertook with regard to solar.  Mr. Barker-Hook said the teeth of the Athol bylaw requires that solar be located  on sites that are at least 50% previously disturbed. “Previously distured” was  established “at the time of the passing of the bylaw”. Otherwise, the max clearing allowed is five acres.    Mr. Barker-Hook further said since the town already has commercial districts  established and therefore it may be a good idea to allow for solar in the Industrial B district as well as areas that are previously disturbed. Mr. Barker-Hook then mentioned a series of locations that may be included. Mr.  Barker-Hook also suggested including the areas within the highways.    Ms. Chandrasekar said visual considerations, such as glare, can be interpreted as a safety issue.      Mr. Foisy said the focus should be on improving the ability of the Planning Board to require screening, which would also be easier to Town Meeting to  understand.   Mr. Sivaraman asked Mr. Foisy about his proposed screening requirements. Mr. Foisy said the screening guidelines can be very strict but still allow solar. The  ZAC generally discussed this issue.    Mr. Sivaraman suggested implementing a hybrid option between Mr. Foisy’s and Mr. Barker-Hook’s options.     Ms. McNamara discussed the concern about cutting existing vegetation. She also said Mr. Barker-Hook’s option may be a good option.    Mr. Smithson said his research showed that solar was better for the energy side,  but keeping vegetation was beneficial to the surrounding environment with regard to stormwater, etc.    Mr. Sivaraman asked if moving forward, could the town focus on parking lots for  solar. Ms. Larson-Marlowe said she does not believe this is the purpose of ZAC in this situation.    Ms. Larson-Marlowe reviewed the options for changes to the solar bylaw that  are currently before the Committee and said that the rationale for implementing the change could apply for all the options.    ZAC generally discussed these options and they would want to send two options  to the Planning Board at the most.   Mr. Smithson asked if there was a way solar could be by-right in a district and  how that would involve site plan review. Mr. Gelcich answered depending on  the design site plan may not be required. ZAC generally discussed this issue.   Ms. Larson-Marlowe began discussion on Option 1 (max lot size of 3 acres). Ms.  McNamara gave her thoughts regarding this option and how it may encourage  accessory solar on parking lots. Ms. McNamara said the rationale is that minimizing the size would avoid impacts affecting the health, welfare, and well-being. Mr. Sivaraman said the one smaller solar array in town shows small  solar is viable. ZAC generally discussed this issue.    Ms. Larson-Marlowe began discussion on Option 2 (restricting to land that was previously developed within the last five years; restricting to IB district, and  increasing screening requirements). ZAC generally discussed the definition of  “previously disturbed”.      Mr. Barker-Hook provided rationale from the Athol bylaw which includes priority and critical natural habitat, etc.     Mr. Gelcich showed the map containing BioMap2 areas and ZAC generally discussed this issue.    ZAC generally discussed the viability of restricting based on the previously  disturbed nature of the land.   Mr. Sivaraman suggested adding language to Option 2 that exempts land with  significant vegetation. ZAC generally discussed including a maximum lot size in  the Option 2 restrictions. Mr. Barker-Hook and Mr. Smithson included discussing silviculture as a use that does not qualify for “previously disturbed” status.     Mr. Gelcich brought up concern of being able to prove that the land was cleared “for a development”. ZAC generally discussed the restriction about clearing land for a number of years prior to a solar application.     Mr. Barker-Hook asked if requiring that any disturbance related to proposed developments could be required to be “approved” to show intent of development. Mr. Gelcich will look into any situations where approval may not  be required and that parcel may suit solar development.    Ms. Larson-Marlowe began discussion of Option 3 (overlay district, including IB district). ZAC generally discussed allowing solar by-right, but ultimately opted to  maintain the Special Permit requirement.    Ms. Larson-Marlowe began discussion on Option 4 (the rewrite of the bylaw as shown at last meeting). ZAC generally discussed and decided against this  option.    Ms. Larson-Marlowe began discussion Option 5 (increasing screening requirements). Ms. Larson-Marlowe said she will work on beefing up this  option.    Ms. Larson-Marlowe reviewed the rationale section to be included in the Purpose section of the existing bylaw.     Mr. Gelcich mentioned that there likely should be a section explicitly stating that accessory solar is not covered by this article.    ZAC generally discussed the timing of the next meeting and getting an article in  for Town Meeting. The next meeting of ZAC will take place on January 11, 2021.      2.Minutes of December 14, 2020   Ms. Larson-Marlowe tabled the minutes for the next meeting.    Mr. Barker-Hook moved to adjourn the meeting, Mr. Sivaraman seconded the motion. ZAC voted unanimously (8-0-0) to adjourn the meeting at 9:13 PM.    Approved:January 11, 2021    Documents: Discussion Outline through 12-14-20  Minutes of December 14, 2020  Hopkinton Solar Bylaw with Proposed Amendments