Friday, February 4, 2000
Abutter purchases Pine Brook land to avert development
It's been four months since Albert Gould and Betsy Goldenberg last visited the planning board to propose their Great Brook Estates development, a subdivision extending from 195 Rutland Street to 120 Pine Brook Road. Plans called for a 23.8-acre conservation cluster on a 1,000-foot cul-de-sac off Rutland Street. In addition, there would be a 14-acre development serving three houses on a common driveway off Pine Brook. On January 24, Gary Shepard of David Ross Associates had some interesting news for the board members.
"An abutter to the property off Pine Brook purchased the 14-acre parcel so that it will remain undeveloped," announced Shepard. "We are here tonight with an ANR plan that splits off the purchased property. The remaining parcel will be combined with a lot owned by the Great Brook Realty Trust to get frontage on Rutland Street for a conservation cluster."
This was good news all around. Good news to the planning board that some of the sticky subdivision issues from the original proposal no longer exist. Good news to conservationists that a beautiful parcel of land will be preserved. Good news to member Louise Hara, also on the trails committee, because the conservation cluster will protect an important trail that creates a large loop for hikers in the state park.
By a unanimous vote, the board endorsed the ANR which allows the division of land between the 14-acre and 23.8-acre parcels.
Wireless facility regulations
Paul Gill of the wireless applications advisory committee (WAAC) stopped by the meeting to discuss the latest draft of the wireless communications facilities bylaw rules and regulations. Holzman, who works in the telecommunications industry, prepared an initial draft of these regulations and has been updating it with input from reviewers. "I hope to have something for the public to pick up by next meeting," said planning board member Dan Holzman.
"Could we get a tutorial on some of the technical aspects from WAAC?" board member Michael Epstein asked of Gill. "I think we can do that," was Gill's tentative reply. Understandably so, because the complex subject of wireless communications raises such questions as, "What is an adequate need?" and "How do you prove that need to the planning board?" The process becomes a trial before the board with testimony from radio frequency experts.
Gill disclosed that they have several candidates for technical consultant, including one from Vermont who works throughout New England. Gill sees the planning board, his WAAC group and the technical consultant working together on future wireless applications. "Would one of your group be present at planning board hearings on cell tower applications?" asked Epstein. "Absolutely!" Gill replied.
© 2000 The Carlisle Mosquito