TOWN OF LINCOLN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
March 1, 2006
PRESENT: R.Domnitz (Chairman), D.Ries, J.Snell
STAFF: M.Whitehead, C.Perry
7:30PM BUSINESS: NEW ENGLAND DEACONESS ASSOCIATION: Introduction and discussion of permitting process.
Rev. Herb Taylor, Executive Director, introduced the Association’s design team: project consultant, architect and construction manager. He described the Association’s origins and its current focus on providing care for older adults in a variety of types of accommodation. The Association is proposing a development of 150 units in an ‘abundant life community’ with a range of services available in a residential setting. This came out of a recognition of the aging population locally and availability of the BIIC site. An agreement is in place with the owner but the Association wants to be sure of Town support. The idea had been presented to the Board of Selectmen and discussed with neighborhood groups and town staff, and the general response seemed favorable.
The Association intends to progress the proposal through the North Lincoln Planning District zoning process which will involve bringing forward a preliminary use and development plan, obtaining a two-thirds majority vote at Town Meeting and then working through the detailed issues. An illustrative design has been drawn up for discussion purposes and the team presented this to the Board. It consisted of a main ‘congregate building’ on the site of the previous institutional building and residential cottages in small groups covering much of the remainder of the site. Fifty foot setbacks from the property lines had been incorporated together with setbacks from wetlands, and the likely loss of a portion of the site to the Route 2 improvement had been anticipated .It was clarified that the illustrative design for the
main building has a total of five levels, although it is stepped in places to take advantage of changes in the level of the land and would appear lower. Unit sizes are up to 1650 sq ft plus basement and garage.
Access would need to be from Sandy Pond Road, at least until the local service road adjacent to Route 2 is constructed in conjunction with the Crosby’s Corner improvement, at which point the Sandy Pond Road end could probably be gated.
Mr. Whitehead stated that a Town steering committee is being proposed to guide the process in dealing with this development proposal, and to make recommendations to the various permitting boards. A charge to the committee had been circulated.
Mr. Ries asked about the Association’s degree of financial confidence and Rev. Taylor explained that as the Association has a local track record and long waiting lists, it had a high level of confidence in its proposal. In response to a question about tax status, he indicated that the Association expects to be assessed on the property.
The main issues likely to be raised by the proposal were discussed briefly. Since several engineering issues will need to be addressed, the steering committee may recommend appointing one engineering consultant to advise town boards.
Rev. Taylor encouraged the Planning Board to visit the Association’s facilities in Concord and mentioned Newbury Court as an example of a development built into a sloping site.
The Chairman thanked the group for their presentation.
8:20PM PUBLIC HEARING: INGE AND ARNOLD WEINBURG, 234 Tower Road (Map 128/ Lot 1-9), site plan review for an addition to a single family residence in the R-1 zone.
Mr. and Mrs. Weinburg explained that they were proposing to add a family room to the rear of their house. The house is in the Coburn Farm cluster subdivision. The total size of the house with the extension is calculated to be 3750 sq ft. No new lighting is proposed but an existing light is to be moved; an illustration was provided.
Mr. Domnitz asked about the relation to other lots. There is a neighboring lot at one side and one across a meadow at the other side. The proposed extension faces the rear, across a landscape buffer towards the town line. No representations were received from neighbors.
Mr. Whitehead advised that he had checked the cluster approval and the proposal did not infringe any requirements.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Ries and seconded by Mr. Snell, to approve the plan as presented. Passed 3-0.
8:00PM KINGSLEY AND LESLIE BROOKS, 39 North Great Road (Map12/ Lot 11-0), site plan review for new single family residence in the R-1 zone.
The scheduled public hearing was not opened due to the presence of only three board members, one of whom would be retiring at the time of Town elections. By agreement the hearing was postponed to March 8 at 8:00pm.
A site walk by the board was arranged for Sunday March 5 at 2:00pm. The applicants agreed to mark out the position of the proposed house, consistent with the submitted plan.
8:40PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: OMNIPOINT HOLDINGS, INC, 23 Cambridge Turnpike (Map 14/ Lot12.1), special permit and site plan review for wireless communication facility.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Ries and seconded by Mr. Snell to continue the public hearing, due to the lack of a quorum for the special permit, to March 8 at 8:20pm. Passed 3-0.
9:00PM ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENT TO SITE PLAN: LARRY AND MYRA BRODNEY, 10 Huntley Lane (Map 101/ Lot 1), request for approval to pave driveway as required in conditions of approval for site plan.
Mr. and Mrs. Brodney explained that the site plan approval for their new house, which is now close to completion, showed the driveway as partly paved and partly surfaced with packed crushed stone. The terms of the approval required them to come back to the Board if they wished to pave the remainder. They now considered it preferable to pave the whole driveway, since they had been advised that the crushed material might create dirt that would spread and since there would be economies in doing it as a single job.
Mr. Whitehead advised that he had investigated the difference in run-off and pollution effects between the two types of driveway and there was little. Mr. Ries expressed the view that the packed material as currently approved might perform poorly on a raised driveway as the fines can wash out. Mr. Domnitz was concerned about the lack of input from the neighbor whose residence was close to the driveway; the applicant advised that the neighbor was out of town and unable to attend the hearing but would be prepared to provide a letter of support.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Ries and seconded by Mr. Snell to approve the paving of the driveway as an administrative amendment, subject to a letter being received from the owner of the adjoining residence showing no opposition. Passed 3-0.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Porch addition: house in Brooks Hill cluster
Mr. Whitehead mentioned an inquiry he had received about a proposal for a porch and asked for the Board’s view on whether it should be handled as an administrative amendment or a site plan review. The Board considered it should be a site plan review.
Minutes
1/4/06 - Approved with amendments
1/11/06 - Approved
2/8/06 - Approved with amendments.
The meeting ended at 9:35pm.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved May 3, 2006
| 
