TOWN OF LINCOLN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
August 23, 2006
PRESENT: K.Hurd (Chairman), E.Flint, B.Wolf, R.Domnitz, J.Snell
STAFF: M.Whitehead, C.Perry
7:30PM BUSINESS:
Clarke, 23 Bedford Road
The Board amended and signed the decision on the site plan review for a renovation and addition to a house.
7:40PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: MARK LEWANDOWSKI, 3 Bowles Terrace, Map 119/ Lot 2, fence permit application under Section 18.5.
The Board members had visited the site individually. They discussed the height and design of the proposed stone wall. Mr. Snell observed that most walls and fences along Route 117 are lower than six feet but some are higher, so he considered the height acceptable. Sight lines at the intersection are poor but would not be made worse by the proposal. Mr. Domnitz thought a lower wall would look better and commented that the height seemed disproportionate to the length. Mrs. Wolf considered that a six foot wall adjacent to the applicant’s driveway would be dangerous in terms of sight lines, and that access to the fire hydrant, located behind the proposed three foot section of wall, would be poor. She asked how the transition from six feet to three would be designed; Mr. Lewandowski responded that it
would be a gradual slope and that tree branches would soften it. Mrs. Wolf said she would prefer a lower wall.
The applicant explained that he wants a high wall for protection from the noise and visual intrusion of traffic on Route 117 and that he considers a stone wall aesthetically preferable to a wood fence, as well as more effective. He offered to lower the wall to three feet within ten feet of his driveway.
Mr. Snell proposed a motion to approve the proposal as submitted subject to review by the Building Inspector and Fire Department and a reduction in the height to three feet along Bowles Terrace to the driveway. The motion did not receive a second.
The Chairman stated the need for a detailed drawing of the wall showing the transition between the two heights. Some Board members were concerned about the proximity to the fire hydrant and the adequacy of clearance. Mr. Lewandowski asked for views on a wood fence of similar height as an alternative. The Chairman felt this would be preferable.
It was agreed that the applicant would consult with the Fire Chief, reconsider his design options and return.
A MOTION was proposed and seconded, to continue the hearing to September 13. Passed 5-0.
8:00PM PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION: NEW ENGLAND DEACONESS ASSOCIATION, 17 Cambridge Turnpike, Map14/ Lot 16, review requirements for North Lincoln Planning District, Section 12.5.
Herb Taylor and Walter Bartkus of NEDA attended, with Bill Jackson and Maria Gonzales of their design team. Bill Jackson gave an update on the project for a ‘continuing care’ residential development. A verbal agreement has been reached with the three internal abutters, for NEDA to purchase and incorporate their land, as encouraged by the Steering Committee. The project has therefore been expanded from 170 to 197 units (including two existing on site). Most of the increase is in cottage units; the congregate building remains at 100 units and the apartment block is expanded slightly from 28 to 30 units. The site is now 34½ acres.
Maria Gonzales presented a comparison of the old and new layouts. The congregate building has been reconfigured so that the end wings do not present such a long façade. The buffer area between the congregate building and the lot line has also been increased slightly. There is a slight increase in the overall density but it remains less than 7 units per acre. The road layout has been revised. NEDA considers it to be a better plan.
Bill Jackson reported that the meeting held for neighbors on August 17 produced few criticisms. There were some concerns about traffic but little comment on the number of units or building design. A question arose as to whether Sandy Pond Road should be gated to only allow emergency access, once Route 2 has been reconstructed; views were expressed on both sides. Mr. Hurd commented that if many of the Deaconess residents come from the Lincoln community, there may be a demand for travel in that direction; however it would be better not to allow delivery vehicles to use this access.
Mr. Domnitz queried the break in the internal road in front of the congregate building. Ms. Gonzales said the idea was to create a green space at the center of the development, but the design team would look into keeping an emergency route through.
The Board noted that the density of the revised development is greater in the north east corner, and considered that the neighbors who will remain on Cambridge Turnpike would be the most likely to be affected visually. The design team explained that part of the reason the density is lower towards the west is that leachfields are fitted in between the cottages on this part of the site, which has suitable ground conditions. The precise amount of land needed for the leachfields remains to be finalized and there may be scope to rearrange the cottage units slightly.
Ms. Gonzales presented sections through the buildings. The greatest façade height is at the garage entrance to the congregate building: 52 feet. However this is set low, most of the garage being below grade. The highest point on the building is the ridge of a part of the building set on higher ground which has a 40 foot façade. Much of the building presents as two and a half stories. The cottages are comparatively low at about 23½ feet.
Mr. Snell asked about the management of noise from air conditioning and other equipment. The team responded that most equipment will be placed on the flat part of the roof of the central wing of the congregate building, where most noise will be directed upwards.
Bill Jackson reported on the affordable housing discussions. A constructive meeting was held with DHCD. A letter is being drafted seeking written confirmation that all thirty apartment units will be classed as affordable. Mr. Whitehead clarified that they are seeking the same treatment as a comprehensive permit, in respect of the apartment block, while pursuing the development through the North Lincoln Planning District process.
Mr. Domnitz calculated that compared with the earlier plan, there was a slight decrease in the ratio of affordable to non affordable units. Mr. Whitehead commented that the focus has been on achieving 15% in the development, which is still satisfied. The Board speculated about the town’s situation when the denominator changes after the next census.
The Board inquired whether there will be provision for overnight visitors. There are expected to be two guest suites.
On the water issues, Mr. Jackson stated that Rizzo has made a proposal to the Water Commission addressing both the costs of laying on a water supply and water conservation measures. They expect a response soon.
A meeting has been scheduled for Monday to discuss taxes with the Town Administrator and Assessor.
The Planning Board hearing has now been set for October 4, with the town-wide mailing two weeks before that. NEDA asked for guidance on it. It will be a sub-set of the package the Planning Board receives. Mr. Whitehead said that the example mailing from Minuteman Commons was probably the best guide, but that NEDA could discuss the details further with him.
Mr. Snell asked when there would be further information on drainage design. NEDA said that there will be some information in the Planning Board package but that this kind of detail is normally worked on after the Town Meeting to establish a Planned Development District.
Mr. Flint suggested that the impact on some of the abutters would benefit from a little more attention. Mr. Whitehead advised that if time does not allow adjustments to the layout at this stage, there is scope for minor changes later, but the number of units cannot be changed.
The Board thanked the team for their presentation.
8:40PM PUBLIC HEARING: BEN DUBROVSKY/ ALICE WAUGH, 178 Weston Road, Map121/ Lot 4, site plan review for reconstruction and expansion of a single family residence under Section 17.7.
Mr. Dubrovsky introduced the proposal to replace a one story house with a two story house on the same foundation, on a non conforming lot. The proposal also involves expanding the attached garage to accommodate two cars instead of one.
The proposal was considered by the Zoning Board of Appeals the previous week. They were concerned about the garage encroaching further on the setback from the side lot line. A possible alternative would be a detached garage, which would be closer to the lot line but as an accessory structure could meet the normal lower setback requirement for such structures. The ZBA intend to make a site visit, and are interested to hear the views of the Planning Board.
Mr. Dubrovsky stated his preference for an attached garage. He also mentioned that the neighbor on the garage side, Mr. Dallos, has provided a letter expressing no objection and the neighbor on the other side, Mr. Bronson, has also agreed to provide one.
The Board asked about the topography; the land rises from the road to the house and again to the rear. The builder explained the plan. The house was actually built closer to one side lot line than the approved plan, but in terms of proximity to neighboring buildings, the tightest area is at the other side, where the garage is. The neighbor’s garage is the nearest part of his house. The Board noted that the close positioning of houses was not unusual for the neighborhood.
Proposed lighting consists of sconces as marked on the plans plus two extras for which details have been supplied.
Mr. Snell asked about the height and shape of the proposed house elevation closest to the lot line. The end portion of roof is proposed to be lower. The Board considered that the overall size of house proposed was reasonable.
The Board discussed the question of an attached versus detached garage. A majority thought an attached garage was a better design solution for the lot, on the basis of its topography and configuration. Mr. Snell pointed out that the garage could remain at a one car size. A two car garage, however, would improve the tight existing parking and turning conditions. Mr. Domnitz thought a detached garage was preferable because it created less conflict with the zoning rules.
The Board asked about drainage and explained that normally run off has to be dealt with within the site but that this may be difficult because of the steep slope. The applicant stated that the approach being taken is to cause minimum disturbance to the site.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Flint, to approve the plan as submitted, subject to approval by the ZBA. Passed 4-1 (Mr.Domnitz voted against).
9:00PM PUBLIC HEARING: COUNTRYSIDE BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT, 188 Tower Road, Map 124/ Lot 1, site plan and scenic road review for new single family residence under Section 17.7
Ken Eisner introduced his proposal for a house on a lot bounded by Tower Road, South Great Road, the railroad, and a private lot to the east. Scenic road approval is needed for a new curb cut on Tower Road.
Mr. Eisner stated that the proposed driveway entrance has been located where it will use an existing break in the stone wall; that it allows the driveway to curve to the house, with some screening between it and the road; and that sight lines are good. It is proposed to remove two trees, including a pine tree that is in poor condition and interfering with electric wires. A stone bollard is proposed at the entrance. The ends of the existing stone wall are to be extended as inward curves at the driveway entrance. Mr. Eisner reported that there are no houses opposite but there is a swimming pool in the Woods’ yard across from the driveway.
The house site has been defined to comply with zoning and wetlands setbacks. The house will be set in a natural dip between two knolls, allowing a gently sloping driveway with minimal need for cut. The septic system will be in a field to the south of the house, around the knoll. The proposed house is 3900sq ft, or 4670sq ft including the garage. In terms of massing, Mr. Eisner described it as reading more as one story than two. Little regrading is needed for the house but some fill will be needed for the septic system. Eight trees will be cut for the house but some evergreens will be planted near the driveway.
Much of the lot is wet. Mr. Eisner described water as entering from the north and being held back by a dam on the eastern lot line. The Conservation Commission has approved the plan.
The proposed lighting was described as dark sky compliant and catalog cuts were provided. Four uplights are proposed under trees along the driveway. On the house, a number of lights are proposed, some of them under overhangs.
The Board considered that the proposed driveway lighting would cause a big change in the character of the area and questioned the need for it. Mr. Eisner felt there was an aesthetic argument for it. He asked if the Board thought a single light at the stone bollard at the driveway entrance would be preferable, which they did. The Board was satisfied with the remainder of the lighting.
Deborah Woods, the neighbor from across Tower Road, asked about the character of the suggested driveway entrance light. The Board assured her that it would not be allowed to shine towards her property. Secondly she asked about trees that screen the lot and was satisfied with the answer.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Domnitz and seconded by Mr.Snell to grant approval to the plan as presented, except for the four uplights on the trees, which are to be eliminated, and with the addition of a discreet light at the bollard at the driveway entrance, casting no direct light off the property. Passed 5-0.
9:20PM PUBLIC HEARING: STEPHEN ODIO AND DEENA BERTON, 56 Conant Road, Map107/ Lot 8, site plan and scenic road review for reconstruction and expansion of single family residence under Section 17.7.
Stephen Odio and Deena Berton appeared with their design team, Marcus Gleysteen and Robyn Bell of Gleysteen Design and Dan Gordon of Gordon Associates. They described the site as having meadow and wetland. The lot is large but has limited frontage on Conant Road and is served by a long common driveway on adjacent land. The developed portion of the lot is away from the road and avoids a wetland area that runs along the side lot line on the opposite side from the driveway. The reconstruction and expansion are proposed to be in the same area, with some regrading but broadly following the shape of the site. The existing lawn will be reshaped slightly to accommodate the septic system. There will be a circular gravel driveway. Some trees will need to be removed at a corner of the house and at the septic site.
Vegetation will be preserved along the driveway and to the rear of the house, with some added planting. Peripheral areas will be woodland meadow. Dry wells will be constructed on the site to deal with run off from paved areas.
Mr. Snell asked about the Conservation Commission’s views on the project. It was reported that the Commission raised questions about the maintenance of the woodland meadow, and about why the house was not located wholly outside the 100ft wetland buffer rather than overlapping it similarly to the previous house. The applicants considered that the current proposal has a gentler impact on the driveway and neighbors’ properties. The Conservation Commission hearing has closed but a decision has not yet been made.
Marcus Gleysteen described the proposed house as being in a farmhouse style, with a bridge across from the house to the ‘carriage house’. The style is different to the previous deck house but he considers it to be in keeping with the landscape and history of the area.
Mr. Gleysteen ran through the floorspace and height calculations in relation to the bylaw. The floorspace of the house will be 6764sq ft, and the total including the garage and existing barn will be 7853sq ft. The height of the house from the lowest exposed point (a walkout basement entrance) is 39 ft but from average natural grade it is only 31 ft 0¼in. The applicant requested that the Board use its discretion to allow the use of average natural grade for the height calculation, as the applicant would like to have the walkout basement feature.
A single landscape post light is proposed to mark the walkway from the driveway to the house. Sconces are proposed on the house to give a low glow. A step light is proposed on a seat wall by the terrace.
The Dessains, neighbors across the common driveway, asked about the position of the house and garage in relation to their side of the lot. The proposed garage is nearer than the present one but still meets setback criteria. Mr. Mahoney, the abutter on the west side across the wetland area, said he had examined the distance and height of the proposed house from his property and was satisfied that it would fit the site well and be in keeping with its character.
The Board reviewed the height calculations and asked how the low height from natural grade was achieved; this is largely a result of setting the first floor low by cutting into the grade a little at the front where there is a knoll. Mr. Snell commented that the new garage block will give a different look from the driveway. The architects pointed out that they have given it a rural character and avoided having the doors face the common driveway. The neighbors said they were satisfied with it.
The Board noted that Conant Road is a scenic Road but that the proposals do not affect it.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Domnitz and seconded by Mr. Flint, to approve the site plan as presented, allowing the use of ‘average natural grade’ in the height calculation, and to grant scenic road approval. Passed 5-0.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Open Space Plan
The Conservation Commission is beginning work on an Open Space and Recreation Plan that will both stand alone and form part of the Master Plan. They are establishing an Open Space Plan Committee and would like representatives from the other land use related committees on it. Mr. Flint was nominated and Mr. Domnitz offered to be available as a reserve.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:55pm.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved with amendments September 23, 2006.
| 
