TOWN OF LINCOLN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
July 12, 2006
PRESENT: K.Hurd (Chairman), E.Flint, B.Wolf, R.Domnitz, J.Snell
STAFF: M.Whitehead, C.Perry
OTHER ATTENDEES: B.J. Scheff, David Reece and Geoff Moore attended for several items.
7:30PM PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING BOARD RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR INCLUSIONARY HOUSING BYLAW, Section 14.5 of Zoning Bylaw
Mr. Whitehead introduced the public hearing, explaining that rules and regulations created under the bylaw can be revised relatively easily via a public hearing and Planning Board vote, rather than needing a Town Meeting vote. The proposed regulations are intended to provide detail of the various ways in which an applicant developing six or more dwelling units can meet the requirement of the inclusionary housing bylaw, to provide some affordable units. The intention to develop such rules and regulations is stated in Section 14.5.5. The bylaw requires the developer to apply for a special permit, either from the Planning Board or the Zoning Board of Appeals depending on the circumstances. The proposed regulations describe the information that is to be submitted with such an application. They also provide for a public hearing and for inclusion
of the affordable units in the State’s Local Initiative Program. They have been reviewed from a legal standpoint by Jay Talerman of Kopelman and Paige.
The Board discussed whether the wording about square footage in section c) was too inflexible. However, after acknowledging that the rules allowed for discretion and that the concept of value was referred to in the bylaw so that the concepts of floorspace and value could be considered in tandem, they decided they were satisfied with the wording.
Mr. Snell asked why payment of the cost of an application to the Department of Housing and Community Development is not included in all the options. After discussion, it was agreed that the procedure and cost may vary but that there is scope for the Planning Board to ask for this cost to be covered where applicable.
The Board made some minor editing changes to the document.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf, and seconded by Mr. Hurd to approve the Rules and Regulations for Inclusionary Housing as amended. Passed 5-0.
8:00PM PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION: NEW ENGLAND DEACONESS ASSOCIATION, 17 Cambridge Turnpike (Map14/ Lot16), North Lincoln Planning District process.
The project team from New England Deaconess Association (NEDA) introduced themselves: Walter Bartkus of NEDA, Bill Jackson of W. Jackson Associates, David Albrecht of Rizzo Associates, and Gerry Menke and Jennifer Blanchet of EGA. They previously made an initial presentation to the Board in March and have been liaising with the Town, mainly through the Steering Committee. They now wished to give an update and to discuss the timeline looking ahead towards a November Town Meeting.
The team reported that some progress has been made on the affordable housing component of the project; Peter Smith has been employed as an advisor and a meeting has been held with the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), attended by Mr. Whitehead and Mr. Snell. The plans have been changed to include a 28-unit rental apartment block, that it is hoped will be capable of being accepted by DHCD as affordable housing provision once they have adopted a pending change to their regulations. 25% of these units will be marketed through ‘affordable’ channels but all should count under the State’s calculations. Gerry Menke described the apartment block as being similar to the congregate building in materials and styling. The total number of units proposed in the development is now 168.
A new access route has been tentatively located, off Service Road 4 of the reconstructed Route 2 Crosby’s Corner design, close to the proposed underpass that connects to other local roads. Traffic patterns have been studied both with and without the Route 2 project; it appears that both are workable but without the reconstruction, residents will need to use Sandy Pond Road for access. The Board mentioned that the scheduling of the Route 2 project is suffering delays and that NEDA will need to address the relative scheduling issues.
The team also reported that they have been liaising with local residents.
On the water issues, David Albrecht reported that there had been meetings with the Water Commissioners, the consultants Wesson and Sampson and attorneys. The water pressure has been tested and a modeling study is underway, with a report to be produced shortly. The Water Board wants to be sure there is a sufficient supply for firefighting needs. Mr. Snell mentioned that the relationship of the development to some water supply issues raised by Route 2 is still open to discussion.
The Water Board is asking NEDA to mitigate its water usage by offering conservation measures in town at a ratio of two and a half to one. The Board’s standard estimate of water consumption of 65 gallons per day is being challenged, as data from NEDA’s Concord facility suggest a significantly lower figure. NEDA has researched conservation methods and looked at the work of the Town’s Natural Resources Commission. There seems to be scope for reductions, with a cooperative approach.
In conclusion, NEDA said they have found the Steering Committee to be a useful sounding board. Going forward, they are scheduled to meet with the Conservation Commission on August 9, and a meeting is to be scheduled to discuss property tax. The Town Administrator has provided a draft timeline based on a Town Meeting date of November 4.
Mr. Whitehead reported that September 20 has been suggested for the Planning Board hearing on the preliminary use and development plan. This leaves scope to continue to the first meeting in October if necessary.
Jennifer Blanchet said that she would be leading NEDA’s work to meet the bylaw requirements. She did not foresee significant problems but would like advice on a few points. The owners of the three abutting parcels enclosed by the development wish their land to be included in the North Lincoln Planning District and have signed the proposal. Some general language has been drafted to say that they would be covered by an equivalent set of zoning rules. Mr. Whitehead explained that the owners wish to have the option of their land being incorporated in the NEDA development. The Board discussed how the current idea of a joint NLPD proposal compared to the alternative of the three homeowners submitting separately at a later date; also what the implications would be for development on these lots if the NEDA development did not proceed; and
whether the joint proposal created too many uncertainties. The Board suggested that the question of the three - lot parcel be separated out in the Town Meeting procedure. Jennifer Blanchet stated that NEDA’s site and development information only covers its own land. The Board said that both NEDA and itself would need to consider how the proposal will be presented to Town Meeting, and the Steering Committee should address this issue.
The illustrative materials to be presented with the preliminary development and use plan were discussed. NEDA has developed conceptual floor plans for the congregate building and cottage units, together with a descriptive narrative. The Board requested a schedule of floorspace devoted to different uses; otherwise it considered the floor plans to be sufficient. Three exterior views have been prepared, two of the congregate building and one of a typical four-plex cottage. The Board thought these were satisfactory but would like them all to be in color.
A site walk by the Board was set for Saturday July 29 at 10am. NEDA agreed to stake out the property line and main groups of buildings and use ribbons to indicate the road layout, keyed to a map.
NEDA wished to discuss filing fees. Mr. Whitehead stated that the normal fee for a business zone site plan review is $100 plus consultancy fees, which are normally drawn from a deposited fund of $5000. NEDA indicated that if possible they would appreciate an estimate of the likely consultancy costs.
The town-wide mailing prior to the Planning Board’s public hearing was discussed. The Board has to approve the documents. Mr. Whitehead said that the mailing has to be at least 14 days in advance of the hearing.
Mr. Snell asked about the ownership status of the site in terms of who brings the proposal to Town Meeting. NEDA hope to have a signed purchase and sale agreement but the Board suggested obtaining the current owner’s co-signature on the proposal to Town Meeting.
There are various Route 2 issues, such as the detention pond, that need to be coordinated; the Board requested that NEDA provide details at a future meeting. The Board also asked about progress on the septic system. Mr. Albrecht reported that ground conditions have been found to be favorable; options for design are being considered and he expects it will be possible to indicate which areas of the site will be used.
Mr. Domnitz expressed a concern about the treatment of affordable units, and whether it might lead to the Planned Development District approach being seen as a way of providing fewer units that have to be marketed as affordable. Mr. Whitehead commented that in this particular case it can be recognized that the rental apartments will add to the relatively affordable options available to local residents.
8:40PM: DISCUSSION: MINUTEMAN COMMONS, 82 Virginia Road (Map 5/ Lot 3), project update
Taran Grigsby of the Mayo Group, Patrick Morganelli and Gary Holden attended, all representing Minuteman LLC.
The Chairman explained that the Board asked the developers to come in to give an update, since the development appears to be advancing, yet there are outstanding issues including significant errors in documents needed for the State’s affordable housing approval, that have not been corrected. The General Counsel for the Mayo Group asked what the errors were. Mrs. Wolf pointed out several pieces of wrong basic information in the word-processed documents.
The Board inquired about the current control of the project. Mr. Grigsby stated that Minuteman LLC is jointly owned by three parties. He said that the original applicant is still in control, but all parties have to agree on major decisions such as selling the project.
Mrs. Wolf expressed concern that building permits have been obtained and homes are being marketed for private sale before the Local Initiative Program arrangements for the affordable units have been approved. The developers referred to a letter addressing the DHCD issues and said that project information has been provided except for the architectural details that are being revised. The Board suggested that if the same wrongly worded documents have been sent to DHCD they should be recalled and quickly corrected. The developers provided the Board with copies of an additional document, a deed rider based on a DHCD template. The Board asked if units in the development are being marketed and the developers confirmed that this is the case, although no sales will go through yet.
B.J.Scheff pointed out that the Housing Commission has a strong interest in how the development is marketed. The practical arrangements for marketing the affordable units need to be coordinated with the Town and with the Lincoln Foundation. Mrs. Wolf recalled an outstanding issue about whether a non-accessible first floor unit could be counted as affordable; she asked for clarification of the situation in writing. The Board also asked about the parking situation, since the documents still made reference to a plan to sell parking space that had been found unacceptable. The developers said this was a mistake that would be corrected.
The Board asked for a clear statement of the time schedule for permitting, marketing and certificates of occupancy. The developers explained that their aim is to build the units to ‘shell’ stage before marketing them around November and custom finishing them. Mr. Grigsby stated that they recognized that DHCD has to approve the marketing plan.
Mr. Whitehead clarified that DHCD will not formally approve the units until the certificates of occupancy are issued but the Town needs an interim letter from DHCD confirming that everything is ready to go. There are six affordable units, split between the four buildings.
The developers agreed to supply corrected documents to the Planning Board within a month, and to liaise on the marketing plan for the affordable units which will need to be approved by the Housing Commission as well as DHCD. B.J. Scheff undertook to provide the Planning Board with a note of the issues. The Board thanked the developers for attending.
OTHER BUSINESS:
‘Approval Not Required’ Plan, Clifford and Carey Cort, 28 Old Concord Road (Map 61/ Lot3)
The Board examined a plan that had been submitted to create a new lot, carved out of an existing lot that has a house on it, on the corner of Concord Road and Fairhaven North (a private way). The Board confirmed that it meets dimensional requirements, and resolved to endorse the plan as submitted. The Board signed the plan.
Town Planner’s Report
The Board is scheduled to meet with the Selectmen on Monday evening.
A letter was circulated from the Rural Land Foundation addressing the time schedule and public consultation for the mall project.
Exempt institutional uses will be on the agenda for the next meeting.
Mr. Whitehead had drafted a reply to Mr. Dimancescu on the issue of leaf blowers. The Board signed it.
Hawkey, 198 Concord Road
The Board signed the fence permit.
Montori/Bordiuk, 84 Codman Road
The Board signed the site plan approval decision for additions to a house.
Master Plan Committee
The Chair reported that Chris Klem has applied to join the Committee as the remaining ‘at large’ member. The Library Committee has also expressed interest in being involved. On this, the Board’s view was that long term representation may not be appropriate but that the Committee’s input would be welcomed when relevant issues are being addressed.
Verizon cell tower, Morrissey site
Mr. Domnitz reported that Verizon had written to the FAA to ask for a change in the light from flashing red to constant at night. The company had delayed sending a copy to Mr. Domnitz and had received a quick refusal with a suggestion that it could remove the light if it instead put striping on the pole (which is a faux pine tree). This strange alternative seems similar to the Tracey’s case. Mr. Domnitz suggested that the Board may wish to appeal the case, and proposed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain any background documents. He also suggested that the Board consider a change in the wording of the bylaw.
Sprint cell tower, Yagjian site
Mr. Whitehead reported that Sprint is intending to exchange some equipment on its tower on the Yagjian site; an application is expected soon.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30pm.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved as amended August 9, 2006
| 
