TOWN OF LINCOLN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
October 11, 2006
PRESENT: K.Hurd (Chairman), E.Flint, B.Wolf, R.Domnitz, J.Snell
STAFF: M.Whitehead, C.Perry
7:30PM BUSINESS:
DISCUSSION OF DECISION: KINGSLEY AND LESLIE BROOKS, 39 North Great Road, Map 12/Lot 11-0, site plan review for new single family residence under Section 17.7.
A draft denial decision had been circulated to the Board. Mr. Whitehead reported some minor changes in wording suggested by town counsel. The Board agreed to incorporate these, together with a further minor editing change.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Domnitz and seconded by Mr. Snell, to deny site plan approval for the proposed residence. Passed 4-0.
(Mrs. Wolf did not participate as she was not present for all sessions of the hearing)
The decision was signed as amended.
Ventresca, 0 South Great Road
The Board signed the decision on a site plan for a single family residence.
8:00PM PUBLIC HEARING: NSTAR, removal of trees under Article XVII Scenic Road in conjunction with the Tree Warden under Public Shade Tree Act (MGL Chapter 87).
A number of residents of Old Conant Road and Old Sudbury Road attended for this hearing.
Ken Bassett, the Tree Warden, introduced the proposal by NSTAR Electric and Gas Corporation, to remove trees under their electricity wires. The trees are growing in the right of way of various town roads: Tower Road, Old Sudbury Road, South Great Road, Weston Road, Old County Road, Boyce Farm Road, Conant Road, Page Road, Trapelo Road, and Stonehedge Road. All these roads except for South Great Road, Boyce Farm Road, and Stonehedge Road are designated as scenic roads. NSTAR identified sixty-one trees for removal. The Tree Warden reviewed these with NSTAR’s senior arborist, according to the following criteria:
• trees that are dead, dying, defective or in danger of interfering with the wires;
• trees of a weak variety that are likely to die: black locust, black cherry, or native ash;
• trees that are healthy but close to the wires, and backed up by other healthy trees nearby.
On this basis, Mr. Bassett agreed with most of the proposed removals, but had reservations about ten of them. The full list of trees was advertised for the hearing.
Bill Hayes, Senior Arborist for NSTAR, explained that there are two electric circuits, previously owned by Boston Edison, which are poor performers. These are in Lincoln and Weston. Trees are one part of the problem and hardware is another. Electricity wires flex and can be damaged by abrasion. In addition there are public safety considerations; many trees are burnt, dead or damaged. The trees proposed for removal are the worst offenders, seen as an immediate risk. Pruning work will also be undertaken, and further removals may be proposed in future. NSTAR is aiming to achieve eight feet of clearance around the wires. The trees have been marked with blue ribbons. Trees on private property are not the subject of this hearing but they have been marked with an ‘X’ and the owners’ permission sought.
Mr. Bassett suggested that if there are objections, NSTAR could look to see if there are other solutions, but Mr. Hayes was not optimistic that the wires could be reconfigured in this situation. Mr. Bassett commented that town staff have been wary of dealing with trees that are near wires, and NSTAR has been slow to take action, so the work is overdue and generally to be welcomed. Mr. Hayes commented that NSTAR has tended to ignore trees when people have objected to their cutting, but that as a result some have grown large and may be dangerous.
Mr. Domnitz asked if the wires are insulated. Mr. Bassett said this is not the case. He clarified that the electricity wires are the higher ones on the poles; there may be telecommunications wires beneath them. He stated that tree guards can only be used as a temporary solution.
A resident asked if the wires could be covered with insulation near the trees, as can be done with an electric fence. Mr. Hayes explained that this was precluded by the higher voltage (5 to 13.8 kv). The State’s Department of Energy is the primary regulator and would not allow it. The Board commented that wires can start fires.
Mr. Whitehead reported that an email had been received from Mr. Pingeon of 47 Old Sudbury Road, objecting to a tree near pole 21 being removed. Mr. Hayes agreed that this is a lovely tree but said that its base is totally rotted and it could fall.
Major Dessain of 62 Conant Road had sent an email in support of the cutting program.
Mr. Bassett ran through the list of trees that he had reservations about being cut:
two on Tower Road near poles 73 and 63; one on South Great Road, near pole 30/41; and six trees on Conant Road (three near pole 22 and one near each of poles 25,48 and 50).
Mr. Mahoney of 54 Conant Road said that he wished to object to the cutting of a second tree near pole 25 next to his property; this is a red oak. He stated that it is not touching the wires.
Another resident queried the inclusion of an oak at pole 47 and some maples at pole 38-39, suggesting that they could be pruned rather than removed. Mr. Hayes commented that pruning has the disadvantage of encouraging fast new growth and that in general it is better to remove selected trees, leaving some intact ones.
Mr. Bassett said he was unsure whether the tree on Stonehedge Road was on private land; he would investigate this.
Mr. Bassett mentioned that the tree on Page Road was included at his request. The one on Trapelo Road was reported to him as being rotten. Its cutting will need the approval of the Historic District Commission.
The Planning Board was amenable to holding back the trees that were the subject of specific objections or queries, for further consideration. Mr. Hayes offered for himself and an engineer to discuss them on site.
Mr. Mahoney presented a petition signed by several residents of Conant Road, objecting to the cutting of all the trees listed in the notice. Under the Shade Trees Act, if objection is received in writing, then trees cannot be cut without the approval of the Selectmen.
In relation to its responsibility under the Scenic Roads Bylaw, the Planning Board accepted that there was a general case for tree cutting on the grounds of safety and electrical reliability, and was minded to be guided by the advice of the Tree Warden on specific trees.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Domnitz, to approve removal of all the trees not specifically cited by the Tree Warden or neighbors as the subject of objections or queries; and to recommend a similar course of action to the Selectmen. Passed 5-0.
8:20PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: SPRINT WIRELESS, 37 Cambridge Turnpike, Map 24/Lot 1, special permit and site plan review for change and expansion of equipment on an existing wireless tower under Section 12.6.
Catherine O’Brien attended for this item.
Mr. Domnitz reported that since the last session, he had sent an email to Mr. Asmussen, Sprint’s agent, listing five matters to be followed up. He also stated that under the bylaw, the change will require a new special permit rather than an amendment to the previous one.
Mr. Asmussen presented a photograph of the proposed cabinet type, and information on its design. He explained that the concrete pad will be extended within the existing fence. He distributed copies of the results of sound testing that had been carried out on equivalent air conditioned cabinets. This had been conducted within a building, to test maximum noise conditions. The Board considered it loud and doubted whether the equipment would meet the criterion of being inaudible at the property boundary, which the Board usually applies as a condition on wireless communications facilities. Mr. Asmussen said that the level of noise was similar to domestic appliances, and thought this should be acceptable, but the Board disagreed, pointing out that neighbors will not be experiencing the noise voluntarily, and the background is quiet. Mr. Domnitz
said that as a guideline, ‘inaudible’ could be interpreted as around 20dbA. Mr. Asmussen stated that the air conditioner will face away from the property boundary. The Board thought this would help, but they requested evidence that the equipment used will not cause a noise problem.
In relation to the emissions data for the current operating situation, Mr. Asmussen reported that this is not available but there are plans to do the tests. On the question of the light, Mr. Asmussen said that the information should be available from Global Signal, the current owner of the tower. Mr. Whitehead mentioned that he has been in touch with Global about the town’s request for help with improving radio coverage for the emergency services, but not about the light on the tower. Mr. Domnitz considered that Sprint should be able to supply the answers, as they were the recipients of the original special permit. He offered to try to contact the previous Sprint attorney. No information was provided on the potential shielding of lights; Mr. Asmussen agreed to look into this.
The Board said that the remaining issue for residents is signage. It was agreed that Catherine O’Brien will provide suggested signage details, with a view to Sprint paying for this.
The Board pointed out that the compliance certificate requires a signature; Mr. Asmussen will attend to this.
Mr. Domnitz offered to follow up with an email on the outstanding issues.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf, and seconded by Mr. Flint, to continue the hearing to November 15 at 8:00pm. Passed 5-0.
8:40 PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: AMJAD HUSAIN AND INDERNEEL SAHAI, 9 Reiling Pond Road, Map 33/Lot 11-5, site plan review for a new single family residence under Section 17.7.
Jessica DeGrace attended in place of Paul Apkarian, the architect. She presented changes to the design in response to the Board’s previous suggestions. A window had been revised slightly, and the gable near the garage had been made more symmetrical. The basement was no longer a walk out design. There would be some windows at the rear of the basement.
Questions had arisen about the trail easement. Mr. Whitehead reported that Buzz Constable’s advice was that the trail seemed to be on the adjacent lot 6, and therefore the applicant’s proposals should not be affecting it; also that a trail should have a grade of no more than 3%. Upon re-examining the site plan, the Board formed the opinion that the re-grading for the septic system extends into an adjacent saleable lot, where the trail easement is, and therefore the plan needs to be revised to stay within the lot boundaries. It appeared that there was scope to place the septic system closer to the house without disrupting the old stone wall, and also to avoid cutting as many trees. The applicant was advised to address these issues.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Flint, to continue the hearing to November 1st at 8:40pm. Passed 5-0.
9:00 PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION: RURAL LAND FOUNDATION, 145 Lincoln Road, Map 95/Lot 38, Preliminary Development and Use Plan, South Lincoln Overlay Zone, renovation of Mall and new Post Office/Café complex under Section 12.7.
Geoff McGean, Sarah Andrysiak and Ed Nardi attended.
The RLF gave a quick update on their progress in addressing some of the issues raised at the public hearing. Donelans’ consultant has agreed to study alternative entrances to the store, in terms of how they would impact the store. The RLF has met with Codman Farm and they have tested the turning layouts with a tractor, with positive results. The Farm does not wish to have a two way access beside the rail tracks.
The RLF is thinking of moving the new building group slightly towards the existing Mall, to keep available the option of a two way entrance/exit in future. This will mean that the green is a little smaller. The Board asked if the northern entrance will be one way (in only). If so, it could be positioned further from the property line to keep more of the existing vegetation. The Chairman suggested that it would make sense to at least trial this arrangement. The Board supported keeping the smaller parking lot in this area, with the ability to turn within it. The Board would have to consider establishing triggers to require the additional reserve parking. The Board said that on the issue of parking, it was prepared to bear in mind that not all the businesses would be busy at the same times, and that people adapt their habits if there is
congestion at certain times.
A floorspace breakdown was supplied. A new sectional of the covered walkway will be provided.
Mr. Snell suggested a canopy over the windows of Donelans, on the side facing the railroad, and more attention to pedestrian routes from the rail platforms. Mr. Hurd thought that pedestrian crossings and routes across the parking lot needed consideration. A further suggestion was that it may be possible to extend the landscaped area around the corner of the store slightly. Mrs. Wolf suggested the need for a back up plan if the restaurant does not go ahead.
It was agreed that the materials and content for the Town Meeting presentation would be discussed at the next meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Comprehensive Long Range Planning Committee
Mr. Whitehead reported that the Committee was no longer planning to ask for funding of consultants at the Special Town Meeting, but simply to make a report at this stage. A smaller amount of funding is expected to be available for assistance with making progress in the meantime.
New England Deaconess Association Project
Mrs. Wolf reported that some people have asked if the Board will obtain an independent review of NEDA’s background studies, especially traffic. Mr. Whitehead and Mr. Hurd commented that they found NEDA’s traffic forecasts credible from their previous experience, although this could be considered. The Board considered it important that NEDA address thoroughly the traffic arrangements for the period before Route 2 is reconstructed, including the driveway’s wetland crossing.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:10pm.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved as amended, January 3, 2007
|