TOWN OF LINCOLN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
November 15, 2006
PRESENT: K.Hurd, R.Domnitz, J.Snell, B.Wolf, E.Flint
STAFF: M.Whitehead, C.Perry
7:30PM BUSINESS:
ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENT: MUNROE TREE & LANDSCAPE, INC., 9-11-13 Lewis Street, May 95/Lot 33, minor change to site plan for addition to garage under Section 17.
David Ries represented Mr. Munroe, who is now the owner of the property. He explained that the applicant is having difficulty in addressing the Board’s suggestions for improving his application. He no longer has a copy of the parking plan that was filed with the Zoning Board of Appeals, although it may be possible to obtain one. He does not wish to change the roof design in a way that would involve extensive work to remove the existing one, because of cost and because he only regards it as temporary - for a few years. He asserts that this is not a structural issue as he has discussed his submitted design with the Building Inspector who is satisfied. He questions the need for a professionally drawn plan showing the whole site layout, again for cost reasons. Therefore he asks if the Board can accept the design submitted and waive its
request for detailed plans.
The Chairman pointed out that the drawing submitted was unclear and/or inaccurate and that the Board needed to apply a standard in accepting plans. Mrs. Wolf expressed concern that the garage extension may affect parking and maneuvering arrangements and so there was a need to see the whole picture. Mr. Ries clarified that the approval received for the parking layout from the ZBA was based on the situation with the proposed garage extension in place, and therefore there would be no further change. In terms of the design of the roof, the Board did not feel that an impasse had been reached; they had suggested that a steeper pitch would function better but if the Building Inspector was satisfied they would not make this a requirement.
The applicant described his proposal with the aid of a sketch plan from the Assessor’s card, and stated that he thought he could achieve a 1ft fall across the roof without needing to join it on higher up.
The Board asked the applicant to provide an accurate drawing, which may be based on the parking layout plan, labeled and indicating the pitch of the proposed roof. The location of any lighting should be marked, and a catalog cut provided. The applicant agreed to these requests.
Minuteman Commons
Mrs. Wolf reported that there seems to be an issue with DHCD concerning the lack of elevator access to one of the affordable units.
8:00PM 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.
Ricardo Sousa of Prince, Lobel, Glovsky and Tye represented Sprint (the applicant) and Nextel (a potential collocator). He explained that both companies are building out their coverage. He wished to address some of the points that the Board had raised previously with Mr. Asmussen.
Mr. Sousa explained the proposed changes to the antennas. Sprint currently has six panel antennas. Nextel has a gap in coverage in this location. The companies have merged but two different technologies are still being used. The proposal is to remove three of the Sprint antennas and add nine for Nextel, for a total of twelve. The new shelter will be for Nextel’s equipment. The Chairman asked about the effect on Sprint’s service. The applicant’s radio frequency engineer stated that Sprint will retain almost the same level of coverage; the company has not experienced sufficient call volume to need six. Antennas come in arrays of three to cover 360 degrees. Nextel would normally have twelve but can manage with nine. The technical basis for its number of antennas is to achieve capacity and ‘spatial
diversity’.
Mr. Sousa reported that the applicant has conducted a radio frequency emission study, which he presented. Measurements of the current situation were taken, and predicted levels were added. ‘Worst case’ assumptions were used in the study, and real post-installation levels are expected to be much lower. The study shows a maximum level of 30% of the allowed exposure limit for public access areas. The Board commented that this is higher than levels it has previously seen, but recognized that it is within permitted limits. It considered that neighbors might be interested to know the predicted levels at their properties, and that perhaps a distance column should be added to the table. The Board also pointed out that the New England Deaconess development is proposed on the adjoining site, with buildings of up to three stories, and
inquired about likely exposure levels. The preliminary site plan was shown. The Board asked at what angle to the horizontal would the maximum emissions be; this was stated to be a 5% downtilt. The engineer estimated that the highest exposure level at 150ft from the antennas would be 5-7% of maximum permitted exposure.
Mr. Sousa said that the proposed 7ft by 13ft equipment shelter is smaller than usual, and that the cooling condenser will produce half as much noise as either of the two existing ones on the site. The ‘Rubix’ design has been tested for noise outdoors at Raynham, Massachusetts. Mr. Domnitz commented that the noise level reported at 100ft suggested that the equipment would be audible at the property line of the application site. The engineer reported that the testing site was close to Route 44 so there was some ambient traffic noise. Also, was not possible to measure the noise further than ten feet from the equipment so some calculations were involved. An error was noticed in the calculations, which meant that the figures given were too high; the applicant undertook to rectify this. The Board noted that the noise is directional,
which may help. The cooling unit is positioned behind louvers on the corner of the cabinet and the orientation appears to be favorable. The Board asked whether any noise reduction kit is available. The applicant considered this unnecessary, stating that the system is one of the quietest available. The Board said it would consider whether to apply its usual condition of no audible noise at the lot line.
Mr. Sousa stated that the applicant is willing to put up a sign to help to address the problem of service vehicles turning into a resident’s driveway, and provided a suggested design. The Board agreed to consult with the O’Brien household on the design of the sign. Mr. Snell enquired whether there had been any discussions with the New England Deaconess Association on the possibility of alternative access via their site. Mr. Sousa suggested that this would have to be taken up with the tower owner, Global. The applicant would fall in line with any agreement to change the access.
On the issue of FAA lighting, Mr. Sousa stated that the two towers on the site have red lights as required by the FAA. He asserted that Verizon’s light on its faux pine tree on another nearby site is the brightest. The Board did not disagree but said that it wished to minimize nuisance from all the lights. Mr. Sousa said research shows that a filter is available but it would need FAA approval. The tower owner, Global, may be willing to cooperate. The Board considered that Global may be the most appropriate party to apply to amend the light; Mr. Sousa agreed to supply a contact reference.
The applicant supplied a certificate of truth and accuracy, a map of coverage of the companies’ own facilities, and a note addressing the application of the bylaw.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Domnitz and seconded by Mr. Flint, to close the public hearing. Passed 5-0.
8:20PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: LINCOLN FUELS AND ARTHUR’S OIL CO., 110 Concord Road, Map 61/Lot 7, special permit for new signs under Section 16.
A site walk was held on November 8.
Mr. Flint gave his view that the proposed lights for the sign look reasonable, but commented that there may be more lighting than necessary on the premises as a whole. The applicant stated that the floodlights on the building are turned off at night. Mrs. Wolf reported a neighbor’s comment that the proposed lights on the sign will probably be less intrusive than the existing clear glass lights beside the door. Mr. Snell asked about hours of operation; the applicant reported these are currently 6am to 8pm but will probably change to 6am to 7pm. The ZBA decision does not specify hours.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Snell and seconded by Mr. Flint, to approve the signs as presented, with the maroon design choice for the pylon sign, subject to: light bulbs to be a maximum of 50Watts incandescent equivalent; and lights to be turned off by a half hour after closing. Passed 5-0.
The Board suggested that the owners consider a few ‘good neighbor’ improvements to the existing lights on the premises, including shielding the lights over the pumps.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Comprehensive Long Range Plan
Mr. Hurd mentioned that the CLRP Committee would be meeting the next day to discuss ideas for issues to be addressed by the plan. Then feedback will be sought from the constituent boards prior to setting up sub-groups. These may be based on the nine plan elements set by the State, plus governance.
The Board suggested some potential issues:
• Transportation issues
• Integration of schools’ plans
• Infrastructure improvements to encourage growth in South Lincoln
• Municipal electricity supply
• Need to connect with and involve the younger element of the population
• Protection of agriculture
• Difficulty of walking around town
• Home businesses
• Smaller homes
• ‘Look and feel’ of roads
• Hanscom – future issues
• Communications/media
• ‘Green issues’, including street lights, operation of transfer station.
The Chair invited further suggestions prior to the meeting.
Planning Board Meeting dates
It was agreed to cancel the December 20 meeting.
Town Planner’s Report
NE Deaconess project, 17 Cambridge Turnpike
Mr. Whitehead reported that he has met with David Albrecht since Town Meeting. NEDA is eager to make rapid progress towards the special permit, and has some requests:
1. A reduction in the normal requirement to show all trees over 6” diameter. NEDA proposes to show clusters of trees, or trees to be saved since many will be cut. The Board considered it reasonable not to hold NEDA to showing full detail in areas that will be clear cut, but wished to have the normal level of detail for the area within 100ft of the proposed Route 2 service road and of the site perimeter next to the site access road from Route 2 (Bethany Road).
2. Scale of plans: NEDA propose 1/16”=1’ rather than the normal ¼”=1’ scale. The Board considered that 1/8”=1’ would be appropriate.
3. Waiver of the town-wide mailing. The Board did not wish to approve this, at least until it was clear whether any significant changes were proposed.
Countryside Development, 188 Tower Road
Ken Eisner is proposing an amendment to the site plan, affecting the scenic road frontage. The Board considered that this could be handled as an administrative amendment and scheduled for December 6.
Hobbs Brook Farm, Reiling Pond Road
The developer is requesting a reduction in the deposited funds for the road as it has been partially constructed. It is covered by a tripartite agreement. The Board agreed to review the terms of the agreement but considered that it would be important to check the satisfactory implementation of the design before releasing any money. Mr. Whitehead will reply to the developer concerning the process.
Minutes
September 6 – approved with amendments
September 13 – approved with amendments
September 26 – approved with amendments
The meeting was adjourned at 10:35pm.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved February 21, 2007
|