The Town of Lincoln, MA - Planning Board Minutes

Mr. Whitehead reported that the contract with Community Opportunities Group for work on the Comprehensive Long Range Plan has been drawn up and has been approved by the CLRP Steering Committee. The end date for the work has been moved a little later, to April 15, 2009. The contract includes the scope of services and the proposal as well as legal wording,

Kathryn Anagnostakis attended. The proposal is for a minor change to the site plan for a house, which was approved by the Planning Board in June. Following the Planning Board’s approval, the design was reviewed by the Zoning Board of Appeals and was modified with small reductions in floorspace, side yard and height as set out in a summary by the applicant. The Planning Board’s approval is requested for minor changes so that the plans match those approved by the ZBA.

Nick Boynton and Larry Herthel reviewed the history of the land, which is at the south west corner of the intersection of Routes 126 and 117. There is a main house, a carriage house, and a cabin at the rear. Mr. Herthel previously drew up an ANR plan for five lots, approved in 2004. An application for a single family residence on one of these lots was submitted to the Board in 2005 (Fico) but withdrawn.

The Board discussed the first stage of planning a cluster development, which is to show how many lots could be achieved under normal zoning rules. The prospective applicants have drawn up a sketch plan showing six lots but the most westerly lot (where the cabin is located) depends upon creating a cul de sac exceeding 500ft in length. This would need a waiver from the Board. Mr. Flint expressed the view that it would be contrary to the philosophy of the bylaw to allow such a waiver for a proof plan. Alternative access to the cabin lot may be available via an existing easement; however the Board pointed out that this lot does not appear to have legal frontage. Mr. Boynton and Mr. Herthel said that they would investigate further whether the cabin site can be shown to be a legal lot.

The Board discussed the criteria for establishing buildable lots. Parts of the land under discussion are in wetlands, including a small portion of Farrar Pond which is a man-made pond. Mr. Whitehead advised that wetlands can be included in the lot areas but that buildable envelopes need to be shown, with adequate access and setbacks. The definition of land useable for residential construction refers to findings by the Planning Board and the Board of Health. The Board considered that the proof plan needed more supporting evidence, and a reduction in the number of lots may be necessary.

The proponents’ aim is to create a cluster subdivision with conservation land including wetlands. The draft plan shows six lots of varying sizes, with building envelopes for new houses along the southern edge. The Board commented that the building envelopes were rather small.

It was stated that there is an existing cart path which is partly within the 100ft wetland buffer zone but that Conservation staff have recommended keeping the access on this line. The Board advised that the 50ft zone is inviolable and that approval is needed for work in the 100ft zone. The plan has not yet been discussed with the Water Commission.

The Board discussed the desirability of a cluster development. Mr. Whitehead suggested that it may be a good idea in principle, in order to enable development to better fit the terrain, but probably with one lot fewer. Mr. Boynton stated that there is potential to provide a better walking path and that the Conservation Commission is interested in improving path connections in the area. Mr. Hurd suggested that a clear proposal will be needed for this, to determine the degree of public benefit. He also recommended consulting the neighbors about the plan.

In terms of the positioning of the houses, the Board asked about proximity to neighboring homes. It was established that there are two houses nearby on Route 117 but that the Davoli lots to the south are empty. The Board considered that it would like to walk the site if a revised proof plan is drafted.

In relation to the lighting on the building, Mr. Boynton stated that he is prepared to consider changing the current lights in response to neighbor and town concerns, if he is given clear guidance. It was established that the previous bright spotlights, which were a zoning violation, have been removed. The current lights were stated to be replacements for pre-existing ones, and to be operated on a timer. The Board referred Mr. Boynton to the dark sky website and suggested that fitting shields to the lights would help.

Mrs. Wolf asked about other recent changes to the site. Mr. Boynton explained that he is trying to make the parking more orderly and to control dumping. A new awning on the building was approved by the Building Inspector. Mr. Whitehead stated that site plan review was not triggered by any of the changes and that there was no previously approved site plan. The Board asked if the number of parking spaces complies with the bylaw; Mr. Boynton confirmed that it does and stated that the spaces for building users and commuters are being distinguished by color coding. The Board supported Mr. Boynton’s aims for improving for the site.

The Board asked about provision for rail commuters to shelter in the building. Mr. Boynton said that people can shelter in the building’s hallway and use the bathrooms, although this is not advertised. Also he suggested that the new awning will help. Mr. Snell reported that the bathrooms have not always been accessible since the doors to the stairwells are sometimes locked, and that there is little space in the hallway. He pointed out that the deed for the property specifies that facilities be provided, and that the railroad company has the authority to review arrangements, with a potential penalty of property confiscation by the MBTA for non-compliance.

Mr. Boynton had previously expressed interest in adding a storage shed to the rear of the building for one of his tenants. He stated that this tenant has now left but he would still be interested in discussing the potential. Mr. Snell suggested that it may be possible to construct a combined waiting room and storage facility, provided this did not cause the loss of required parking spaces. Site plan review would be needed. Mr. Hurd said that the Town is keen to pursue further improvements to the South Lincoln area, begun by the approved Mall redevelopment. The Comprehensive Long Range Plan may address this. Mr. Boynton recalled that the previous charrette exercise had not led to any action because a relaxation of the parking standards was not granted. Also he was unsure if any expansion of the building was feasible without sewer provision.

8:20 PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: KIMBERLY AND MARK SOUKUP, 6 Woodcock Lane, Map 106/Lot 3, site plan review for teardown and reconstruction of a single family residence in the R1 zone under Section 6.0 and 17.7.

Kimberly and Mark Soukup attended with their project architect, Chris Crump. Mr. Whitehead supplied copies of the Assessor’s property cards for two recently built large houses in the vicinity of the applicants’ property for comparison, as requested by neighbors.

The Board conducted a site walk the previous Saturday. They had some difficulty relating the position of the proposed structure and driveway to existing trees, and in particular wished to clarify whether the driveway would affect a large beech tree, which they felt should be protected. The applicants stated that the tree would stay. The architect outlined the effect of the project on trees. Mr. Hurd questioned the proposal to move a large fine specimen from the rear of the existing house and wondered if the proposed house footprint could be shifted instead. Mr. Domnitz asked whether a large juniper has grown into the septic system expansion area. The applicants stated that a system has been approved for six bedrooms.

Mrs. Wolf asked if some regrading is proposed, since there is currently a depression to the rear of the deck house. The Board felt it needed a clearer depiction of existing and proposed grades to properly assess cut and fill operations. It also thought that information on existing vegetation along Weston Road and the neighbor’s boundary would be helpful in considering impacts.

Mr. Hurd wondered if a shorter driveway would be preferable. He was also concerned about the house reading as one long façade and suggested that staggering it may help. The architect suggested that the trees may help to soften the effect. The Board asked for a comparison of the heights (top elevations) of the new and old structures. The architect commented that the house has a lower design than some other large houses in the area.

The applicants agreed to show existing and proposed structures, grades and vegetation, together with the proposed septic system, on a single plan by a registered architect. They also agreed to sketch the proposed driveway on an aerial image base. The driveway material was discussed, including blacktop with stone rolled into the surface.

Mr. Whitehead reported that the Town proposes to conduct a height test at the current height and at 80ft. The new tower, which comes in sections, has been purchased with a grant. The Zoning Board of Appeals has determined that if there is no increase in height, no hearing is needed, and the Town Administrator has stated that if the tower is required to have a light, it will not be erected.

Mr. Domnitz reported that the Zoning Board of Appeals met recently to consider the Red Rail Farm cell tower proposal. The ZBA asked T-Mobile to provide improved documents, and continued the hearing. The Town’s consultant is examining alternatives to the proposal.