TOWN OF LINCOLN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
January 9, 2008
PRESENT: R.Domnitz (Chairman), K.Hurd, B.Wolf, J.Snell, E.Flint
STAFF: M.Whitehead, C.Perry
7:30PM BUSINESS:
Hall, 20 Garland Road
The proposal for additions to a house was approved at the last meeting, subject to confirmation that it complies with the requirement of 250 ft lot width through the principal structure. The applicant has submitted a plan showing a rectangle 250 feet long around the house. The Board noted that this shows that the width between the two widest side lot lines is adequate but does not address the remaining lot lines. The lot is an irregular shape, with nine straight segments in addition to the curved street frontage. If only one segment is counted as a rear lot line, then lines of less than 250 feet can be drawn between some pairs of side lot lines, through the existing house, thereby violating the 250 ft minimum lot width requirement. The proposed additions do not create any new such lines.
The Board noted that a building permit was issued for the house more than six years ago, so the statute of limitations in MGL Ch. 40A S.9 applies to it. The Board found that the proposed additions do not create any new zoning violations.
Mr. Whitehead was asked to revise the draft decision to accord with the above findings.
8:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: DAVID BAU, 88 Lincoln Road, Map 85/Lot 1, scenic road approval to cut down a tree with change to site plan under Article XVII of the General Bylaws and Section 17.7.
Mr. Whitehead reported that the tree warden has no objection to the removal of the tree, provided the applicant pays for the work. He believes that the tree is probably an ash rather than an oak, notes that it has a damaged limb and is in the electricity wires, and agrees that it obstructs sight lines. The Board read email messages from the tree warden covering these points.
Mr. Bau showed further pictures of the tree and of relevant views.
The Board noted that although abutters have been notified and the tree has been marked with a ribbon, no objections have been received.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Hurd and seconded by Mr. Flint, to approve the cutting down of the tree at the applicant’s expense. Passed 5-0
The Board agreed not to require this decision to be recorded at the Registry.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Blakely, 144-146 Lincoln Road
The Chairman reported that he has researched the issue of gross floor area in connection with the lot coverage bylaw. He has visited both of the two buildings and compiled floorspace figures for each floor using the best available sources. He concluded that the above-ground, existing and proposed gross floor area is less than 25% of the lot area. Looking at the basements, that of number 144 is of better quality. It only covers a small portion of the building footprint, and when it is added to the above-ground floor area on the lot, the total remains less than 25% of the lot area. The basement of number 146 is of poorer quality, having substandard headroom and showing signs of damp. If that basement area is also added in, the total gross floor area exceeds 25% of the lot area. The bylaw is silent as to what
types of floors should be included.
The applicant has submitted a calculation giving a total area of 24.8% including basements.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Hurd and seconded by Mr. Domnitz, to reconsider the application. Passed 5-0
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Hurd to rescind the approval based on a lack of total information, poor architecture and not having been informed that retail use was intended for the ground floor. This motion did not receive a second.
Mr. Domnitz suggested that a reasonable approach to the gross floor area calculation would be to include the basement of 144 but not that of 146. The Board acknowledged that it is usual in New England for some excavation to be done to make foundations for walls, and that the quality of the resulting below-ground space is variable.
The architecture was discussed further. Mr. Hurd favored a redesign whereas Mr. Domnitz thought that overall it represented an improvement. The Board considered that a quiet color would be helpful and wished to retain a right to review this aspect; alternatively, white would be satisfactory.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Domnitz and seconded by Mr. Flint, to approve the development subject to conditions that: the applicant shall plant an ornamental flowering tree in the northeast corner of the property as additional screening; any color for the body and trim of either building other than white requires the prior approval of the Planning Board; and the basements shall not be used for any commercial purpose. Passed 3-2
(Mr. Hurd and Mr. Snell voted against)
The Board signed the decision.
Discussion of possible zoning changes:
Signs
The Board was happy with the drafted wording.
Preliminary meetings (Section 17.7.3)
Mr. Domnitz suggested deleting ‘proposed’ before ‘renovations’ in the first sentence and being consistent about capitalization. Mr. Flint wished to see vegetation removal included in the triggers, but it was agreed that this was hard to define and would need to be considered further. It was considered that the remainder of the existing paragraph would benefit from simplification and Mr. Domnitz agreed to review it.
Alternative energy structures
Mr. Snell outlined current proposals by the UK government for designating certain types of small scale power generation equipment as ‘permitted development’, a by-right provision. The purpose of these proposals is to give householders some certainty as to whether their equipment needs planning permission; to encourage use of renewable and low-carbon energy sources, while retaining local planning control over equipment that exceeds stated parameters; and to increase consistency between areas. He distributed copies of a summary of the proposals, which appeared to be a useful model for potential bylaw changes. Mrs. Perry explained that the UK government employed consultants to review the types of equipment available, identify the impacts and concerns raised by each and recommend suitable limits
for allowing equipment without planning permission.
The Board considered the tabulated summary useful. It recognized that a proactive approach to new energy equipment may have merits. The interaction with other types of regulation such as pollution rating of equipment by the Federal EPA may have to be explored. In framing any bylaw change, it will be necessary to consider the types of equipment to cover, how they are treated under the existing bylaws (for example as accessory structures, subject to setbacks and height limits), whether or not existing definitions are clear, whether certain limits should apply, whether equipment should be allowed by right or through a special permit, and how the bylaw provisions will interact with the Historic District Commission’s jurisdiction.
The Board concluded that the Green Energy Committee would be an appropriate forum to examine these issues. A zoning change sponsored by the Planning Board may be appropriate next year.
Lighting
Mr. Domnitz reported that he had examined the Lexington bylaw. He distributed copies of relevant parts. However he did not find it a very useful model for improving control over glare. Mr. Whitehead was asked to seek other examples via the Massachusetts planners’ listserve.
Potential addition to WCF District: Pine Hill
Mr. Domnitz reported that he met with Kathi Anderson of the Thoreau Institute/ Walden Woods Project, who indicated that her organization would oppose any proposal to use Pine Hill for a cell tower. She considered that a tower would detract from the ambience of the hill top for local walkers who visit it. The organization is also opposed to the Red Rail Farm site.
A possible alternative option for extending cell phone coverage is greater use of the tower at the public safety site. The Board decided not to pursue a change to the WCF District this year.
Report from MAPC meeting
Three members had attended a meeting coordinated by MAPC to discuss development proposals and traffic issues relating to the nearby portion of Route 128. Mr. Domnitz reported that the meeting was well-attended. As reported by MAPC, the traffic studies indicate that the proposals will increase traffic congestion significantly. The Board commented on the existing long tailbacks in the peak hours. Waltham is interested in increasing its property tax revenues. Developers may be expected to contribute to solutions/ mitigation. There was some discussion of potential public transport measures. Sara Mattes proposed a working group of affected towns.
Recent legal case, Norwell
Copies of a newspaper report of a recent legal case were distributed. The court supported the denial by a ZBA of a special permit for major expansion of a small house. Mr. Domnitz had viewed the actual decision and reported that although the circumstances are narrow, relating to a substandard lot, the proposed house did not infringe setbacks and the denial rested on detriment to the neighborhood.
Minutes – deferred.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30pm.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved as amended, February 6, 2008
| 
