TOWN OF LINCOLN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
February 20, 2008
PRESENT: R.Domnitz (Chairman), B.Wolf, J.Snell, K.Hurd, E.Flint
STAFF: M.Whitehead, C.Perry
7:30PM BUSINESS:
Minutes
The Board voted unanimously to approve the minutes of January 23 with amendments.
Soukup, 6 Woodcock Lane
The Board examined a revised landscape plan submitted under a condition of the approval for a single family house. The Board considered that the list of trees could be more clearly related to the plan in the form of a key, and asked Mr. Whitehead to convey this request to the applicant.
Recent legal cases
Mr. Whitehead supplied the Board with copies of an update on appellate land use decisions prepared by Kopelman and Paige.
CLRP survey
The Board asked about the cost of analysis for the survey of residents for the Comprehensive Long Range Plan. This will be discussed at a CLRP Steering Committee meeting on Tuesday February 26. Mr. Domnitz will attend.
7:45 PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: CHRISTINA BREITER, 10 Reiling Pond Road, Map 33/Lot 1, amendment to a cluster subdivision special permit to change a sound barrier wall in the R-1 zone under Section 6.6
Mr. Whitehead reported that the applicant requested a continuation.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Snell, to continue the hearing to March 5 at 8:00pm. Passed 5-0
8:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING: ROBERT DAVOLI, 6 Winchelsea Lane, Map 101/Lots 7-5, 7-6, site plan review for an addition to residence in the R-1 zone under Section 6.6 and 17.7.
The applicant attended with his architect, Michael Price.
The Board received two letters from neighbors, Alaric Naiman and Ellen and Peter McCann. Mr. Naiman’s letter referred to drainage and noise issues connected with the existing Davoli house. Mr. and Mrs. Mc Cann’s letter expressed concern about the visual impact of the proposal on their house and asked for more screen planting.
The architect introduced the plans for a one story addition with a rooftop terrace, to the east side of the house. Retroactive approval is also being sought for a change to the driveway lights. Mr. Price stated that the addition is within the building envelope that was approved as part of the site plan for the house, which was a change from the original building envelope.
He presented a photo montage of the proposal, with the existing view for comparison. The addition has a flat roof and glazed walls. The land slopes down towards Farrar Pond.
The Board asked about the height of the house, with and without the addition. It was stated that the existing house is more than 36 feet from the lowest exposed point to the highest point of the roof. It was approved under a previous bylaw that measured the roof height differently. The bylaw changed in 2003. The addition appears to increase the vertical span slightly, in a downward direction. The Board concluded that it would need to calculate the height of the house with the addition, using average natural grade. The proposal may be able to satisfy the height requirement using this method if the Board allows its use. If the height is too great under the average natural grade method then the applicant may need to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The applicant questioned whether it was the intent of the
bylaw to prevent downward rather than upward height extensions.
The proposed exterior lighting was discussed. The driveway lights that have been installed and are proposed for keeping are low ones to the south side of the driveway (in the original intended lighting position not the approved revised one). For the house addition, three recessed lights are proposed in the overhanging roof above the first floor balcony that connects the stairs to the addition. On the roof terrace, small, ½W LED lights are proposed to mark the perimeter of the paved area, which will also have a guard rail. Mr. Flint commented that the LED lights would be quite bright, but the Board considered that the main light coming from the addition will be interior light shining through the large windows/ glass walls. The applicant stated that it will be lit consistently with the rest of the
house, which has 9 ft ceilings and recessed lights.
Neighbors living at 4 Winchelsea Lane attended the hearing and asked for assurances that the land adjoining their property would not be used extensively for construction staging as was the case for the original house construction.
Buzz Constable appeared on behalf of the Farrar Pond Association and Farrar Pond Conservation Trust. He drew attention to these interests but did not anticipate that the addition would have a major impact.
The Board suggested that the applicant provide a response to the points raised in letters from neighbors. The applicant asserted that he has carried out extensive planting, including some provided voluntarily on a neighbor’s property. Mr. Constable said he believed that a sediment problem that arose during construction was addressed. Board members wished to visit the site, and agreed to do so individually.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Hurd and seconded by Mr. Flint, to continue the hearing to March 5 at 8:20pm. Passed 5-0
8:40 PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: JAMES & KAREN DWYER, 83 Page Road, Map 50/Lot 4-3, site plan review for construction of a new residence in the R-1 zone under Section 6.0 and 17.7.
The applicant attended with his architect. The Board held a second site walk on February 9.
Mr. Snell advised the applicant that the Cambridge Water Authority wishes to be notified when construction begins; it is trying to work with homeowners to minimize pollution to the Cambridge water supply.
Mrs. Wolf asked about septic provision for the accessory building, since it is shown as having a bathroom. The applicant provided a new plan showing more detail of the septic layout. He stated that the main sewer line no longer goes through the woodland area but runs along the driveway, along with other utilities. It will be marked on a plan.
The Board discussed whether the mound for the septic system could be reduced or moved back. The applicant believed there was little choice in the location, but stated that further percolation tests will be conducted in the wet season to see if the height of the mound can be reduced. The Board considered that disturbance of the 10 ft buffer will be inevitable but that the same is true on the neighbor’s side of the boundary (Hawkins). The applicant agreed to ask his landscape architect to work with the neighbor to address the buffer issues.
The applicant reported that the driveway design has been reworked, reducing the maximum cut to 4 feet.
The orientation of the accessory building and the size of its parking area were discussed. The roof of the building has been lowered and the required setback is now 27 feet. Mr. Hurd suggested placing the parking area adjacent to the driveway to minimize the need for additional turning space and the loss of trees. The applicant stated that he wished to have a lawn area continuing from the house to in front of the accessory building, with the parking hidden on the far side. The Board asked if the parking area could be made smaller. The applicant has a large truck, but agreed to examine whether the turning space could be reduced.
The Board asked about the material to be used for the stone walls. This was stated to be fieldstone.
Exterior lighting was discussed. Small wall-mounted lights are proposed at the ends of the ornamental walls, in the driveway turning area beside the house, and to the rear of the house. The Board considered that the number of lights proposed in the turning area was more than necessary, and the applicant agreed to limit these to three. Shielded downlights are proposed on the house and accessory building, with 60W typeA bulbs. Mr. Hurd recommended dimmer switches.
The applicant will supply a revised set of plans.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Snell and seconded by Mr. Flint, to continue the hearing to March 5 at 8:40pm. Passed 5-0
9:00 PM REQUEST FOR MINOR CHANGE TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL: MICHAEL & SUSAN SALM, 236 Lincoln Road, Map 117/Lot 22-1, request for change to roofing and cupola on previously approved accessory structure.
Susan Salm explained that a change in the roofing material is proposed for the barn-like accessory building that was approved in June, 2007. A change to the cupola was being considered but it is now proposed to remain as approved. The proposal is to substitute asphalt shingles for the previous metal roof. Mr. Whitehead explained that abutter notification is not required for a minor change, but that the neighbor, Eleanor Gallitano, was notified as a courtesy. The Board agreed that the proposal was a minor change. A sample was shown, in a grey-brown color, ‘heather blend’.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Flint, to approve the minor change as presented. Passed 5-0
9:20 PM DISCUSSION OF DECISION: ANDREW EGENDORF, 10 Tower Road, Map 74/Lot 24, site plan review for an addition to house in the R-1 Zone under Section 6.0 and 17.7
The hearing was closed on January 16. The applicant has supplied a new plan for the septic system, showing the reserve area within the cleared area under the easement. Because the proposed system is not on land owned by the applicant, it will need a variance from the state and the local Board of Health. The Planning Board considered its options in relation to this aspect of the site plan. It was reluctant to allow the clearance of woodland for the septic system, but noted the applicant’s representation that there is no alternative location for the system on land that is already cleared. The Board considered that the system should only be allowed in this location if an equivalent area of compensatory planting is provided to soften views from the trail, and if no wider area of disturbance is caused.
The Board wished to communicate to the Board of Health its concern about the impact and its preference for ensuring that all avenues are explored including restricting the number of bedrooms or not allowing a garbage grinder.
The Board did not consider it appropriate to allow operation of helicopters or other aircraft, in view of the character of the surroundings and proximity to the facility of Hanscom field. It considered the design of the house and exterior lighting to be satisfactory.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Flint, to approve the site plan as presented, subject to the following conditions:
- Helicopter or other aircraft operations are not allowed
- The limit of tree clearing for the septic system, depicted by a dashed line, shall also be the limit of disturbance
- A 10,000 sq ft area of compensatory planting shall be provided in the vicinity of the septic system, on the uphill side; a landscaping plan providing for mixed evergreen and deciduous planting in a naturalistic pattern, shall be submitted for the Board’s approval.
Passed 5-0
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Snell and seconded by Mr. Hurd, to authorize the Chairman to write a letter to the Board of Health and Massachusetts DEP opposing the grant of a variance for the septic system as proposed, because the Planning Board does not believe that alternatives for locating the system on the applicant’s land, including limiting the number of bedrooms and/or garbage grinder, have been fully explored. Passed 5-0
The meeting was adjourned at 11:00pm.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved as amended, March 19, 2008
| 
