TOWN OF LINCOLN
MINUTES OF PLANNING BOARD MEETING
Held on February 4, 2009
At 7:30 PM in the Donaldson Room, Lincoln Town Offices
PRESENT: R. Domnitz (Chairman), K.Hurd, J.Snell, J.Craig, B.Wolf
STAFF: M.Whitehead, C.Perry
7:30 PM PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUATION: MICHAEL VACCARO, 12 Reiling Pond Road, Map 33/Lot 11-8, site plan review for construction of a new single family house under Section 17.7.
The applicant attended with Tom Frisardi, attorney, and Shallan Fitzgerald, engineer. Christina Breiter was also present. William (Buzz) Constable represented the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust.
Mr.Vaccaro presented a new conceptual grading plan covering lot 7 as well as lot 8 as requested. He also supplied corrected house drawings. Mr. Frisardi stated that covenants exist for regrading work on the conservation land in connection with house septic systems and that no easement is needed to do regrading on lot 7 for lot 8’s septic system as the two lots are in the same ownership. Only one system will be constructed at a time. The applicant agreed to show a limit of disturbance on lot 7 for the current proposal, at 40 feet from the lot line.
Mr. Constable stated that the LLCT’s approval is needed for work on the conservation land under the terms of the conservation restriction. There is a need to ensure that the trail is not adversely affected and that suitable topsoil is used. He noted that the Trust should not withhold approval if there is no practical and feasible alternative. A retaining wall might be an alternative but it would be undesirable. The Trust needs more information in writing to make its decision. The Trust has not yet been consulted on lot 7. Mr. Constable observed that from the new conceptual plan, lot 7 presents bigger issues with steep grades in the area of the trail. Ms. Fitzgerald explained that the proposed grades are predicated on groundwater conditions, which were tested some years ago. She said that the design
is similar to the original conceptual layout but uses more detailed calculations. The Board suggested that the design team examine the potential to reduce the impact of lot 7’s development on the trail by substituting a four bedroom septic system for the five bedroom one shown, and shifting the house position slightly within the building envelope. The Board is only currently reviewing lot 8 but it needs an idea of how the two lots will mesh. Mr. Hurd suggested that the stone wall should not undulate too much or it will look unnatural. Mr. Snell asked if the trail easement could be moved. Mr. Constable advised that this could be done with the consent of all the parties, but that the area of the conservation restriction is fixed.
The Board asked for Ms. Breiter’s opinion of the proposed grades. She said she was satisfied and preferred the slopes to retaining walls.
On lot 8, Mr. Constable expressed a concern about the amount of tree cutting needed. The Board noted that a proper landscape plan is still needed.
Mr. Vaccaro reported that he asked for further information about the dark sky lights and was informed that the dark sky model has frosted glass. The Board confirmed that it was satisfied with the gross floorspace calculations; the attic and basement do not need to be included.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Domnitz, to continue the hearing to February 18th at 8:00 PM. Passed 5-0
8:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING: FRED WINCHELL & THERESA MANNING, 221 Concord Road, Map 101/Lot 7-2, site plan review for a garage addition to a house in a cluster subdivision under Section 6.6.5 and Section 17.7.
Fred Winchell attended. He explained that the house was built around 16 years ago and has no garage. The proposal is for a single story, two car garage attached to the house, accessed by the existing driveway off Concord Road. A copy of the cluster subdivision plan was included in the packet and Mr. Whitehead provided a copy of the approval notice. The garage proposal has been to the Conservation Commission and Mr. Whitehead reported that the Conservation Officer confirmed it was approved.
Mr. Winchell presented additional photographs and a more detailed site plan (dated January 16) that were produced in connection with the Conservation hearing. He stated that the garage will be built on a slab where there is currently a dirt area. There will be some regrading to the rear to allow access to the septic system. A small retaining wall will be constructed of boulders. Some small shrubs will be removed, but no trees. Mr. Winchell said that the garage will be well screened by existing vegetation and slopes. A woodshed on the site is to be demolished. No trails are affected. Two dark sky lights are proposed on the building.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Snell and seconded by Mrs. Wolf, to approve the proposal as submitted, incorporating the plans presented at this meeting, with a condition that the retaining wall shall not exceed five feet in height. Passed 5-0
8:20 PM PUBLIC HEARING: METRO PCS, 295 Cambridge Turnpike (Farrington Memorial site), Map 48/Lot 7, special permit for wireless PCS facility under Section 12.6 and Section 17.
Attorney Scott Lacy of Prince, Lobel, Glovsky and Tye attended together with a Metro PCS agent and an engineer. Mr. Lacy reported that the company’s services have now been launched in this area.
A preliminary meeting was held on November 19th, 2008. The proposal is to construct a second wireless communication tower on the Farrington Memorial site. Mr. Lacy stated that the existing tower is the original 55 foot one for Sprint. A replacement 65 foot tower for T-Mobile and Sprint was approved in May 2007. The current proposal is for a 65 foot tower for Metro PCS. It will be in a new compound on the opposite side of the driveway, with an eight foot high wood stockade fence.
Mr. Lacy reported that a tree canopy study has been done. It showed that the top of the tower will be 16 feet above the measured average canopy but there are some trees as high as the tower. Mr. Lacy confirmed that the FAA does not require a light on the tower.
In terms of service coverage, the company expects the facility to enable it to cover this part of Route 2 in a similar way to the other carriers. Mr. Lacy stated that there is no ready alternative site. He provided a substitute coverage map to correct an error in the one submitted. The Chairman reviewed the information supplied about other wireless communication facilities in the area. It did not fully meet the bylaw requirement for information on all existing and known proposed facilities up to two miles from the town’s boundaries. The applicant agreed to make best efforts to supply this information.
No air conditioning equipment is proposed, and Mr. Lacy pointed out that the equipment is at some distance from houses. The Board considered that on the basis of this information and also taking into account background noise from Route 2, noise would not be an issue.
Mr. Domnitz noted that the radio frequency emissions study was conducted on a Saturday when there could be less activity on Route 2 than on a commuting day. The Board asked what types of emissions were covered; the engineer stated that the study measures all radio frequency emissions within a certain band. It concluded that levels will be well within allowed limits.
The tower will have external flush-mounted antennas, described as being the same as T-Mobile’s. The pole will be of galvanized steel, which can be painted gray if required.
Frank Panetta, a neighbor, commented that steel can be somewhat reflective and asked for matte paint to be applied. He asked why the tower is proposed to be 65 feet rather than 55 feet, when no co-locator is proposed. Mr. Lacy replied that the radio frequency analysis suggested that 65 feet would give better propagation or that it would last longer because trees grow. Results for 55 feet were not submitted. Mr. Domnitz recalled that a balloon test that was conducted nearby suggested that a 65 foot tower would not be visible from houses. Mr. Panetta asked whether the bylaw sets a limit on the number of towers on a property; the Board said this was not the case.
Mr. Hurd mentioned that the Town is interested in being allowed to install public safety radio equipment on cell towers and asked whether this would present any problems at the application site. Mr. Lacy said it would not.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Snell and seconded by Mr. Craig, to continue the hearing to February 18th at 8:20 PM. Passed 5-0
8:40 PM PUBLIC HEARING: NICHOLAS KONSTANDAKIS, 22 Old Cambridge Turnpike, Map 24/Lot 6, site plan review for an accessory structure (pool house) under Section 17.7.
Nicholas and Vicki Konstandakis attended. The proposal is for a pool house in the rear yard of the house. Mr. Whitehead reported that it has been approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals and needs to file with the Conservation Commission. The building size was reduced in accordance with the Board of Appeals decision. Revised plans reflecting a 50 foot by 60 foot pool house were distributed.
The applicants explained that they originally purchased the pool with the intention of installing it nearer the house, but due to constraints on the lot, they now propose to place it in the rear portion of the lot, beyond a stream, and to enclose it in a building with bathroom facilities. The Board examined a plan of the applicant site and surrounding lots. It noted that the orientation of the building is shown a little differently on two submitted plans. The applicant stated that the contoured plan is more accurate. He agreed to mark the distances from lot lines on this plan.
The Board asked about access for construction equipment. The applicant showed a plan of an existing culvert which he was confident that trucks would be able to cross. The Board asked about sewerage. A pipe will be laid to the septic system for the house, which was installed recently.
Mr. Konstandakis said that the construction materials for the pool house will be wood clapboards and asphalt shingles, to match the house. He agreed to note this on the drawings. The building will have no second floor. It will have a truss roof and will measure 19’ 6” high to the ridge. One light is proposed at the front entrance; a catalog cut was supplied. The dwelling house has an existing sensor-operated light at its rear. Mr. Konstandakis stated that the pool house will be well screened from neighbors by existing vegetation. The Board said it may wish to apply a condition that this vegetation be retained. It suggested that the applicant mark the rear area on the plan as “no change proposed”.
In terms of grading, the site will need to be level; the new drawings show a retaining wall around the rear of the building. Mr. Hurd suggested that the wall may need to be a little further from the building.
The Board wished to view the site.
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Hurd, to conduct a site walk on Saturday February 7th at 11:00 AM Passed 5-0
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Snell and seconded by Mr. Domnitz, to continue the hearing to February 18th at 8:40 PM Passed 5-0
9:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING: THOMAS RISSER, 70 Todd Pond Road, Map 104/Lot 7, site plan review for demolition and reconstruction of a single family house under Section 17.7.
Thomas Risser and Edie Mackey attended with their architect, Jeffrey Yates. The proposal is to reconstruct most of the house, keeping the racquetball/ garage wing. The Board conducted a site walk on January 24th.
The architect reported that since the preliminary meeting he has modified the design to reduce the height a little. The basement has been checked and found to count as a story. The front of the new part the house will be two feet higher than the rear. The portion of the top floor that has less than five feet of headroom has been calculated as 40.5%, meeting the half story definition. The Board noted that the calculation excludes areas that are simply raised ceilings from the floor below and so the approach can be seen as conservative. It was agreed that the house counts as 2½ stories. At the rear, the elevation will comprise two stories plus a roof with dormers.
The height of the building as a whole exceeds 36 feet but if average natural grade is used for the calculation, it is well below; the architect calculated it as 31 feet based on the grades around the existing house. The Board was generally satisfied with the approach to the height and massing.
The applicant has selected a new dark sky fixture for the house. At the preliminary meeting, the Board expressed a concern about the total amount of lighting on the lot, and has supplied a copy of its current lighting policy. In relation to the tennis court lights, the applicant said that he had obtained letters of no objection from all the abutters to the pond at the rear of the house, except for one that is away. He presented a set of letters. He stated that the tennis court has been used for 20 years, that the lights are only used occasionally and that they shine down. Alex Houtzeel, the neighbor at 66 Todd Pond Road, said that he had not been bothered by the use of the tennis court. The Board asked for clarification on times of use. It was stated to be used approximately twice a week until 11:00 PM.
Peter Speert, a resident elsewhere in town, spoke in support of the need for exercise. The Board stated that if the tennis court lights were newly proposed it might not allow them, but it may wish to take into account their pre-existing nature and the history of good neighbor relations. It may consider limiting hours of operation.
At the front of the house, along the driveway, the plan shows the existing three foot high bollard lights. The architect stated that an earth bank along the street shields these lights effectively and that the driveway is not being changed significantly. The Board accepted the argument about shielding but considered that 25W bulbs should be sufficient, given the spacing.
Drainage plans were considered satisfactory. Additional screen planting was not considered necessary.
The applicant agreed to supply a final set of plans.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Domnitz and seconded by Mr. Hurd, to approve the site plan, with a finding that the use of average natural grade for the height calculation will not adversely affect the neighborhood, and subject to the following conditions:
- the bollard lights shall be limited to 25W maximum incandescent equivalent bulbs;
- the tennis court lights will be allowed to remain but not operated after 11:00 PM.
Passed 5-0
BUSINESS:
Minutes
The Board voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the meeting held on January 14th, with amendments.
Hardigg/Pope, 61 Beaver Pond Road
The Board signed the decision on the site plan for a house.
Planning Board vacancy
The Board noted that Patrick Murphy has taken out election papers.
Comprehensive Long Range Plan
Mr. Hurd announced that an All Boards meeting has been arranged for February 10th to discuss key issues and generally respond to the plan’s recommendations. Mrs. Wolf will be unable to attend due to a conflict with the CPC meeting.
The Board briefly discussed some of the five issues put forward by the CLRP sub-committees for the All Boards meeting.
Town Planner’s Report
Mr. Whitehead reported from the Land Use Group, noting that the ZBA approved all of the applications before it. On March 4th, the Jerodel Realty Trust will be bringing its proposal for a minor subdivision to the Planning Board.
Mr. Whitehead passed on news from the Town Administrator that Hanscom Air Base did not reach the short list of locations for a new Cyber Command headquarters.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 PM.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved as amended February 18th, 2009
| 
