TOWN OF LINCOLN
MINUTES OF PLANNING BOARD MEETING
Held on July 7, 2009
At 7:30 PM in the Donaldson Room, Lincoln Town Offices
PRESENT: R.Domnitz (Co-Chair), B.Wolf (Co-Chair), K.Hurd, J.Craig, D.Boynton
STAFF: C.Perry
7:30 PM BUSINESS:
New Member
The Board welcomed Dan Boynton as a new member on the Board.
4th July Parade
The Board received a “Cheers to Volunteers” certificate from the Parade organizers.
Minutes
The Board voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the meeting held on June 10th, with amendments.
Frumkin, 1 Tower Field Lane
The Board signed the decision approving a site plan for a new house in a cluster subdivision.
Brooks, 39 North Great Road
Some members of the Board had viewed the stone being used for the house walls and were satisfied with the color and construction method. Approval of the stone was required under the terms of the decision on the site plan.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Hurd and seconded by Mr. Domnitz, to approve the stone as viewed on site. Passed 5-0
Mr. Hurd reported that when he visited he observed that plumbing fixtures were being installed in the basement. As he did not recall any rooms being proposed in the basement, he wondered whether there were changes that may not comply with septic and other permits. Mrs. Perry agreed to check the approval documents and refer the matter for investigation if necessary.
Information Technology 5 year Strategic Plan
Mrs. Perry reported that the Town has appointed a consultant, eGovernment Consulting, to help to prepare a five year plan for improving and expanding its IT services. The Request for Proposals is on the website. The scope of the plan may include increased web functionality, interdepartmental workflow and collaboration tools, document management, email archiving, online permitting, expanded use of GIS and database technology. The consultant has conducted a questionnaire survey of staff and will be holding interviews next week with departments and some groupings of departments e.g. GIS users. Board members are invited to attend. Mr. Domnitz expressed interest in attending the Planning Department session on Thursday July 16th at 9:30 – 10:30 AM.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Comprehensive Long Range Plan
Mr. Hurd reported that the Steering Committee met this morning. It discussed the timeline for comments and changes to the draft Plan.
Mr. Hurd outlined some comments that the Steering Committee received from Peter Braun and Peter Felsch on education issues. It favored a reduction in the discussion of the high school in the Plan. The Planning Board discussed the issues raised in these comments. Mr. Craig felt that the Plan gives more recognition to the problems of elder care than of childcare/ early education and suggested that these are important topics to cover in discussion, even if only at a general level.
Mr. Hurd reported that there was further discussion on the intersection of land use and economic development matters. People who worked on the land use topic favor having development proposals come to the Planning Board but having broader economic development issues considered by an economic development committee. There is a degree of consensus by the Steering Committee on this. Some of the wording in the Plan may currently be inconsistent and Ken Bassett has agreed to check through it.
The Selectmen were reported to be compiling comments for a Steering Committee meeting on July 16th. Mr. Hurd said that it would be helpful if the Planning Board could also submit comments at that time.
Mr. Domnitz made a request for changes to be tracked, beginning with Version 5.
The Board discussed the land use and economic development issues. Mr. Domnitz said he would oppose putting the Planning Board in the position of serving economic development needs, and thought it was appropriate for the economic development committee to be appointed by the Selectmen.
The Board noted that a set of criteria have been developed to give some guidance to developers and boards on land use proposals that would require zoning changes. The Planning Board supported the fact that the criteria allow a degree of flexibility. It requested that earlier critical comments from the consultant be taken out of the text.
Mr. Hurd agreed to relay the comments made up to this point. The Board proceeded to review the Executive Summary and the land use and economic development chapters in detail. Mr. Domnitz raised some issues concerning the judgmental tone of commentary by the consultant. The other members agreed that it was important in several places to make the descriptions more neutral/factual. Mr. Boynton agreed to develop a set of edits to address this. Mr. Domnitz will also propose some edits. Mrs. Perry will see if Version 5 is available as a Word document so that changes can be tracked.
Other matters raised in discussion were:
In the Executive summary:
- ‘how and where Lincoln will grow’ (p.8) seems loaded.
- The need to obtain a special permit for a cluster development is made to sound like a major impediment whereas cluster developments are popular with developers.
- The Planning Board doubts that backlot development and TDR will prove useful but is open to discussing them, so wording should be more tentative.
- ‘property taxes are very high’(p.15) is not totally accurate; the tax rate is relatively low.
- The statements about commercial development under paying for services (half way down p.15) are too strong.
In Chapter 2, Land Use and Zoning:
- Goal LU 3.1 should be to consider whether such additional techniques should be developed.
- There is a general issue of enforcement, which may also need to be included in the services chapter or weighed in the Implementation Plan.
- Water as a potential constraint may merit an additional bullet (p.3)
- Under cluster developments (p.10), add ‘however, almost all subdivisions created in the last ten years have been clusters’.
- Under the B-3 District (page 12), insert ‘by right’ before ‘permitted uses’.
- Discussion of 2 acre zoning is unbalanced without mentioning the large number of ‘grandfathered’ non-conforming lots that are less than 2 acres.
- On Dover amendment uses (p.14), Lincoln only requires limited site plan review. If the use does not need zoning exemptions, there is no site plan review. If exemptions are requested, site plan review provides a framework for considering them, having regard to the legal tests.
There is more detail than necessary about the deficiencies of the parking regulations.
The discussion of the overlay district process is a little negative (p. 15-16); the last two sentences (which relate to a single development that did not proceed, either because it was ill-conceived by the developer or because of the financial climate) could be deleted.
- Under creative development (p.17), it should be stated that Lincoln has a history of creative development and cutting edge zoning tools. The new suggestions should be ideas to consider (also on p.22).
- The lead in to the assessment criteria for zoning changes (p.20) should say that they will be ‘evaluated’ for compatibility not ‘deemed compatible’
- The discussion of Open Space Residential Development is confusing as the town already has the R-3 OSRD district.
In Chapter 8, Economic Development:
- In the overview it may be more accurate to say that the town ‘continues to feel pressure’ rather than ‘feels increasing pressure’ to find other sources of revenue.
- In recommendation ED 2.1 proposing an economic development committee, insert ‘appointed by the Board of Selectmen’
- In recommendation ED 2.4, it would be better not to include the list of potential benefits. Also, some items are mitigation rather than benefits.
- Recommendation ED 4.2 should be to review the zoning regulations to determine if there are barriers to at-home employment, rather than assuming that there are.
- In the bullet point on public participation (page 153), economic development is too narrowly equated with commercial development.
- Under key challenges, the Board does not like the phrase ‘aligning Lincoln’s land use policies and tax revenue needs’. It would prefer ‘Maintaining land use policies and financial sustainability will require close collaboration between town boards and an open, inclusive process.’
- In the bullet point about the Leggatt McCall proposal (p. 145), ‘doubt’ would be more appropriate than ‘skepticism’ about the fiscal benefits.
- In the discussion of mixed use and commercial development (p.145) it would be more accurate to say that ‘some’ people rather than ‘many’ have questioned whether Lincoln should reassess its long standing ideas.
- The near-absence of local business owners from the debates about mixed use and commercial development should not be described as ‘noteworthy’ unless there is a clear point to be made (page 145).
Reports from committees
Mrs. Wolf reported that a Small House Study Committee has been established by the Housing Commission and the Historical Commission to discuss possible strategies for preserving small homes. There will be representation from other boards. An initial meeting has been scheduled for July 14th at 8:00 AM. Mrs. Wolf said she would be unable to attend this meeting. Mr. Boynton agreed to attend and report back.
Election of Officers
Mr. Domnitz stepped down as Board Co-Chair.
A MOTION was proposed by Mr. Domnitz and seconded by Mr. Hurd, that Mrs. Wolf be elected Chair for the coming year. Passed 4-0
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Hurd, that Mr. Domnitz be elected Vice Chair for the coming year. Passed 4-0
A MOTION was proposed by Mrs. Wolf and seconded by Mr. Domnitz, to appoint Dan Boynton as the Board’s representative on matters relating to Route 2. Passed 4-0
The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 PM.
Submitted by Catherine Perry
Approved as amended, July 21, 2009
| 
