Laserfiche WebLink
know why Peacock Farm Road did not connect with some , <br />other street other than Baker Avenue, suggesting Carville <br />Avenue as a possible connection. In reply it was stated <br />that Baker Avenue was the only street to which Peacock <br />Farm Road could be connected and at the same time be at a <br />grade which would meet the requirements of Lexington's <br />subdivision rules and regulations. It was also stated <br />that there was no way to connect Peacock Farm Road with <br />Carville Avenue without purchasing or taking by eminent <br />domain land and newly constructed houses on Trotting <br />Horse Drive. <br />Mr. Mark Field of 4.0 Peacock Farm Road inquired it <br />traffic over said road could be restricted. It was <br />stated that the Planning Board had no jurisdiction over <br />traffic. <br />Mr. Norman Hayes of $O Baker Avenue pointed out <br />that Baker Avenue was unaccepted from Butler Avenue to <br />the Peacock Farms development, this being approximately <br />124 feet. He questioned the right of people, other than <br />the people owning the last two lots on either side of <br />Baker Avenue, to use that section of said way. <br />Mr. Paul Segally of 4.0 Peacock Farm Road asked if, <br />in the near future, Parcel A was to be laid out as a road <br />as he would like to construct a driveway to this street <br />rather than Peacock Farm Road. In reply it was noted that <br />said parcel was privately -owned land reserved for future use <br />as a way to connect with the property to the southeast but <br />that the Board had no knowledge of any proposals for such <br />a connection. <br />COMPLETION The Board next discussed with Mr. Stevens what action , <br />OF WORK IN it should take in regard to the subdivision improvements <br />SUBDIVISIONS which had not been completed within the time agreed upon <br />in the applications for definitive approval. It was de- <br />There being no further questions the Chairman asked <br />for an expression .of opinion of those in favor of:approv- <br />ing the application and those opposed. Two people indi- <br />cated they were in favor of approval, six opposed there- <br />upon the Chairman declared the hearing closed at 4:35 p.m. <br />SUMMER <br />The Board considered the matter of a schedule for <br />SCHEDULE <br />the remainder of the summer and it was decided to meet on <br />July 22:-A and tQ, thereafter meet the same nights that the <br />Selectmen held their meetings during the summer; namely, <br />August 5 and August 19, 1957. <br />BURNHAM <br />The Board approved an application for definitive <br />FARMS <br />approval of the subdivision plan for Burnham Farms Sec - <br />SEC. 1 <br />tion 1. It was decided to hold a public hearing on said <br />application on August 5, 1957 at 8:00 p.m. <br />COMPLETION The Board next discussed with Mr. Stevens what action , <br />OF WORK IN it should take in regard to the subdivision improvements <br />SUBDIVISIONS which had not been completed within the time agreed upon <br />in the applications for definitive approval. It was de- <br />