1957-09-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

ADDENDUM September 27, 1957 Outdoor Advertising Authority, Rm. 546, 80 Boylston St., Re: Application #405$0 Boston 16, Mass. John Donnelly & Sons Gentlemen: The Lexington Planning Board's attention has been called to the application of John Donnelly & Sons for a sign to be erected on the property numbered 93-97 Massachusetts Avenue, Lexington. At its meeting on September 24, 1957 the Planning Board considered this application, decided to go on record as being opposed to the approval of the same, and to write a letter to the Outdoor Advertising Authority setting forth its reasons for such opposition. In the first place the Board would like to point out that while the proposed sign is to be located in a general business dis- trict, it is not one of the usual size, being only 155 feet wide where the sign is to be located and 190 feet at its greatest width. On both sides the business district is bounded by residential districts, the one on the southeasterly side largely being situated on higher land overlooking said general business district. It is the opinion of the Board that in otder to "conserve the value of land and buildings" and "to preserve and increase (the land's) amenities" as set forth in Section 2 of Chapter 40A of the General Laws, no sign of such large size, erected at such a height, should be allowed in this particular district. The Planning Board would also like to point out that no free standing sign and no sign of such large dimensions is allowed under the Lexington Zoning By-law. The Board believes that an advertising sign of such size as the petitioner proposes to erect is entirely out of keeping with any use in Lexington and with any standards this town has always tried to maintain. In the opinion of the Planning Board the sign would be a traffic hazard being located on a busy through street into which four other side streets connect within a distance of 600 feet. On October 25, 1956 a traffic survey conducted under the auspices of the Planning Board revealed that in addition to the local traffic generated in the vicinity there were 6206 through cars passing along Tassachusetts Avenue northwesterly of the pro- posed sign location. It is the Board's opinion that this sign would be a distracting influence upon this traffic in addition to that from surrounding residential neighborhood. It is thought that this would be particularly true in the case of ' vehicles entering Kassachusetts Avenue from Taft Avenue. In doing so the vehicles would be traveling northeasterly in a down -hill direction and would be looking directly at the pro-