Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
Mrs. Morey asked if, in view of the land -taking ' <br />for the re -design of Route 2, it would be necessary <br />to strip more of the land for the site in order to <br />develop the project. Mr. Gummere replied that he did <br />not think so, that some of the trees would have to be <br />.taken but most of them would be left. Mrs. Morev and <br />Messrs. Gummere, James and Maloney left the meeting at <br />9:30 p.m. <br />BATTLE GREEN The Board then took under consideration the <br />VILLAGE definitive plans for the Battle Green Village,, Section <br />SECTION 2 2 subdivision. The Board endorsed said plans, the <br />appeal period after date of approval of the plans hav- <br />ing expired and all other matters appearing,to be in <br />order. <br />CONSERVATION Considered next was the October 29, 1957 letter <br />COMMISSION from the Selectmenin regard to Chap. 223 of the Acts <br />of 1957, said enabling legislation providing.for-the <br />establishment ofconservationcommittees by the, various <br />cities and towns in'Massachusetts. In reply to the <br />Selectmen's request for comments -on the legislation it <br />was decided to reply to the Selectmen that it was the <br />opinion of the Board that said Act was not particularly <br />applicable to Lexington, that the development of the <br />natural resources of this town have been given consider- ' <br />able study by the Planning Board in the preparation of <br />recommendations for the development of these resources <br />have already been made, and that others will be in- <br />cluded in the near future. <br />BOARD OF <br />APPEALS Considered next by the Board were the notices <br />of petitions to'be heard by the Board of Appeals on <br />November 12, 1957 • It was -decided to take action on <br />the Barrett, Boutwell,'Mahoney and DeFelice petitions. <br />Letters were drafted to the Board of Appeals setting <br />forth the Planning Board's opposition to granting of <br />the first three petitions named above. (See addendum). <br />In regard to the DeFelice petition, it was thought the <br />proposal constituted a subdivision. Mr. Grindle was <br />asked to convey the Board's view to the Chairman of <br />the Board of Appeals. <br />After a general discussion of current problems <br />before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10.:45 <br />P•m• - <br />L i G ev Burnell Jr. , <br />Clerk <br />