1955-02-07 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Planning Board Meeting Monday, ftbruary 7, 1955 Present: Adams, Gri.ndle, Hathaway, Irwin, dagvith, Ripley - Snow, The Board met with the Board of Selectmen and Appropriation Cam- mittee from.7:30 until 8 91clock. DeVries Construction Co., Inc. A public hearing was held at 8:00 ololoc application for ap. proval as a subdivision the property of DeVries Construction Co., known as Section IP, Sun Valley, extension of Fiske Road from Fairlawn Lane to Winchester Drive. Mr. George DeVries was present as petitioner, No objections. On motion of Mr, Hathaway, seconded by Mr. Irwin, it was unanimously VOTED: that the Beard will approve this subdivision as socn a s the bond submitted to the Board by Mr, DtieVries is ap- proved by Mr. Stevens. h Crosby Road Mr. Robert Hunter.,. Chairman of the .Elementary Schools Facili- ties Committee, was present for a discussion relative to the matter of Crosby Road, Mr, Paul:'Palmer was not present, but had previously indi- cated to a member of the P'lau Ang Board that he had been told the two lots could not be built upon because of a water condition and his com- mittee did not feel the expenditure of $6000 would be warranted. Mr, Hunter, however, would like to see the town purchase these two lots in order that it might be protected from future building of houses facing the school. It was the decision of the Planning Board that it would go on record at town meeting as being apposed to.the acceptance of Crosby Road and in favor of the purchase of the two lots. MacNeil Mr. Norman May vas present ]representing John and Doris A. Mae. Neil with a plan showing apiece of land owned by the Boston & Maine Railroad which they wished to purchase, and which adjoined a lot owned by them. The MacNeils wished endorsement of the plan by the Plaming Board with the warding "Approval not required under the subdivisions control law." It is thought that the division of this parcel of land upon which the Railroad station is situated is in violation of Sec. 8 (a), subparagraph 3-d, which requires a 15 ft -side yard on lots hav- ing a frontage of 100 ft. or more, Furthermore, these two lots are in different zones, the original MacNeil lot being in business zone and the new lot in Ra.. Mr, May stated that Mr, !MacNeil wished this lot only as a protection to his business -lot so that if a building were placed close to the lot line there would be a guarantee of light and air, since the new lot would not be large enough to be built upon. Mr. .May further stated that he did not believe it was necessary to have Planning Board approval and that the Boston & Maine could convey the