1955-03-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Regarding the preliminary subdivision plans previously dis- approved, the Board gave an informal opinion that Teebbuilt could pro- ceed with definitive plans for.a section of the subdivision, including Lots 1 through 12 and 46 tbrough 61 along a portion of Puritan Road and "A" Street as shown on the "Preliminary Plan Showing Proposed Subdivision of Land in Lexington, Mass.," Scale 1" - 100 t, dated Feb. 7, 1955, Miller & Nylanier, C.B.'s and Svrveyors, Lexington, Mass. In preparing the plans it was understood that a temporary turn -around would be in- cluded at the end of "A" street at Lots 12 and 61 and that the road curve at Lots 11, 12,_60 and 61 would be redesigned with a larger radius. Yeoman Messrs. Frank A. and Frank Be Ye®an appeared before the Board in regard to a subdivision of a parcel of land they owned at the and of Coles Street and which they bad petitioned the Board of Appeals to subdivide into lots neither of which have sufficient frontage under the Lexington Zoning By-law. Because the Yeomans did not own a strip of land separating their property from the end of Columbus Street, the ' Planning Board had objected at the Board of Appeals hearing that the matter was not a proper one on which the Board of Appeals could grant a variance. After a discussion, the Board indicated by a sketch how it PLASM BOARD NMTING Wednesday, March 23, 1955 Presents Adsms - Grinile, Hathaway, Irwin, Jaquith - Snow Meeting opened at 9:10 p.mi. Teghbuti1t, Inc. Ere Sullivan of Tachbuilt, Inc. and Mr. Winfield S. Cacuette, - realtor, appeared Before the Board to discuss msteters in regard to a proposed subdivision isf the Robinson Read -Route 128 areae Preliminary plans for this subdivision more disapproved by the Board on February 23, 1955 ars the basis that there is only one recognized means of access to the subdivision. Mr. Caouette left with the Board photostatic copies of two deeds recorded in Middlesex So. District Registry of Deeds and conveying parcels of land under the will. of Franklin P. Simonds, one dead dated Nov. 29, 1940 to William A. Hennessy (Book 6453, Page 193) and the other dated Jan. 20,°,1943 to Mary Ae Hennassy (Book 6657, Page 474)e Both these deeds contained the statement that "There is conveyed the right to use Mountain Road to Robinson Road and Robinson Road to Grove Street, in connection with the grantors and others who meg be entitled to such rights as are shown on said plan." Mr. Sullivan and We Caouatte both felt that these deeds ware evidence that "Mountain Road" is a public way. The Board asked Mr. Sullivan to in(Nire into the matter of whether or not the corporation could cross or enter the Boston ' Edison Company easement for a transmission line, it being the Board's understanding that the Northeastern Gas transmission line had some diffi- culty in making such arrangements. Regarding the preliminary subdivision plans previously dis- approved, the Board gave an informal opinion that Teebbuilt could pro- ceed with definitive plans for.a section of the subdivision, including Lots 1 through 12 and 46 tbrough 61 along a portion of Puritan Road and "A" Street as shown on the "Preliminary Plan Showing Proposed Subdivision of Land in Lexington, Mass.," Scale 1" - 100 t, dated Feb. 7, 1955, Miller & Nylanier, C.B.'s and Svrveyors, Lexington, Mass. In preparing the plans it was understood that a temporary turn -around would be in- cluded at the end of "A" street at Lots 12 and 61 and that the road curve at Lots 11, 12,_60 and 61 would be redesigned with a larger radius. Yeoman Messrs. Frank A. and Frank Be Ye®an appeared before the Board in regard to a subdivision of a parcel of land they owned at the and of Coles Street and which they bad petitioned the Board of Appeals to subdivide into lots neither of which have sufficient frontage under the Lexington Zoning By-law. Because the Yeomans did not own a strip of land separating their property from the end of Columbus Street, the ' Planning Board had objected at the Board of Appeals hearing that the matter was not a proper one on which the Board of Appeals could grant a variance. After a discussion, the Board indicated by a sketch how it