Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-03-18-BOS-min 472 SELECTMEN'S MEETING March 18, 1974 A regular meeting of the Board of Selectmen was held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Office Building, on Monday, March 18, 1974, at 7 30 p.m. Chairman Kenney, Messrs. Bailey, Busa, Brown, and Mrs. Battin, Mr. O'Connell , Town Manager; Mr. Cohen, Town Counsel ; Mr. McSweeney, Director of Public Works/Engineering; Mrs. McCurdy, Executive Clerk, were present. The Board officially welcomed Mr. Busa back after his recent hospital- ization. At the request of the Town Clerk, five jurors were drawn, as follows Jurors Lois Gallagher 181 Follen Road Jack P. Selian 374 Lowell Street Jennie E. Nowell 298 Marrett Road Henry Torpey 7 Preston Road Alden A. Robbins 40 Homestead Street Mr O'Connell informed the Board that bids have been received for construction work on the Old Res Recreation area. I concur with the recommendation of theDirector of Public Works/Engineering that the con- Old Res tract be awarded to Po-Mar Contracting, Incorporated of 50 Mooney Bids Street, Cambridge, as the lowest bidder. Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to award Contract 73- I2-E to Po-Mar Contracting, Incorporated for construction work on the Old Res Recreation area in the amount of $34,606.24, under the appropriation of Article 45 of the 1973 Annual Town Meeting. TMMA Bus The Board discussed the route of the TMMA bus tour of areas con- Tour cerned with 1974 Town Meeting Articles and it was agreed to meet at Cary Hall on Sunday, March 24 at 100 p.m. for the bus tour. Mr. Cohen read a letter from Mr. Martin Bernard, Trustee of the Burlington Arcade, withdrawing his petition for a hearing before the Burlington Board of Appeals and .... "It is not feasible for me to devote the Arcade entire five acre parcel to a greenbelt. Rather than have a piecemeal consideration of the ultimate use of this parcel , I consider it advisable to withdraw the pending petition and submit for considera- tion a proposal which in my judgment will provide the Town with the desired greenbelt coupled with a taxable use of this land which would be a credit to the community and to me. I intend to submit such a proposal before the end of April." Mr. Bailey The only position we can take is to restore the area to its original condition. 473 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 Chairman Kenney Mr Bernard refers to five acres of greenbelt. Is this within Lexington? Mr. Cohen I don't know. 1 think he is going to propose a green- belt type of thing along Lowell Street so the neighbors won't see anything. Mr. Buse In my opinion, we don't gain anything by starting legal action if he still agrees to our agreement to restore the area. The Board agreed to allow a limit of six weeks for the Burlington Arcade to restore the area at the Burlington-Lexington line. Attorney William Whalon and Mr. Haroian met with the Board. Haroian Mr. Whalon We are here at the suggestion of the Engineering Depart- Drain ment regarding the final phase of Minuteman Highlands. Since the adop- tion of the Article at Town Meeting, we have appeared before all Town Boards and have a problem in obtaining site approval. We have been twice before the Conservation Commission; apparently there is increasing con- cern regarding runoff of water. We find ourselves with a problem which arises because of the development of the land itself. There is obvious growth of interest in people in ecology, and this gets down to the estab- lishment of adequate drainage systems on the property and the necessity of upgrading existing facilities on Concord Avenue; also other problems which may require enlarging the storm drainage system. There is a pro- posal posal that the Town share with the developer in the cost of storm drains; we are prepared to recognize that what is there now is inadequate and we are willing to pay the increased cost. There is a storm drain system that runs to the East on Concord Avenue and disposes runoff in a brook. This is presently a 12" line; we are collecting water that requires an 18" line. We think we are going to need, depending on what they will require ultimately for the long-term picture, the line on Concord Avenue that will be 24"; possibly we will be adding to it and also satisfy future requirements and it won't have to be dug up In years. We would like to go forward and have you consider the possibility that the Town might assume a portion of this and, if the contract is awarded for storm drain construction, that this be an addition to the existing contract and make it suitable to apply. We have conferred with Mr. McSweeney and our engineers are here. Chairman Kenney How much is the cost on the public way? Mr. Whalon The distance is approximately 1 ,000 feet and from where we would dump our storm water, at that point there is now existing a 12" line and the additional cost to which would vary on the size of the property. I believe a ballpark figure would be approximately $25,000. Chairman Kenney When you explained to Town Meeting, did the ques- tion of drain come up? Mr. Whalon No. We had no reason to believe the existing storm drain was inadequate, but the ideas of storm drains have changed; the calculations made now by the Conservation Commission and the Engineering Department are on calculations of 10 year.storms. 1 474 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 Chairman Kenney Part of the problem is your sense of timing in coming this evening because our Capital budget is all wrapped up. From our viewpoint, we wouldn't be replacing that drain within the near future, and we just haven't budgeted anything of any major amount. I don't think the Board is of the opinion to changeit, but we will take it under advisement. Mr. Buse 1 sympathize with the builder but feel that in this development they should take it at least to our storm drain. I don't know why the Town didn't take this into consideration but feel the developer should take it to the Town of Lexington's drainage system. I don't think it is the responsibility of a developer to enlarge a drainage system because he is the first, and that they should be able to construct their drainage system into the Town's and future devel- opers should share. Chairman Kenney There may be a question whether an 18" line could go into a 12" line. Mr. Busa A 12" pipe can adequately take care of it if the pitch is there. Mr. Bailey How old is it? Mr. McSweeney My guess is 20 years old. Mr. Bailey It is not designed to take any feeder? Mr. McSweeney No. The question has come up as it is in a brook area. They happen to be in a position where they are at the top end and the only avenue is down a public way. Mr. Buse If they tie into the nearest catch basin, is there any problem? Mr. McSweeney Yes, of boiling over. Chairman Kenney We will take it under advisement. Mr. Whalon We will have in Mr. McSweeney's hands all of the engi- neering data. I reiterate that we don't look to the Town to assume the entire cost, we would pay a fair share. Chairman Kenney We will be prompt in our answer back to you. Mr. Whalon and Mr. Haroian retired from the meeting. The Conservation Commission, Planning Board and Mr. Jaquith of the Historic Districts Commission met with the Board. Conservation Mrs. Frick The Conservation Commission has received preliminary Commission approval from the D.N.R. on the Hill-Meek property and Juniper Hill Grey Nuns property and I think the Town will realize about $60,000 reimbursement. Front Land Dr. Kessler The Conservation Commission has been working for many years on trying to protect the front land of the property owned by the Grey Nuns, not so much that it falls into the classic picture of the Town but that it is of vital character to the Town and should be pre- served. As a land acquisition group, we have been negotiating with the owners of the property, with the help and advice of the Selectmen. 475 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 The situation now is that Youville Hospital has an option onthe land which runs to October. If they exercise the option, they will discuss with the Town the possibility of preserving the front hill. Conserva- tion met with the lawyers and, if the option ie not exercised, he will discuss preserving the front land. We have an Article and we have agreed in principle with the lawyer of the Grey Nuns not to move that Article for eminent domain. We would like the Selectmen, Conservation Commission, Planning Board and Historic Districts Commission to dis- cuss this and then ask Town Meeting for the sense of the Town. It really isn't up to Conservation Commission but we feel it is essential for the preservation of the character of the Town. If we have to have a special Town Meeting, we are all for it. We would present it to Town Meeting as a group, and not ask for the Article to be passed but to get the sense of Town Meeting. If we need a special Town Meeting, we would ask for one for the funds. Chairman Kenney When you ask for the feeling of Town Meeting , would you have a dollar figure? Dr. Kessler- Yes, but I would rather not give you a figure to- night. We have opinions of value and would let Town Meeting know what it would cost. I think the sense of the community is what we are look- ing for. Dr. Clarke- We have not considered the idea, although I think it is a good one. Mr. Jaquith, Chairman of Historic Districts Commission As now proposed, there is no question that you would be placing Historic Dis- tricts before Town Meeting on an official basis for something we don't have authority to proceed on. Dr. Kessler: Doesn't the Commission vote on policy? Mr. Jaquith- It is different in each case. Mrs. Lois Brown: More times there are issues that come before one or another board, and we could have some preliminary con0ersation about it. That is what Conservation has in mind. I can see if the land were developed and the street laid out, then Historic Districts might want a word on it. To have boards working together can enable us to have a preliminary discourse on such questions. My question of the Conserva- tion Commission is, "What is the precise device?" Dr. Kessler Right now, we are asking for help right here - to see if it has any merit. Mrs. Brown Is it under the Article to ask that it be explored? Chairman Kenney I suggest that the Boards reply to Conservation, and Town Counsel will get an explanation. What Mrs. Brown was refer- ring to was that it may come before them as a change in the road and they feel they should stay out of it. Mr. O'Connell A special Town Meeting would have to be soon after the Annual Town Meeting because the tax rate would be set. Dr. Kessler I feel we wouldn't have to go to a special Town Meeting. 411T6 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 Mrs. Frick The land is owned by the Lexington Corporation of the Grey Nuns and the Grey Nuns in Cambridge have an option on the land for another year. They are intending to build a facility for out- patients, and there is no fear of having it developed. They are an Order of Nuns from Canada and don't realize our feeling about the land. If the Grey Nuns are not able to accept the option in October, 1974, then this land is open for grabs and we didn't know how to handle it. Also, we thought Historic Districts had authority over the first 200 feet on Massachusetts Avenue. Mr. Jaquith That goes to buildings and structures. There is nothing in our Act to recommend on blind projects. Dr. Clark If the option is up in October, would that give us enough time to go to a Town Meeting a year from now for money? Mrs. Rawls Their lawyer said if the option were not exercised, they would talk to us. Dr. Kessler If we could decide ahead of time. Dr. Clarke• I don't remember any action on this before. From a personal point of view, I am wholeheartedly in favor as I like the hill the way it is. Mr. Busa I agree with the process and the way it is being taken but I disagree that the Grey Nuns could care less because of being from Canada. They have a citizen of Lexington that represents them. Chairman Kenney I agree. ' Mr. Jaquith If Conservation wants all represented on this, it could be done by having a member of the Historic Districts on the com- mittee. Chairman Kenney As I understand it, you are asking for the sense of support. We will answer you in writing that we support the concept of putting the question of the Town's interest in the Grey Nun's front land before Town Meeting in order to get an indication of the amount of support which the proposal will have. However, since there was no figure mentioned, we must reserve judgment in relation to the monetary cost which might be involved, and we feel that an estimate of this cost should be made in the upcoming Town Meeting. Mrs. Frick We have a line item of $5,000 in the budget for an Conserve- intern and Mr. O'Connell said we would not have David Hughes' services. tion What is your direction to mel Intern Mr. O'Connell This is not an appropriate matter for open session. The Board agreed to discuss the matter at a later meeting. The Conservation Commission, Planning Board, and Mr. Jaquith retired from the meeting. The Board discussed the following report of the Advisory Committee on Filling Vacancies on the School Committee and the Board of Selectmen: 477 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 REPORT OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONCERNING ARTICLE 90, 1974 A.T.M. (FILLING OF SELECTMEN AND SCHOOL COMMITTEE VACANCIES) We have been asked to advise the Selectmen as to possible amendments to the third paragraph of Section I of the Town Manager Act, dealing with mid-term vacancies on the School Committee and Board of Selectmen. The existing scheme calls for filling such vacancies by special town Vacancies elections, unless the vacancies occur less than 100 days prior to the School next annual election. There are two alternatives that we believe supe- Committee rior to this scheme. We describe these two preferred alternatives Board of immediately below, under the headings "Town Meeting Scheme" and "Re. Selectmen stricted Appointment Scheme." We then go on to examine some of their respective advantages and disadvantages, as compared with the existing scheme, with other possible schemes, and with each other. The Town Meeting Scheme A vacancy in either board, occurring 100 days or more prior to the next annual election, would be filled at a special town meeting, to be called for this purpose by the Board of Selectmen upon notification of the vacancy. The person so chosen would serve only until the next annual election, but would be eligible then to run for the unexpired (or new) term. (if the person did run at the next annual election, he or she would not be identified on the ballot as a candidate for re-election.)* The town meeting would normally be set for the evening of the third Monday following the Selectmen's action. (This would normally mean an elapsed time of 3 - 4 weeks between the occurrence and the filling of the vacancy. ) The charter amendment would stipulate that the Warrant for a special town meeting called for this purpose would be restricted to just the one Article. Citizens' articles would not be admitted to this Warrant. When setting the date for the meeting, the Selectmen would also establish a deadline for taking out nomination papers. This would norm- ' ally be the second Thursday following the Selectmen's action, allowing for publicity in one issue of the L-exincrton Minute-man and a week's *G.L. c.54, S41 , provides "To the name of each candidate for a town office upon an official ballot who is an elected incumbent thereof shall be added the words 'Candidate for Re-election."' (emphasis sup- plied) We believe that the word "elected," as used in this provision, applies only to persons elected by the voters and would not, or need not,•apply to someone chosen by a representative town meeting. 1 4Th Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 time thereafter for deciding upon candidacies. The usual requirement of 50 signatures to nominate would be in force. (This seems neces- sary to week out frivolous candidacies.) Signed papers would be due four or five days after the deadline for taking them out -- normally the following Monday. This would leave a one-week period for communi- cation and discussion, including one opportunity for candidates to have their qualifications and views published in the Minute-man. The town meeting session itself would be simple and expeditious. Statements by the candidates might be allowed, but there would be no need for floor debate. Voting would be by elimination. Each member would cast one vote on the first ballot, with a candidate declared elected if he/she received a majority of the votes; and, if no candi- date received a majority on the first ballot, a second ballot would follow with that candidate eliminated who ran last on the first ballot; and so forth. Since members would be voting as elected representatives, not private citizens, we think the balloting should probably be by roll-call. The Restricted Appointment Scheme If a vacancy occurred 100 days or more prior to the next annual election, the remaining members of the board having the vacancy -- norm- ally four in number -- would be joined by the Moderator, and this group, by majority vote, would appoint the successor. The appointment would be made not more than two weeks after notification of the vacancy. The successor would have to be selected from among past elected occupants of the office to be filled, unless at least four of those participating in the appointment process first determined, by vote, that there were no such persons still resident in the Town who were willing and able to serve. The person appointed would serve only until the next annual elec- tion, but could run for election at that time.* it is an essential feature of this scheme that the Moderato- would be expected to take a full and active role throughout the process, •on an equal footing with the four remaining board members. There should be no thought of the Moderator's role being restricted to that of breaking- deadlocks that might arise among the other four, because assuming such a restricted role could prove detrimental to the performance of the Moderator's other responsibilities, which depend heavily on his maintain- ing a posture of impartiality and neutrality as among political groups and factions in the Town. *Since the appointed successor would clearly not be an "elected incum= bent," he or she would not be entitled, under G.L. c.54, S 41 , to be designated on the official ballot as a "Candidate for Re-etectia4." 479 Splectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 The Schemes We Have Rejected The relative merits of our two preferred schemes can best be dis- cussed by comparison with other possible schemes we regard as unsatis- factory. Town Election Scheme This is the existing scheme. Its ais' are dieor y known from our recent experience with it expense, delay, apathy. We understand that the recent School Committee election cost the Town about $5,000 -- perhaps about $1 ,000 to print and mail the Warrant and over $3,000 for election day expenses. In addition, the private expenses of campaigning effectively for a town- wide election are substantial. Such an election, moreover, seems bound to take at least two months from the time the vacancy occurs if there is to be a reasonable opportunity for candidates to communicate with voters. The expense and delay might be justified if they were the price of a truly democratic and representative election process; but voter apathy and light turn-outs for such special elections seem pre- dictable, undermining the representative character and participatory benefits of this expensive and time-consuming process. The Restricted Appointment Scheme is, of course, far cheaper and quicker than the present scheme; but it seems no better than that scheme in terms of representativeness and citizen participation. The Town Meet- Ina Scheme occupies a midpoint as to expense and delay the cost to the Town would be about $1 ,000 for printing and mailing warrants, plus the costs of a single town meeting session, while private campaign expense and necessary campaign time could both be greatly reduced by the abil- ity to focus communications on presumably knowledgeable town meeting members. The Town Meetina Scheme seems plainly superior to any appoint- ment scheme in terms of representativeness and participation; and we believe' it probably superior in these same characteristics to a special town-wide election, because there would be a very high (proportionate) level of participation by elected Town Meeting members as contrasted with a very low voter turn-out. We reach this judgment although we are aware that, especially given the restrictive time-frame we are propos- ing, Town Meeting members would tend to vote on the basis of their own individual appraisals rather than on the basis of constituent views. Promotion Scheme. A conceivable method of filling vacancies is to promote the runner-up in the previous town election for the office in question. We reject this idea because the risk is too high that it will be undemocratic in its effects. A "runner-up" may well be indis- tinguishable from an "also-ran." It frequently happens that in an annual election the number of candidates exceeds the number of vacan- cies by precisely one, and in any such case, the "runner-up" is siinp'ly a person whom the electorate has rejected. Where the number of "excess" candidates was larger, the adverse inference is less obvious, but still plausible. Appointment Schemes All appointment schemes have the advantage of cheapness and quickness. All have the disadvantage of being, or at least seeming, undemocratic and nonparticipatory. The person 480 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 appointed is almost certain to be someone personally known to many or all of the board members doing the appointing -- what many citizens would think of as an "insider." On the other hand, the appointee would serve only until the next election. In that election the appointee would not have the advantage of a special ballot position or designation, though he/she could, of course,_pppeal to theme electorate on the basis of experience gained during the interim period of service. (We reject the possibility of requiring the appointee to refrain from running for election, for two reasons first, an indi- vidual 's right to run for office should not be thus restricted; second, it seems wasteful to disqualify a person who may have invested heavily in acquiring valuable knowledge and insight during his/her period of service. ) The idea of restricting appointments to former occupants of the office is intended to alleviate the anti-democratic character of an appointment scheme by ensuring that the person selected is someone whom the voters themselves have once seen fit to select. Yet we should note the risk (though it seems unlikely) that the only willing former office-holders are persons whose ability to serve the Town effectively has become impaired, for example, by illness. We have recommended that any appointment should be made by the remaining members of the concerned board plus the Moderator -- thus rejecting the scheme proposed in the general laws for filling School Committee vacancies, whereby the Selectmen would sit with the re- maining members of the School Committee in filling School Committee vacancies.* Our thinking here Is that the voters may well have selected Selectmen and School Committee members with different objectives in mind, and that the two boards often (and appropriately) have different, and partially conflicting, institutional goals. (Certainly no one would suggest that the School Committee participate in the filling of Selectmen's vacancies! ) Wait-it-Out-Scheme- One way of dealing with vacancies is simply to let them remain unfilled until the next annual election. The virtue of this approach is that it completely avoids all the problems of expense and/or offense to democratic principles that each of the alternatives to some degree entails. The disadvantages are the risk of deadlock in a remaining four-member board, and the increased work- load on remaining board members. The "I00-day" provision is a device *G.L. c. 41 , S IJ , deals with School Committee vacancies, Under G.L. ch. 41 , S 10, vacancies on the Board of Selectmen are filled, if at all , at a special election which may be called by the remaining Selectmen or by 200 voters. There is no requirement that our special-law charter (i .e. , the Town Manager Act) follow the methods provided in the General Laws ' 481 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 for trading off these conflicting considerations. (The length of this period could, of course, be adjusted in either direction without vio- lence to the central purposes of either the Town Meeting or the Restricted Appointment Scheme. ) Town-Meeting Versus Restricted-Appointment Choice between these, our two preferred alternatives, depends on appraisal of their relative virtues and defects vis-a-vis one another. The Restricted Appointment Scheme is clearly superior in terms of expe- ditiousness, inexpensiveness, and administrative ease. In addition, it might be argued that those participating in the appointment process would have a degree of special insight, not readily available to Town Meeting members as a group, regarding the personal qualities and talents which would be of particular and timely service to the Board in question. By contrast, the Town Meeting Scheme's greath strength is the breadth of participation it would make possible, and the assurance it would tend to give that the person filling a major (normally an elective) office was someone acceptable to a broadly representative body of citizens. We believe the choice is a closely balanced one. We have not attempted in this Report to suggest which way it should go, believing that the appropriate step at this point is to submit the matter to broadened discussion. Should anyone wish to know our individual pre- ferences as they stand at present, we shall be glad to state them. Procedure Itmight be advisable to have two motions drafted for presentation to the 1974 ATM -- one for a Town Meeting Scheme, one for a Restricted Appointment Scheme. We could also have in readiness certain motions to amend, especially in regard to the "Appointment" motion -- for example, to remove the restriction to former office holders. In any case, we think the motion should provide for petitioning the General Court for special legislation which would set forth an amendment to the Town-Manager Act and would stipulate that the amendment would take effect only after approval by the voters at the next annual election. The Act was initially adopted with voter ap- proval , and no amendment affecting the method of filling major town offices -- especially if the method would reduce the powers of the general electorate -- should be adopted without also having obtained voter approval. Using this approach, a rough time-table would be• 1947 A.T.M. -- Town Meeting votes to instruct Selectmen to petition General Court for special legislation to amend Town-Manager Act. 1 42 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1.974 May, 1974 -- Selectmen forward petition to General Court. Summer 1974 -- General Court passes, and Governor signs, special act calling for submission of proposed amendment to voters. March. 1975 -- Amendment question on ballot at annual town election. If approved, amendment takes effect. If disapproved, it doesn't. Drafting of motions should, of course, rest ultimately with the Town Counsel acting under instructions from the Selectmen. We shali be happy to provide any requested assistance. Respectfully submitted, Frank I . Michelman George P. Wadsworth Natalie H. Riffin, .Chairman Mr. Brown I like the restricted appointment scheme as long as ap- pointees are not restricted to former members of that board. Chairman Kenney I think it is an unnecessary restriction. Mrs. Battin I like the Special Town Meeting Scheme. Chairman Kenney, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Buse and Mr. Brown agreed to support the restricted appointment scheme. Chairman Kenney Eighty percent of the Board takes a favorfble position on the appointment scheme and the motion at Town Meeting would be on the restricted appointment scheme. Mrs. Battin We propose to have a substitute motion drawn up, and I think Town Meeting ought to have the option to decide. When the Selectmen-Town Manager Act was initiated, it stated "when a vacancy or vacancies occur in the membership of the school committee or the Board of Selectmen, the Board of Selectmen shall call a special town election to fill the vacancy or vacancies for the unexpired term or terms, except that if such vacancy or vacancies occur less than one. hundred days prior to the annual election and not less than three mem- bers of such committee or board remain in office, the vacancy or vacancies shall remain unfilled until such annual election." Float Chairman Kenney read a request from the Chamber of Commerce for Competition the appointment of a Selectman as a Judge of the Float eompettion. Judge 1, Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to appoint Mrs. Margery M. Battin as Judge of the Float Competition on April 15, 1974. 4S i Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to sign the license for Marine) Transportation, Inc. , North Chelmsford, to transport Raytheon Common employees from Route 128 from the Burlington line, Bedford Street, Hart- Carrier well Avenue, Westview Street to the Bedford line, with no stops. License Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the Minutes minutes of the Selectmen's meetings held on October 23 and October 29, 1973. Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to sign Contract 73-7-E, awarded on February II , 1973, to Antonellis & Curley, Inc. in Sewer the amount of $139, 189.67 for sanitary sewer construction on Blossom Contract Street, Lawn Avenue, Concord Avenue at Blossom Street, Concord Avenue 73-7-E at Pleasant Street, Blossom Street Interceptor, Constitution Road Pump- ing Station, Hayes Lane, Davis Road, Summer Street, Green Lane. Authority is contained in the appropriation under Article 20, 1973. Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to sign Contract Contract 75-1-E, awarded on February II , 1973 to D.L. Jones Investigations in 75-I-E the amount of $6,700 for test borings in Lexington, locations to be Test designated by the Engineering Department. Authority is contained in Borings several Articles, depending upon the purpose of the project. Chairman Kenney read a request from the Conservation Commission to vote to acquire and take by eminent domain, under Article 59 of Ashley 1972. Land Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to take by Acquisi- eminent domain for conservation purposes land owned by Carol Ashley Smit tion and Rosamund J. (Ashley) Savage shown asParcelsA-I and A-3 on "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass." dated December 27, 1973 by Barnes Engineering Company, Inc. Authority is contained in Article 59 of the 1972 Annual Town Meet i ng Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to sign the Order of Taking as follows COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, SS. Town of Lexington At a meeting of the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Lexington held this 18th day of March, 1974, it i-s ORDERED Whereas by a vote adopted at a Town Meeting duly called, warned and held on the sixth day of March, 1972, namely at an adjourned session thereof duly held on March 27, 1972 in accordance with the provi- sions of law applicable thereto, the Selectmen were authorized on behalf of the Town of Lexington to take by eminent domain, upon the request of the Conservation Commission of the Town of Lexington, for conservation purposes as provided by Section 8C of Chapter 40 of the General Laws of Massachusetts, the land hereinafter described, and an appropriation of money was made therefor. 484 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 WHEREAS, the Conservation Commission of the Town of Lexington has requested the Board of Selectmen In writing to take said land in fee simple by eminent domain. NOW, THEREFORE, we the undersigned, being a majority of the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Lexington, duly elected, qualified and acting as such, do hereby, pursuant to said vote and request and under and by virtue of the provisions of said Section 8C of Chapter 40 and Chapter 79 of the General Laws of Massachusetts, and all acts in amend- ment thereof and in addition thereto, and of any and every other power and authority us hereto in any way enabling, take in fee simple in the name and on behalf of the Town of Lexington for conservation purposes as provided by said Section 8C of Chapter 40 two certain parcels of land in said Lexington, bounded and described as follows Parcel I - Beginning at a point on the southwesterly sideline and terminus of the so called Worthen Rd. , thence S 36-27-24 E distant 259.07 ft. to a point, thence bearing to the right with a curve of 1184.00 ft. radius distant 686.58 ft. to a point, thence N 51-27-54 W distant 434.20 ft. to a point, thence N 45-14-31 W distant 88.97 ft. to a point, thence N 44-52-38 W distant 58.31 ft. to a point, thence N 46-19-29 W distant 62.44 ft. to a point, thence N 46-40-34 W distant 69.43 ft. to a point, thence N 47-37-57 W distant 41. 18 ft. to a point, thence N 41-35-49 W distant 35.00 ft. to a point, thence N 45-35- 11 W distant 71.51 ft. to a point, thence N 44-29-13 W distant 59. 14 ft. to a point, thence N 46-52-22 W distant 61.04 ft. to a point, thence N 45-27-51 W distant 52.04 ft. to a point, thence N 51-05-02 W distant 89.05 ft. to a point, thence N 77-35-49 E distant 463.81 ft. to a point of beginning. All as shown as Lot A-I on a plan entitled, "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mese. Scale I"=80' , December 27, 1973, Barnes Engineering Company, Inc. , 411 Lexington Street, Auburndale, Mass." to be recorded herewith, con- taining according to said Plan 6. 17 acres. Also another parcel of land bounded and described as follows Parcel 2 - Beginning at a point, said point being N 77-35-49 E distant 298.01 ft. from the southwesterly sideline and terminus of the so called Worthen Rd. , thence N 77-35-49 E distant 382.60 ft. to a point, thence N 00-20-47 W distant 168.59 ft. to a point, thence S 85-58-55 E distant 127.64 ft. to a point, thence S 02-44-58 E distant 499.01 ft. to a point, thence N 89-56-30 W distant 200.00 ft. to a point, thence N 51-38-07 W distant 413. 12 ft. to the point of beginning. All as shown as Lot A-3 on a plan entitled, "Plan of Land in Lexing- ton, Mass. Scale 1"=80' ; December 27, 1973, Barnes Engineering Company, Inc. , 411 Lexington Street, Auburndale, Mass." to be recorded here- with, containing according to said Plan 3.20 acres. 485 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 All trees upon said parcels and buildings and structures affixed thereto are included in the taking. We have awarded damages by reason of the taking hereby made to Carol Ashley Smit in the sum of Eighteen Thousand Two Hundred Seventy- One and 50/100 Dollars ($18,271.50) and Rosamond J. Savage, formerly Rosamond Jean Ashley in the sum of Eighteen Thousand Two Hundred Seventy-One and 50/100 ($18,271.50). In so awarding damages, we have awarded them to the supposed owner of record of the land hereby taken as of the date hereof, but if the name of the owner of any interest in said land is not stated or is not correctly stated, it is to be understood that such interest is owned by an owner or owners unknown to us and in such case our award is made to the lawful owner or owners thereof. WITNESS our hands and seals in said Lexington the day and year first above written. TOWN OF LEXINGTON Fred C. Bailey Alfred S. Buse Sanborn C. Brown Margery M. Battin Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to acquire and take by eminent domain for school , playground, recreation, sewer and drain purposes land owned by Carol Ashley Smit and Rosamund J. (Ashley) Savage shown as Parcel A-2 on "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass." dated December 27, 1973 by Barnes Engineering Company, Inc. Authority is contained in Article 58 of the 1972 Annual Town Meeting Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to sign the Order of Taking, as follows COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middl®sex,ss Town of Lexington At a meeting of the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Lexington held this 18th day of March, 1974, it is ORDERED Whereas by a vote adopted at a Town Meeting duly called, warned and held on the sixth day of March, 1972, namely at an adjourned session thereof duly held on March 27, 1972 in accordance with the pro- visions of law applicable thereto, the Selectmen were authorized on behalf of the Town of Lexington to take by eminent domain for school , playground, recreation, sewer and drain purposes the land hereinafter described, and an appropriation of money was made therefor. NOW, THEREFORE, we the undersigned, being a majority of the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Lexington, duly elected, qualified and acting as such, do hereby, pursuant to said vote and under and by virtue of the provisions of Chapter 504 of the Acts of 1897, Chapter 263 of the Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 Acts of 1926, Section 14 of Chapter 45 and Chapter 79 of the General Laws of Massachusetts, and all acts in amendment thereof and in addi- tion thereto, and of any and every other power and authority us hereto an any way enabling, take in tee simple in the name and on behalf of the Town of Lexington for school , playground, recreation, sewer and drain purposes a certain parcel of land in said Lexington, bounded and described as follows 1 Beginning at a point on the southwesterly sideline and terminus of the so called Worthen Rd. , thence S 36-27-24 E distant 259.07 ft. to a point, thence bearing to the right with a curve of 1184.00 ft. radius distant 686.58 ft. to a point, thence S 51-27-54 E distant 94.85 ft. to a point, thence bearing to the left with a curve of 1 1254.00 ft. radius distant 100.00 ft. to a point, thence N 84-59-44 E distant 130.00 ft. to a point, thence bearing to the left with a curve of 1384.00 ft. radius distant 539,74 ft to a point, thence N 65-32-35 E distant 202. 16 ft. to a point, thence N 51-38-07 W distant 413. 12 ft. to a point, thence S 77-35-49 W distant 298.01 ft. to a point of beginning. All as shown as. Lot A-2 on a plan entitled, "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass. Scale 1"=80' , December 27, 1973, Barnes Engineering Company, Inc. , 411 Lexington Street, Auburndale, Mass." to be re- corded herewith, containing according to said Plan 5.46 acres. All trees upon said parcel and buildings and structures affixed- thereto are included in the taking. We have awarded damages by reason of the taking hereby made to Carol Ashley Smit in the sum of Ten Thousand Three Hundred Seventy,- Four Dollars ($10,374.00) and Rosamond J. Savage, formerly Rosamond Jean Ashley in the sum of Ten Thousand and Three Hundred Seventy- Four Dollars ($10,374.00). In so awarding damages, we have awarded them to the supposed owner of record of the land hereby taken as of the date hereof, but if the name of the owner of any interest in said land is not stated or is not correctly stated, it is to be understood that such interest is owned by an owner or owners unknown to us and in such case our + award is made to the lawful owner or owners thereof. WITNESS our hands and seals in said Lexington the day and year first above written. TOWN OF LEXTINGTON Fred C. Bailey Alfred S. Buse Sanborn C. Brown Margery M. Battin 4 Selectmen's Meeting March 18, 1974 Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to table the letter School from Mrs. John Steiner, 22 Estabrook Road, regarding School Street traffic. St. Traf Mr. Lloyd Gilson, Community Concern for Regional Planning Commit- Burlington tee, met with the Board to discuss House Bill 2856 concerning an Lexington access road on and off Route 3 at Burlington. Route 3 Mr. Gilson We oppose this bill because it conflicts with re- Access Rd. quired Federal safety standards for limited access highways such as Route 3. It is an encroachment on right-of-way land on both sides of the existing highway now reserved for future lane expansion. There is lack of specific information in the bill regarding location of connec- tors and possible use of bridges or underpasses which would affect traffic flow on Route 3. Additional access roads would have to be built, possibly through residential neighborhoods in Lexington and Bedford and these roads would severely disrupt the neighborhoods, and would undoubtedly be built at the States expense. The current owners of the 250 acres, and the potential developer, have consistently refused to publish a definite site plan, showing location and density of buildings. Maximum development must therefore be assumed, creating major sub-regional problems of an environmental and traffic nature. We are asking the Planning Board and the Selectmen to oppose this bilkand to have a representative of the Town speak at the State House on March 25. We would request that a letter be sent to the Chairman of the Transportation Committee stating opposition to this bill. Chairman Kenney It is the unanimous feeling of this Board to oppose any access to this land. We will write to the Chairman of the Transportation Committee stating that we feel that the additional traffic which would be generated by industrial development would add an impossible burden to the presently overburdened Middlesex Turnpike. All of the Lexington land which abuts this area is zoned for single family residences and we foresee many traffic problems. Therefore, we strongly urge a negative report on House Bill 2856. Mrs. Battin agreed to be present at the State House on March 25 to oppose the bill. Mrs. Brown will also be present to represent the Planning Board. Chairman Kenney read a letter of resignation from Mr. Timothy Resignation Sullivan as a Registrar of Voters, effective immediately. Registrar Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to accept, with of Voters regret, the resignation of Mr. Timothy Sullivan as Registrar of Voters. Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to go into Execu- Executive Live Session for the purpose of discussing, deliberating or voting on Session matters which, if made public, might adversely affect the public secu- rity, the financial interests of the Town, or the reputation of a person. After discussion of matters of financial interest to the town, it was voted to go out of Executive Session A true record, Attest zee Executive Clerk, Selectme//