Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1929 Planning Board Minutes 1929 PLANNING BOARD Frederick L. Emery J. Henry Duffy C. Edward Glynn William D. Milne Clarence H. Cutler Nelson J. Bowers PLANNING BOARD MEETINC LEXINGTON, MASS . March 25, 1929 . Minutes of the Meeting Present: Messrs . Emery, Duffy, Bowers , Cutler, Milne and Engineer Cosgrove . Plan for development of the Robert L. Innis and Dougal Lennan property off School Street was considered at length and the plan prepared by the Town Engineer was deemed to be generally acceptable, but it was thought wise to have a definite layout made for School Street to allow for a fifty foot width before this development plan was finally approved. The plan for subdivision of the Baker Estate off Massachusetts Avenue submitted by W. R. Rice , Cambridge , was considered and it was voted that in view of the steep grade necessary for the development of the street and its immediate entry at this grade to the avenue as well as the general effect on the neighbor- hood, the approval of the Board should be withheld. The matter of the Ryder petition for action on the Vine Brook drainage basin development was brought out and discussed and it was agreed that this should have the early attention of the Board. Mr. F. L. Emery was re-elected chairman of the Planning Board for the year and Mr . Nelson Bowers was unanimously elected as clerk. W. D. Milne, Clerk. PLANNING BOARD DETING April 1, 1929 I•,embers present: - '"tilliam D . Milne , Frederick L. Emery, J . Henry Duffy, C . Edward Glynn and Nelson J. Bowers . The Town Engineer, John T . Cosgrove , was also pre sent. Evening spent in discussion of drainage and highway lay- outs for Vine Brook District . Er . Cosgrove to draw up plan showing drainage, Massachusetts Avenue to Waltham Street . Adjourned at 11: 00 to meet again when Er. Emery sets date . Meeting of the i'lanning Board April 29, 1929 Those present; Messrs. Emery, Milne, Glynn, Cutler, Duffy (Cosgrove) Discussion of proposed new highway from Lowell Street through to Bedford Street. Vianols petition for a Marquise in front of theatre. Board votes to send an opinion to the Selectmen to effect that Board is opposed to all projecting signs of any nature over public sidewalk. Discussion of site or sites for a new Central engine douse. Three sites mentioned; 1. Plot of land on Bedford Street on far side of Phelps Garage. 2. Plot of land owned by Bailie Blake on ',raltham Street oppo- site Forest Street. 3. Triangular plot of land bound- ed by Fletcher Ave., 1•oburn Street and the B. & M. R. R. tracks. Swimming Pool: Consensus of opinion of Planning Board that swimming pool committee confer with Planning Board and that further consideration should be given before plans for pool go any further. Such opinion to be conveyed to Selectmen by Chairman i;mery. Friday Evening, Aay 3, 1929. 4 AWING BEFORE SELECTMEN. 1. Hill Street - 50 foot layout proposed. Abuttors favor improving street by straightening out curves in street k Apja extent. 2. Proposed new road from Lowell Street through to Bedford street, by way of East Street - and from Nuaas Street over private lands to Bedford Street. That part of proposed road from Bedford Street almost to Hancock Street apparently favored by abuttors. nr. hull. Messrs. Jonas and Robbins and Mrs. Deerinaz sL.oka against proposed ssy as it crosses Hancock Street. whey claim the y would seriously Mamas the Ball, Jones and .Robbins properties. 'ley oug est alternative :ray by using north Hancock Street or Simonds Road, or a net? construction around and to the north of the hill over which fonds T:.oad runs. East Street - genera1 opposition to straightening out curves. Mr. Amery explains reason for through highway around Lexington. Messrs. Every, £ iffy, Bowers of aanning Board present. May 10, 1929 Mi. Cuitanco mat with the Tianning Board and discussed a plan for the public swimming pool. He loft )lane and correspondence with Mr. ]terry who in to bring the subject before a future mooting of the Planning bard. The Board is to consider present means as to their practicability and )Hake regio:scacsndaationn to the 7oard of ,olootLen. Mr. Cos' rove brodelt before tho attention of the Board a bluer*. priest layout of as eeetion of land prepared y the $tar Realty Com.. pony. "hie plot of land is bounded on one si{lo by Uassaachu)setts Arenue on another side by Sylvia street and the Arlington town-line and lies in a north.wsaterly direction frets the corner of Sylvia and Maseaahnsette Avenue. By motion of Ur. ';i; ry, it was voted to defer action on this subject until next mooting. The layout as is, is not eat .s3factory to the 'lapping DmIrd and lots ere laid out with a 7o foot frontage when in tho opinion of the Board, front¢«;a should be 75 feat to con., form with the new coning lax. By vote it l:.s decided that the Planning Board should at once tar up the subject of the pr000syed now road or taking for a road to run from aanoadhussette Avenue across Vine Brook Read throe/11 to ` alta&a !itroet. Mr. r21,377 fools that the time hash epee for definite actioa on this whole project on the part of the Planning Boar:i. In th© Hoar future the Time Brook Drainage schema by Metcalf and `eddy will be discussed with Mr. Startleff. ter. Cosgrove is to draw u7) a blue.' ri nt of the proposed road loading off of Hassachu otts Avenue across Vine Brook Road sac) the :.Tanning Board may have it for study and reference. Meeting adjanarnod tknbor* presswt -.7oros— i:nory, Glynn, Milne, Duffy. Cutler and l ow_:re. May 21, 1929. 111 Planning Board Meeting with Board of Selectmen. Subject; Discussion of Proposed Public Swimming Pool . Mr. Theodore Custance opened discussion. Mr. Emery discussed Vine Brook Drainage System and proposed new roads in leading up to swimming pool. Mr. Shurtleff g-ve his views and presented his criticisms of the swimming pool plans which the "Swimming Pool Committee" had drawn up. Mr. Shurtleff suggested that be :ter location could be found. Mr. Emery charged that "Swimming Pool Committee" was forcing project thro without careful study as to location or orienta- tion. Present: Emery, Glynn and Bowers. Signed: Nelson J. Bowers , Secretary. 111 May 26, 1929. 7:00 P. M. Joint Meeting of Planning Board and Board of Selectmen held on the Playground at end of Parker Street. Purpose of Meeting was to go over the proposed sites of the swimming pool . Different proposed sites were paced out and criticised. The matter of dust on windy days from tennis courts was dis- cussed and the orientation of the pool to get the most sunshine was discussed. Mr. Emery suggested a possible site on the easterly side of the road from the Parker end of the playground. Town Engineer is to make soundings of this site and otter sites on the playground and result of such soundings will be discussed at a future meeting of the planning board. Present: Emery and Bowers. Signed: Nelson J. Bowers, Secretary. May 27, 1929. Meeting of Planning Board. Purpose: Hearing for amendments to Zoning By-laws as printed, and approved by Attorney - Journal. Numerous errors and omissions crept in, such as commas left out, or commas wrongly inserted, and in some places certain paragraphs were left in which should have been struck out. Mr. Neil McIntosh and three others w,ere present to find out what amendments were proposed. These people left shortly after 8:00 p. m. Members of the planning board worked until shortly after midnight preparing data and corrections necessary to prepare amendments to propose at next town meeting. Members of Planning Board Present: Emery, Duffy, Cutler, Bowers together with Cosgrove, Town Engineer. Signed: Nelson J. Bowers , Secretary. June 3, 1929. Meeting of Planning Board. Purpose of Meeting: k''urther reading of recently passed Zoning Laws and the checking up of corrections made at last meet- ing. Mr. Wrightington, Town Counsel, was present and all corrections in the form of amendments were verified by him so that necessary amendments might be in proper form for voting on at the next town meeting. Those present: Emery, Duffy, Glynn and Bowers. Signed: Nelson J. Bowers, Secretary. June 10, 1929. Meeting of Planning Board. Board unanimously approves and recommends for favorable consideration and further hearing the proposed new road continuing from East Street across Adam` Street and connecting with Bedford Street, as shown in yellow outline on a map in the Town Engineer's office dated and corrected to June 10, 1929. Vine Brook Drainage System. Proposed road from Massachusetts Avenue to and across Vine Brook Road and diagonally over to Waltham Street was discussed. Mr. Cosgrove has drawn up a map showing a tentative road lay-out. After discussion the Board felt that a road constructed diagonally across to Waltham Street- to include the present sewer would make a satisfactory approach to the proposed park area. Mr. Cosgrove is to make some corrections to his map for further discussion by the Board. Matter of establishing building lines toward Arlington end of Massachusetts Avenue again discussed and Mr. Cosgrove tQ approach several land owners of land with the idea of taking up this item at a future meeting. Application of Mona A, Holland t9teerect a tearoom on her property on Massachusetts Avenue almost oppositelTottler Avenue. The Board decided that this matter was for the attention of the Board of Appeals and the Secretary was instructed to so inform Mrs . Holland. Present Emery, Glynn, Duffy, Cutler and Bowers. Signed: Nelson J. Bowers , Secretary. ilugust 8, 1929. Hearing on proposed extension of East Street through to Bedford Street. Members of Planning Board present: Emery & Bowers . Considerable opposition to the proposed layout, most opposition centering on that section between Hancock Street and Bedford Street. Nelson J. Bowers, Secretary. Planning Board Lexington, Mass. Minutes of the Meeting Sept. 13, 1929. Members present: Emery, Duffy, Glynn, Milne , Cutler, Bowers , and Town Engineer, Cosgrove. Vine Brook Drainage. Subject discussed. Mr. Ryder wrote Mr. Emery on August 2, that he and his brother were going ahead on their develop- ment plans . They are , at present, surveying a street from Winthrop Road through to Waltham Street. They expect to lay out this road as soon as possible. This action has approv=al of the Planning Board and the Board intends to cooperate as far as possible with the Ryders . It is felt that it is not yet the right time to appear before the Town for an appropriation to provide drainage for this district. Waltham Street widening. Business district now goes down both sides of Waltham Street to Vine Brook Road. The Board suggests an additional width for Waltham Street of twenty feet, whether to be all on one side or part on each side was not decided. Voted to have Mr. Cosgrove , Town Engineer, to make a study of this subject and to make suggestions . Mr. Cosgrove presented a blue print of the Golden Guernsey Farm proposed development. This property is back from. Marrebt Road and is borderedon one side by the Sarano property and Lincoln Street. 1 PLANNING BOARD LEXINGTON, MASS. September 20, 1929 . - MINUTES OF TIE MEETING- Present: Messrs . Emery, Glynn, Cutler, Duffy, Milne and Cosgrive . Consideration was given to the request of the Lexington Trust Company for a recommendation as to the set-back for their new building on Muzzey Street. The site for the new Central Fire Engine Station was considered at request of the Selectmen and the clerk was asked to write to the Selectmen recommending the plot on Fletcher Avenue and Woburn Street . The plan of the Golden Guernsey development off Lincoln Street was reviewed and some suggestions made to Mr . Cosgrive for the arrangement of the connecting roads . The matter was left in his hands for final adjustment, the feeling being that the interior arrangement for this development was generally satisfactory. Planning Board Lexington, Mass. Minutes of the Meeting. September 27, 1929. Present: Emery, Milne , Cutler, Duffy, Bowers , and Town Engineer, Cosgrove. Subject: East Lexington Fire Station Site. It was voted by this board that the present site would be the best site for a new Fire station for East Lexington. The Board considers that it would be most economical for the town to use this site inasmuch as the town already owns the land, providing of course that there are no outstanding objections that have not come to the attention of the Planning Board. The Board understands that there is little need for the present hall for public functions . Golden Guernsey Development. Board approves of several changes made by Mr. Cosgrove , Town Engineer, in lay out of roads as indicated in red on a blue print in the town office described as "Proposed Development of Golden Guernsey Farm, dated April 1929. " c9^ Planning Board Lexington , Mass. Minutes of the Meeting October 7, 1929. Members present: Emery, Milne, Bowers. Hearing before Planning Board on Five Forks Corner proposition as to whether this sectionshould be a business section or whether it shall be decided to recon-rend that this be restored to a strictly residential section. Meeting called to order by Chairman Emery, at 8.15 P. M. Mr. Emery explained the purpose of the meeting. Mr. George H. McDermott asked about a section of the Zoning Law having to do with Five Forks. He also wanted to know if this meeting was called by Planning Board or by fifty per cent of those owners near Five Forks . Mr. Emery ansdered, "By both". Mr. Heaney objects to Five Forks becoming residential. He loses his temper several times and is told to sit dorm by Chair- man. Mr. Miller speaks in favor of having residential section. Mr. Scheibe in favor of residential section. Mr. Webb Frank Goldman representing Innes and McClellan, argues that his clients will suffer--that his clients bought land and gave a seven foot strip of land to the town on School Street on strength of a part of the land being in a business section. Mr. McDermott also makes same objections as Mr. Goldman. Mr. McDermott is interested in Innes and McClellan property as a mort- gagee. He holds a first mortgage of 413 ,000. given on Oct. 15, 1928 which was raised to `13,600. In June 1929. George H. McDermott is located at 75 Tremont Street, Boston, Mass. _2_ October 7, 1929. Mrs . Sa:ran.o objects to having business property in vigcin_ity of her home. Mr. Heaney infavor of any business that wants to come to Five Forks . He does not favor any change in Zoning; Law. Mr Miller does not object to any business being at Five Forks . He signed petition for change at Mr. Saran.o 's request. Chairman Finery objects to conduct of opposition and adjourns meeting. 9 Planning Board (Five Forks ) Lexington, Mass . Minutes of the Meeting. October 8, 1929. Present: Emery, Glynn, Milne , Cutler, Bowers , and Board of Selectmen. Subject: New Fire Station Sites Mr. Emery speaks for Planning Board in favor of triangular plot of _land on Mass. Avenue between Fletcher Avenue & R. R. track. Mr. Devine of Fire Station Site Committee speaks in favor of site on "'althorn St. offered as a donation by Hallie Blake. Mr. Emery suggests that Chief Taylor prepare for Selectmen & Planning Board rough plans for fire station including in plans what he thinks town needs for a station and apparatus . Mr. Emery asks Selectmen to postpone action on application for permit for filling station on south east corner of Five Forks until Planning Board can reconsider Five Forks and study tentative plans for a new and different layout of this junction. Lexington Planning Board Meeting October 28, 1929. Present: Emery , Glynn, Cutler, Bowers , and Cosgrove , Town Engineer. Five Forks Intersection discussed Board not entirely agreed on adopting Mr. Emery's suggestion to do away with the triangle and also doing away the right fork of Lincoln Street. Mr. Cosgrove to draw up several new plans of Five Forks for further discussion. Mr. Custance offers for study of the Planning Board a plan calling for a proposed street leading off Mass. Avenue near Summit Avenue to lead over and connect with Columbus Street in one direction and another fork to cross the Old County Road and connect with Bellflower Street at junction of Bellflower and Balfour Street. Mr. Custance also asks Planning Board to reconsider proposed street between Mass . Avenue and Vine Brook Road. Mr. Custance says that proposed street should be narrower than 100 feet. Planning Board to study matter. Lexington Planning Board Meeting November 4, 1929. Mr. Barnes representing Mr. Rider presents plans of Vine Brook Drainage Area. It seems that he came to get information from Planning Board as to lay out of roads . Mr. Emery promised hearty cooperation of the Board. Five Forks Junction. Board has spent several sessions on trying to arrive at the best solution of the traffic situation and whether or not Board should recommenda change in the zoning laws at this junction. Shall Board recommend change in laws so that there shall be no business on the northerly side of this junction, or shall they leave zoning law as is and allow business within 200 feet in all directions from junction. Board agrees to keep triangle of land intact instead of throwing it into a roadway. It had talked of giving right fork of Lincoln Street to Mr. Elliot in exchange for this triangle plot. Mr. Cosgrove to approach Mr. Elliot to get his price on triangular plot if town would buy it for a park space. Lexington Planning Board Meeting November 18, 1929. Members Present: Emery, Glynn, Duffy, Bowers , Cosgrove, Town Engineer. Vine Brook Drainage: Proposed road from Massachusetts Avenue , to Vine Brook Road discussed: Moved and seconded that Planning Board recom- mend to Selectmen an eighty foot roadway, forty feet to be a traveled way and forty feet for marginal grass plots and sidewalk space. Secretary instructed to so notify Selectmen. Five Forks; Agreed that Town should try to buy triangular piece of land from owner Richard P. Elliot. Board not agreed on recommending that land to north of Lincoln Street be put back in residence zone . Action to be put over until full board meets . Board agreed that as Board has not used all its appropriation some money be paid to Mr. Shurtleff for his services , after Mr. Shurtleff has sent a bill for services . Spencer Street: Board approves a layout for extension of this street as submitted by Robbins & Smith. Secretary instructed to notify Selectmen. Hinchey Road: Relative to installation of street lights on Hinchey Road: Upon assurance of Town Engineer,whatever additional streets may be laid out or whatever other changes may be made in develop- ment of adjoining properties Hinchey Road is likely to remain substantially as laid down on plan entitled "Plan q,4 Profile of Hinchey Road in Lexington 3/1928, F. P. Cutter C. E. (2 sheets ) , Voted that no objection appears to installation of street lamps on Hinchey Road, if such installation is otherwise found to be expedient by Selectmen. Lexington Planning Board Meeting November 25, 1929. ?resent: Emory, Milne, Glynn, Duffy, Cutler, & Bowers. Mr. Barnes presented a new lay out for a development of the Vine Brook Area, Planning Board sugger ted that Mr. Barnes, perhaps in conjunction with Mr, Cosgrove, Town Engineer, make further soundings to make sure of his lar out, Be is to confer with Planning Board a week from today. Voted to pay to fir. t:hurtleff from "lannin , Pofard Appropriation the sum of ,25OJ, on account of his bill rendered. L<cidod tit Planning Board should ask the town to appro- priate :500. for its use for next year, that being the amount of appropriation for this past year. Five Forks: Mr. r"mery to have Mr. Cosgrove draw up a new lay out of Five Forks according to idea of Mr. 'Time discussed this evening. Planning Board Meeting Lexington, Mass. December 2, 1929 . Present: Emery, Glynn, Higgins of Town Engineer' s Dept. , Mr. Duffy was with us part time. Five Forks : At a final discussion the Planning Board voted to recommend to the Board of Survey that the triangle of land be retained and not thrown into a highway, and furthermore that the Town negotiate with the owner Mr. R. D. Elliott for the purchase of the triangular plot as indicated by a plan which will be prepared by the Town engineer to illustrate suggestions of Planning Board, and bring out the treatment of Five Forks Junction as thought out by said Board. Rough sketch is also sent Board of Survey showing what Planning Board at first had in mind. This sketch shows the elimination of the triangular piece of land and the elimination of the northerly fork of Lincoln Road. After studying this layout at several meetings the Board felt that the curb lines would be too far apart and that this condition would offer too great a risk to pedestrians wishing to cross this junction. Hinchey Road: The Planning Board voted to recommend for approval by the Board of Survey the layout of Hinchey Road as shown on a plan entitled "Plan and Profile of Hinchey Road at Lexington, 3/1928, F. P. Cutter, C. F. , scale Hor. 40, Vert. 6, " except that the southwesterly end of said Road be considered by the Town Engineer and determined if it be left in such direction as will permit of its ultimate proper extension when required. Massachusetts Fed. of Planning Boards : Voted: that yearly dues of cls. be at once sent to the State organization instead of waiting for January 1, bill. Mr. Emery to take care of this matter, PLANNING BOARD MEETING ( with Mr. Barnes ) LEXINGTON, MASS. DECEMBER 9 , 1929. Present: Emery, Glynn, Milne , Duffy, Cutler, and Cosgrove . Vine Brook Road: Drainage problem and highways discussed with Mr. Barnes who had had certain soundings made to help determine location of roads and he was asked to meet with Planning Board on. Friday, December 13 . Planning Board Meeting Lexington, Mass. December 16, 1929. Present: All but Mr. Bowers and Town Engineer. Harold B. Lamont of Winthrop Road appeared to protest against any extension of a road at the rear of his lot. No approved plan of such an extension was found and the owner of land in question, Mr. Black was called and said he did not desire any such road extension. Mr. Lamont was therefore satisfied. Mr. Ryder and Engineer Roland Barnes , presented plans for Vine Brook development of land east southeast of Waltham Street with soundings by Mr. Barns , which suggested to the Board a change in proposed Street layout for better lots , easier road building and retaining some areas for park purposes . Mr. Barnes will present a change in the plan Friday evening , December 20. Planning Board Meeting. Lexington, Mass . December 30, 1929. Present: Emery, Glynn, Butler, Bowers , and Cosgrove. Five Forks lone : Petition of Mr. Sarano to restore part of this junction to a residential section read by Chairman Emery and matter discussed. Board unanimously agreed to recommend that Town restore this junction as petitioned. Board agrees that Mr. Cosgrove should cooperate for the Town with State and County engineers in matter. of widening and improving of Concord Avenue from Cambridge to Concord. / , r /I/ • ` I Vel / PLANNING BOARD REPORT FOR 1929 The activities of the Planning Board during the first two months of the year were devoted almost entirely to considera- tion of the proposed amendments to the Zoning Law. The original Zoning Law, that hadbeen in force since April, 1924, had been found by experience to require amendment in order to provide adequate protection for the town. Proposed amendments to that end were presented by the Planning Board to the town at a Town Meeting held on December 17th, 1928, and were refered back by the town for further consideration by the Planning Board jointly with a committee appointed by the Selectmen. This joint committee held frequent meetings for considera- tion of the subject and arranged several public hearings to give all citizens opportunity to appear to inquire as to various as- pects of the proposed amendments and to offer suggestions and objections, with the result that upon the unanimous report of this joint committee , the town at the session of its annual meet- ing held March 18, 1929, adopted the amendments reported, and which were in the main as originally proposed by the Planning Board . The Zoning Law as amended now affords the town the best protection that is probably to be had against unduly congested and other undesirable developments . The most important of the amendments adopted are those increasing the minimum frontages of lots in any development from 50 ft . to 75 ft . , and minimum areas from 5,000 sq. ft . to 7,500 sq. ft . , and the adoption of a provision that dwellings hereafter erected upon back lands shall have the same minimum lot areas as those that front upon the main highways and shall be provided with approach streets established under the Board of Survey Act and following hearings by the Board of Survey. In- creasing the minimum frontages and lot areas will tend to pro- tect the town against the most dangerous kind of lot develop- ments , and the amendment relating to the erection of dwellings upon back lots will protect the town against dangerous and con- gested developments on the rear ends of excessively deep lots that some developers have foundit expedient to lay out . Our present Zoning Law is generally pronounced to be among the best in the Commonwealth. It is, however, too much to expect that it will stand without further amendment because from time to time , as conditions change , it will be necessary, as well. as desirable , to amend it in various respects, to keep it abreast of the times. One possible amendment is already before the Planning Board . Prior to the adoption of the principal amendments of March last, a petition was received from residents in the -2- vicinity of "The Five Forks" so called, asking that the Zoning Law be amended to eliminate business on both sides of Lincoln Street except the southerly corner lots on Parrett Road, and upon both sides of Parrett hoad and School Street north of Lincoln Street . The petition was based upon the feeling of the residents that there was no present call for the large business area provided by the existing Zoning Law, and that it was better to restore a substantial part of it to the status of a residential district until a real need for an enlarged business district in that locality should develop. At the request of the Planning Board, the petitioners generously consented to defer consideration of this petition un- til after the other and more important amendments were disposed of. It was felt that to inject this particular matter into the broader project then under consideration would tend to con- fuse the entire subject . Now that the main amendments are out of the way, this particular matter will be brought before the town at an early date . In this connection it is well to state that there is at present a preponderance of opinion that it is better not to provide business districts very much beyond immediate require- ments . 1,Jhen our Zoning Law was adopted, the best opinion was to provide business districts in advance of immediate require- ments, but experience in Lexington, as well as elsewhere, has shown pretty conclusively that to so plan means a scattered development within the business districts, by isolated stores, ill-arranged and undesirable from every angle . Such scattered business development does not add appreciably to the value of the property as business property, and it practically ruins inter- vening residential properties so that no worthwhile improvement comes from the development . By keeping the business districts down approximately to immediate or immediately prospective needs, a more compact business development is assured, appreciation of values is attained and unnecessary depreciation of residential values is avoided. ` hile it is probably unwise to undertake to interfere very much with what has already been allotted to business development, it will henceforth be well to be governed by past experience and not unnecessarily increase provision for future business beyond the then immediate requirements; and where , as in "The Five Forks" district , a strong sentiment has developed for a return of a part from business to residential uses, such change may well be made . Following disposal of the zoning Law, the Planning Board has been busy throughout the year upon other and miscellaneous matter, many of which were and are of substantial importance . One of these matters related to the display of "For Sale" and. " Sold" signs upon various properties throughout the town. Being of the opinion that the increasing number of such -3- signs upon our principal streets - frequently several signs to a lot - not only seriously disfigured the town, but also tended to create a false impression that something was wrong with the town, the Planning Board sough the co-operation of the Fealtors in some agreement to regulate the practice . Accordingly, in June last, communications upon the sub- ject were addressed to a large number of Realtors - opinions were sought and suggestions were invited, following which, upon invitation of the Planning Board, some twenty Realtors doing bus- iness in Lexington met with the Board in the Selectmen's room on the evening of October 21st , for a discussion. the possibility was considered of an agreement to refrain from posting such signs altogether, there being a large body of well considered opinion that the display of signs does not pro- mote advantageous sales of properties . surprising as it may seem, the Realtors, themselves were willing to agree to dispense with the signs but, since no way could be found for bringing individual property owners within such an agreement , it was necessary to abandon the idea as im- practicable . The Realtors, however, did agree unanimously to erect no " Sold" signs thereafter in Lexington; that all existing "For Sale" or "For Rent" signs that did not conform to the new Zoning Law restriction or six square feet maximum area should be replaced by signs conforming to such restriction; that all "For Sale" or "For Rent" signs should thereafter be mounted upon one or more posts instead of being nailed upon trees, and that all existing signs that were nailed to trees should be re- moved as promptly as possible ; that all signs thereafter erected should be set back twenty feet from the sidewalk to conform with the Zoning Law set-back requirement; and that none of the Realtors would thereafter install a "For Sale" or "For Rent" sign upon any property in Lexington that already carried one such sign. It is believed that the appearance of the town will be much improved when the foregoing agreements shall have been put into effect . A gratifying result of the conference was the unanimous expression from the Realtors present of their belief in our Zoning Law, their willingness to work for its enforcement and their confidence in the town itself. They were outspoken in their emphasis of the high standing of Lexington among the towns of the b.etropolitan District and pledged their efforts to maintain that standing so far as within their power. A great deal of time has been given to the general sub- ject of the drainage and development of the Vine Brook drainage area. The project itself is a large one and of very great im- portance to the town. If that area is not drained and rendered -4- suitable for first-class residential development, it is certain to go to a low-class, undesirable development. If well developed, it will bring a large taxable return to the town; if it goes to an undesirable development, it will become an actual charge upon the town. e are very glad to report that the principal owner of property in that area, Mr. Charles W. Ryder, is co-operating heartily with the Planning Board, with the end in view of ob- taining the best possible development for residential purposes . Mr. Ryder' s engineer has been working closely with the Planning Board and, as the result of the many studies and conferences that have been had, the Planning Board has recently informally approved the proposed layout of streets, etc . , and that layout is now before the Board of purvey for definite and authoritative action. The area above referred to as having had intensive study, is that located between Highland Avenue and 14altham Street, and extending from Vine Brook Road to the vicinity of Marrett Road. The Planning Board now contemplates detailed study of the remainder of the area to the west of Waltham Street, embracing what gener- ally may be referred to as the "Playground" area. The Planning Board is of the opinion that the importance of this development justifies any amount of time and study that may reasonably be required for its adequate presentation to the town. Considerable study has been given to the proposed estension of East Street through to Bedford Street . In addition to the preliminary hearings held by the Selectmen, which the Planning Board attended, the Planning Board, with representatives of the Selectmen, attended a joint hearing in Arlington at which Chair- man Harriman, of the Metropolitan Planning Division, explained plans to make of the proposed East Street extension a more im- portant highway than had been originally planned. This project has developed to a point where the Metropolitan Planning Division has now introduced before the Legislature a bill to provide for the widening and development of the Alewife Brook Boulevard and to amplify its connection with the Mystic Boulevard, which is to be straightened and widened to its connection with Summer Street, which latter is also to be straightened and widened, continuing up Lowell Street to East Street . Thence East Street is to be widened and straightened , or a new boulevard built, that will extend across the open area to the west of Adams Street and, touching Grove Street , will cross the open country to the west thereof and join Bedford Street in the vicinity of the Lexington-Bedford line . This will provide an ample cut-off for traffic originating in New Hampshire and destined for Medford, Revere , Malden and points north of Boston, and will remove the major part of such traffic from Massachusetts Avenue through the center of the town. The bill proposes that this road, so far as Lexington is concerned, shall be built at the sole expense of the Commonwealth except that the town will be required to cover the land damages. Since the land is not at present particularly valuable , and since the owners would be benefited by the construction and are generally in favor of it , the cost to the town should not be much more than nominal. It is under- -5- stood , however, that the bill, if passed, will be conditioned upon the town, at some later date , providing at its own ex- pense a cut-off from Summer Street to Maple Street, to eliminate the present sharp junction point, so as to improve the present way from Summer Street to Marrett Road in East Lexington. Other street matters considered by the Planning Board were : a new layout for Hill Street; `:altham Street widening; plan for proposed street leading off Massachusetts Avenue near Summit Avenue to connect with Columbus Street ; Spencer Street layout; Hinchey Road layout ; and the rearrangement of the streets at "The Five Forks" . This latter project has engaged the study of the Planning Board at several of its meetings, and has proved to be a problem of unusual complexity. The principal question has been whether to retain the present triangular area at the junction point or to remove it and, dispensing with the cut-off now flanking the triangular plot at its northerly side , bring the intersections down to the more simple form of crossing of Lincoln Street and Marrett Road, with wide curves at the four corners. The Planning Board has finally recommended the reten- sion of the triangular area. The matter of building lines on Massachusetts Avenue near the Arlington line has hadvery considerable further attention bar the rlanning Board, but as yet no definite results can be re- ported. The board is still at work upon the subject and it is hoped something by way of advance may be reported during the coming year. The Planning Board has considered the subject of sites for new Fire Engine houses, both at the center and East Lexing- ton, and has reported its recommendations to the Selectmen. Considerable study was given to the project of the Swim- ming Pool recently constructed by the town, and its recommenda- tions were reported to the selectmen. A number of hearings were held for consideration of what is known as the Innis and IvicLellan development between School street and Marrett Road, extending from Massachusetts Avenue down to the apex at "The Five Forks" . The owners showed a very commendable willingness to co-operate with the Planning Board, with the result that a satisfactory layout was arrived at and recommended to the Board of purvey for adoption. Consideration was given to a proposed development of the Baker estate at 1404 Massachusetts Avenue , which was to serve as the basis for a sale . The plan submitted was not approved by the Planning Board and the sale was not consummated. The owner of a property is of course privileged to develop it whenever he so desires and considers it to be to his interest to do so. It is not within the power of the town ordinarily to prevent such a development ; all that can be done is to regulate it, so far as possible , for the benefit of the town - and that means usually for the benefit of the owner also, since the -6- interest of both town and owner are in the final analysis ordinarily found to be identical. This regulation of development in general is the business of the Planning Board, and the Baker project was an instance in point. It would be better both for the town and for the owner to have the property developed, if at all, in con- junction with a larger scheme involving neighboring properties , but if this cannot be had, and development is insisted upon, the plan recommended by the Planning Board appears to be next best . At any rate , it cannot be developed otherwise than in accordance with that plan without further hearings and approval by the officials of the town. Plans were also considered and approvedby the "Planning Board for development of what is known as the "Golden Guernsey Farm" , property on Lincoln Street west of "The Five rorks" . This development also has not yet progressed to actual accomplish- ment, but the plans are approved for such development if and when it becomes expedient to undertake it . More or less time has been consumed at a number of meet- ings of the Board in connection with the development by the Star Realty Company of property on and adjacent to Sylvia Street, r ast Lexington. No definite plans have resulted from this con- sideration. The various plans submitted from time to time by the owners have not been satisfactory to the Planning Board and approval has been withheld. Numerous other and minor matters have come up for con- sideration and appropriate action taken. The work of the Planning Board is still hampered by lack of engineering service, and it is hoped that at the coming Town 'oleeting an appropriation may be made that will make possible the needed engineering staff. Instead of being in advance of the individual develop- ments in the town, the board in almost every instance is behind them, and instead of being able to outline broad constructive plans to which local developments shall be made to conform, the work of the board is largely confined to jumping from one in- dividual project to another, regulating as best it can the in- dividual developments without opportunity to coordinate them with the more important and larger plans . This unsatisfactory line of work must continue until the town provides additional en- gineers to permit the Planning Board to obtain the data that will make it possible to plan ahead in anticipation of individual developments . As it is now, when an individual owner wishes to develop his farm, or when a realtor purchases a farm for development, it is his right to have a plan therefor approved with reasonable promptness . Because of our inability to plan ahead and present a major scheme already developed, to which minor or individual plans shall be adapted, the Planning Board is now obliged to -7- drop whatever work it is engaged upon and take up the individual plan last presented, act upon it as best it can, and then take up another, and so on, jumping from one scheme to another. While in the main we have been able to handle the various propositions with a fair degree of satisfaction and, on the whole, in a manner to protect the town, it is clearly not the best procedure , and a time will come at no distant date when these individual develop- ments will be found to block larger and more important plans that have to do with necessary through highways and open play- ground and park areas, all of which should have been laid out in advance of the subordinate developments. Respectfully submitted, Frederick L. Emery, Chairman C . Edward Glynn, J. Henry Duffy, William D. 'Milne , Clarence H. Cutler, lelson J. Bowers, Clark.