HomeMy WebLinkAbout1933-04-03Report to Town Meeting April 3, 1933
Actin on the petition of Daniel J. O'Connell to amend
the Lexington ?oni:i, :3y -Laws by changiae; the tr.isnbular parcel
of lend bounded by Fletcher Avenue, !"oburn Street and the ri6ht-
of-v.ay of she Boston and Lowell RailroPd Corp. from an R.l
district to a. C.1 district, the ''tannin;; Bo&rd in accordance
with the provisions of the .'onin6 By -Law has held a duly advertised
hearin6, and - fter consideratio.:, iiow reaorts to the Town.
The ''lanninL, Board has twice previously considered
requests for substantia.11Y this sane chane, end u.�on its
adverse reports the Town has twice refused to approve it.
T3pon this its third consideration of the iaatter, the Planning
Board hes again unanimously voted to recoiiaaend to the Town that
this chenge be not apyiroved at this ti.ae.
It does not ap?et r that tree fnn t mental conditions affecting
the matter have i_i r.ny :iatcriai degree chpnf ed since it was last
considered by the Town. The opposition of the ;'tannin Board to
the proj)osed change is, t s formerly, 'o< sed primarildr upon a firm
belief that the area e ready L)rovided for business use is a,..,)ie,
not only for all present needs but for the needs of wany years
to cone, anc: that to eniarge the ..rep. viii necess:.ri y lead to a
depreci tion in value of existing, busiiess areas and a
progressive deterioration of nearby residential properties.
:3eyond this )rimay'consideratio;i, which iuvolv._s a
principle of f«r-reachi.,: ir:.)ortance affectiig the future develop-
ment of the Town with respect to its business arez,s, the P_Lannirig
Board in mope(- by other and more iaLaediate considerations to
recouuaend the.t the Town at:,least difer comiiiittin6 itself to a
change at this time. Among t.ese are the following;
(1) The petitioner has indicated that he has in mind re-
questin the withdrawal of certain lands on the southerly side
of Gassa.chusetts Avenin e from ...inthrot) Road to the Baptist Churen
from the ?3usiness or A.1 district to an:.l or residence district
and further th4t ae would fe.vor the withfrawa.i of the lend frow the
Town _Buildings to Pletcher Ivenue, from tag C F
l dis district to n R.�
district. Such cha.n6es, the lanni.ng :hoard feels, deserve the
serious consideration of the Town, and should be carefully
explored and acted upon before any new Brea immediately adjacent
is set apart for business use.
(2) The Russell Irouse property involving an important tract
of land adjacent to Town property is now in the marxet and its
future development is uncertain. Beim important in its influence
on general town develo.inent the future of this area should riot
be prejudiced at this time by a, cha.n;,e in the status of tree
property involved in this petition.
The Plannin- .rioard recognizes the improvements that the
petitioner ha.s im de in the I)roy)Prty, and the ap,)arent fact that
the land cannot be turned to as great profit for the owner through
-2-
residential use as through business use, but would main point
out that the 1.=nd wss acouired by the owner while it was in a
residential zone with no indication on the part of the Town that
its status ws.s to be chrnLed.
'te5pectinE, th«t specific business use indicated for this
area, should. it oe changed to a. business area, the Planning Board
is of the opinion that a filin6 station would introduce added
complications and dent,ers to ooth hit,hwc y and sidewalri trafzic.
Seeint; no _>uolic necessity with respect to t he special use at
this location, the Board notes th, gj-°owing; demand in neighboring
municipalities to exe.lud:. such uses from ax ea.s in proximity Lo
churches, schools, and public buildings. Respectin6 the induce-
ments offered in the way of new assessable valul-s, the Board is
inclined to discount these considerably in view of the oroader
considerations and to conte,nplate the prooability of eventual
depreciation of the value of mercantile buildin6s in this area
owing to its peculiar location.
The Planning Board recognizes the desire of residents of
the Fletcher Avenue and "'oburn Street districts for improved
street conditions and convenient neighborY;ood stores, but it
should be noted that Fletcher Avenue is now an unaccepted street
and, that 'a uusiness area suiteole for neighborhood stores, is',
already provided on '''oburn Street east of the railxoad.The
future extension of Sherman Street to "oburn Street with neneral
rearrangements and improvements includin6 the possible discon-
tinuance of Fletcher Avenue from the Railroe.d to Masst.chusetts
Avenue are seen as developments indicating the desirabiiity of
deferring a.ny chr:nl,e in the sV tus of the are¢ involved in the
present petition.
The Planning Board regards this triengulr°.r area, ,ust
off the-)rincipal avenue between two streets and a railroad, and
between two Preis in which the Town itself has heavy investments,
as being of ;)eculiar strategic importance. Changes such as
might be involved in the elimination of the "."oburn Ctreet grade
crossing, or the re ayout of 7oourn 2treet as a part of a mF,.or
state highway development suggest that Meavy chErges for dama-es
might well fall on the Town if this area were to be built upon
for business purposes.
For these reasons the Town should surely maintain at
this point the limitation of the business area as originally
contemy)la.ted when the 'oiing 13y -Law was passed. The Planning
Board avain ur.;es that the Town :name no change at this time in
the status of the particular area covered by the t)etition.
;l