HomeMy WebLinkAbout1936-02-04PLANNING BOARD MEETING
' February 4, 1936
Present:- Messrs, Duffy, Borden, Ellis & Kimball.
It was voted to make the necessary arrangements coinei-
dent to holding public hearings on the various proposed amend-
ments as follows: -
Hearings to be held in the Selectmen's office, Friday,
February 28, 1936, in the following order:- Mr. Ernest De-
Vincent at 7:30 P. M., Mrs, Sarah A. Cutler at 8:00 P. M.,
The Removal of Sod & Loam at 8:30 P. M., and the amendment
to replace Section 10 at 9:001 P. M.
Note 2/8/36:- Copy for the necessary publication of no-
tice of hearings to appear in the Lexington Townsman February
14 and 21 was provided and copy of the articleefor the Town
Warrant furnished Miss Lowe.
A joint meeting was held with the Board of Selectmen
to discuss the proposed.amendment relating to the removal of
sod, loam, sand and gravel. The discussion centered around
provisions for specific regulations as to permissible quanti-
ties to be removed as well as required permits for operation
' as against a general clause designed to amplify the present
by-law in respect to wholesale removal.
It was unanimously voted to propose,at the next Town
Meeting, the amendment as drawn by the Town Counsel, dated
October 21, 1935, corrected February , 1936, and attached
hereto.
Mr. Duffy described briefly the Planning Board's proposal
to study in more detail the areas adjoining the Concord Turn-
pike before laying down definite setbacks, pointing out that
the Engineering Department was preparing the necessary funda-
mental plans. The Board of Selectmen agreed to the wisdom of
postponing direct action on the setback to a later date and
the joint meeting dissolved.
Interpretation of the clause provided "for purposes not
substantially different", as relating to non -conforming uses
was discussed with the Town Counsel with its particular bear-
ing on the Merriam Factory and Jefferson Union uses.
Mr. Borden expressed the opinion that an equity had been
established (in the cases under discussion) previous to the
adoption of the By -Law which could not be disregarded and that
this equity was entirely different from one enhanced by changes
in the character of an area through natural developments. The
latter is in fact an unearned equity.
' Mr. Wrightington expressed the opinion that a fair ques-
tion existed whether the Lexington By -Law as it now stands,
Hearings
Sod, Loam
& Gravel
Concord
Turnpike
Non-
conform-
ing
Uses
could be interpreted to permit a change to some other type
of use even though it was one of higher degree: vis, from
a manufacturing use to one permitted in, business areas-.
The draft of a new Article 10 to replace the present
Article 10 of the Zoning By -Law, as drawn at the last Plann-
ing Board Meeting, was reviewed with Mr, Wrightington and a
final draft prepared.
It was voted to propose this draft to the March Town
Meeting as an amendment to the Zoning By -Law.
'House Bill 218 (an ac't providing ari improved method of
Municipal Planning) was'briefly discussed with particular
reference to its provisions for "'plot" layouts as influenc-
ing lot frontages and areas. -
Mr. Duffy expressed the opinion that a fixed lot front-
age and area did not provide the best.,means for the overal Frontages
development of the Town, and that where a 75 foot limit might
well be ample in some locations, a 150 or 200 foot minimum could
be justified in others. In other words, the "plot" layout
method offered the best planning method.
Meeting adjourned at 10:25 P. M.
Respectfully submitted,
Clerk Pro Tem.
1
1