HomeMy WebLinkAbout1939-05-18PLANNING BOARD HEARING
MAY 18th, 1939.
A hearing of the Planning Board was held on May 18th at
the Selectmen's Room, Town Office Building, at°8:00 F.M.
All of the members of the Planning Board were present.
Members of the Board of Assessors, Appropriation Com-
mittee, the Building Inspector, real estate agents and
several other interested parties were also present at the
hearing.
Mr. Greeley, Chairman of the Planning Board, opened the
hearing for discussion. He stated that the Planning Board
had drawn up a proposed amendment for an R.3 or apartment
zone. He said that the purpose of the Planning Board in
presenting the proposal was to put before the town something
which could be discussed and perhaps make it possible for
Lexington to have a type of apartment house which would not
in any way injure the town but would be an asset rather than
a liability. He stated that the Planning Board felt that
apartment houses would be a great advantage to Lexington as
they believed there was a real need for them. The Planning
' Board also felt that an unlimited permission for an apartment
house of any type would be unwise so they have tried to pre-
sent something which would make possible an apartment house
which would be governed as to construction and design so that
the citizens of Lexington would have something that would be
advantageous. He said that a requirement was made for a two
and a half story apartment house as they felt that it should
conform to the type of house that would probably by in the
district. This, of course, does not include apartments in a
business zone. Mr. Greeley said this would conform to our
present law which is defined by the State in the so-called
Tenement Mouse Act for Towns, which we made a part of our
Building Law and which still stands. Mr. Greeley stated
that there was at the present time a committee working on
the revision of the Building Laws, particularly the Tenement
House chapter, so that if the amendment being considered now
is passed, it might be altered in its actual effect by a sub-
sequent amendment proposed by the committee on the Building
Law, which with the Zoning Laws, determines the character
of apartment houses. Mr. Greeley asked if there was anyone
desiring to speak in favor of the proposed amendment.
Mr. Eugene G. Viano stated that he wished to commend
the Planning Board for the construction of the amendment.
He said that he felt it eliminated the possibility of any
undesirable type of apartment buildings in Lexington. He
stated that he felt there undoubtedly was a_need for such
construction in the town as at the present time there were a
number of persons in the town who desired to make their homes
in such a building. He stated that these people, of necessity,
must move out of Lexington unless such accommodations are
made. He said that there were many people who did not want
the care and responsibility of a home or who did not have ,
the means necessary, and that is the type that would be
attracted to the town. He did not believe that with an
amendment of this character there was any danger of Lexington
becoming an apartment house town. He stated that the Board
had limited the building to cover 25% of the lot which would
limit the construction to a high grade type of building.
He stated that he and his associates were interested in a
proposed apartment house and if such a zone was made, he
would apply under it for a permit to erect an apartment
house. Mr. Viano said that there was only one thing he would
*gestion and that was the restriction that any yard abutting
upon a C.1 district should be not lessthan thirty feet in
width. He felt this might work a hardship on a man owning
residential property abutting a, business district. He said
he understood it would be advisable to shut out the business
district as much as possible, but felt that thirty feet would
work a hardship. He felt that some other way of handling
this might be arranged such as planting a line of trees or
something of that nature. Mr. Viano felt that the apartments
would probably be built in close proximity to a business
district as he felt many people would not have automobiles
and would like to be near the churches, stores, etc. Mr. Viano
said he saw nothing else in the proposed amendment that would
not lead to a fine type of building and he was heartily in
favor of it. '
Mr. Greeley said that in regard to the set -back, Mr.
Viano was correct in that the Planning Board did feel
that the business district should be shut out as the apart-
ment windows might look right out on a back yard or stores.
Ile said, however, that fifteen feet seemed a little narrow
to allow for sunlight and air to come into the apartments.
He said thirty feet would allow fifteen feet for trees or
something of that nature and fifteen feet to allow the sun-
light and air.
One gentlemen said that as he understood it, the
building laws were so strict that it was now uneconomical to
put up an apartment house. He asked if this law were passed
the Building Law would still make apartments uneconomical.
Mr. Greeley said that there were not sufficient facts to
prove that the present Building Law was the reason we have
no apartment houses. He said that many felt the reason was
that during the past ten years or so people have not had the
money to invest in apartments.
Mr. Kimball stated that the question of a limited
zone for apartments had been discussed for many years by the
Planning Board, and there was one thought and that was that
the land in a business zone was considerably more expensive,
and that added to the coat, as well as the construction costs,
made it expensive.
Mr. Greeley said that the Committee referred to prev. '
iously was considering changes in the Tenement House Act
which might make the buildings cheaper to construct, but
this would not affect this proposed amendment.•
Mr. Neil McIntosh asked if he was correct in thinking
'
that this type of apartment could only be allowed outside of
an R.k District and that in order to get it into the
correct district, the Zoning Daws would have to be altered.
Mr. Greeley replied that this amendment was to make
At possible for persons to set up a zone for apartments, and
these districts can be in present R.1 districts. Anyone
desiring to erect an apartment house in an R.1 district must
go before the town and have a vote passed to change the zone
from an R.1 zone to an R.3 sone. He said that the Planning
Board felt this would be the best method, that is, to take
each request as it came up rather than set up any specific
zones as R.3 zones. In this manner, it would be possible
for the town to decide if it wanted an apartment house in any
specific zone.
Mr. Eugene Morgan stated that it would seem to him
that there was a need for apartments in certain areas, but
he felt that these should be restricted rather than allowed
to develop anyplace. He said that mhen he came to Lexington
it was with the idea that it was a town for homes. .He thought
it would be rather unfair for people who came here with that
idea to have an apartment house put in next to 'them. He said
that he had built an apartment house in Jamaica Plain and
when the site was decided on, it was found that it was in a
restricted area and they could not put it there, He felt
that it was proper that the people should be protected.
1
Mr, Greeley said that if anyone wanted to build an
apartment house under the proposed amendment it would be
necessary to have a hearing at which time the neighbors
could be present and object if they desired, and also it was
necessary to have a vote of the town. Mr. Morgan felt that
it was quite easy to influence people and that persons who
came here desiring to live in a residential area would be
hurt. He stated that this plan was too flexible. Mr. Greeley
pointed out the fact that it was now possible to change any
district to a C,l district where apartments are allowed, and
that it would be necessary to rely upon the judgment of the
voters in the town. Mr. Nickerson said that the idea of the
R.3 district was the same as that of an R.l, R.29 C.1 or
T.1, that is it would limit the district to the erection of
an apartment house only, whereas in a business district, many
more things were allowed.
Mr. McIntosh requested an explanation of article (g)
which defined apartment houses as follows: "A limited
apartment building is a group of apartments not over two and
one-half storied high, arranged in rows or on two or three
sides of a central court".
Mr. Greeley said that this was to prevent a closed
court.
Mr. McIntosh said that he would like to see drawings
of what was proposed.
Mr. Greeley said that this amendment was not for any
spedific building - that it was drawn up with the feeling
that it limited the type of building as much as the town
should limit it. He said that it was not possible to
restrict the type of architecture as that would have to be
left to the people who might build apartments.
Mr. Kimball remarked that if an amendment to the
'
zoning law were passed, it would then be necessary to have a
Board of Appeals hearing on the matter before the building
could be erected.
Mr. Caouette asked if the present Tenement House Act
was to be rescinded, and Mr. Greeley replied in the negative.
He said that the Tenement House Act was in connedtion with
the Building Laws and this amendment is in connection with
the Zoning Laws.
Mr. Brown asked about section 8 (e) limiting garages
in connection with apartment houses, and Mr. Greeley said
that this was to prevent the property being used as a public
garage in connection with an apartment house. Mr. Brown
thought this might work a hardship on the owner if the
residents were elderly people who did not have cars and then
the owner could not rent the garages.
Mr. Caouette spoke in favor of the amendment, and
stated he felt it would be a good thing for the town.
The question was asked whether or not it might be best
for the Planning Board to set asida certain zones for apart.
mehts. However, Mr. Greeley said that it was the feeling of
the Planning Board that this would not be practical and that
it would be better to act on each case individually.
Mr. Leland Emery asked if it would be possible for
someone to request an apartment zone and then turn it into
something else, and Mr. Greeley replied in the negative.
'
The hearing was declared closed at 9:30 P. M.
A true record, Attest:
Clerk.
1