Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1955-07-05 PLANNING BOARD MEETING July 5, 1955 A regular meeting of the Planning Board was held in the Town Engineer's Room, Town Office Building, on Tuesday, July 5, 1955 at 7:30 P.M. Chairman Adams, Messrs. Abbott, Grindle, Hathaway, Irwin and Jaquith were present. Mr. Snow, Planning Director, Mr. Stevens, Town Counsel, and the Acting Secretary were also present. The records of June 27, 1955 were approved with a revised section in regard to the master plan. Mr. Snow stated that Mr. Robert Carrig had come to the office the previous week requesting the plans of CARRIG Section IV of the Minute Man Highlands subdivision so that Miller & Nylander could complete the plans by MINUTEMAN inking the penciled profile lines. Mr. Carrig stated HIGHLANDS that, since the Town had approved the first part of a SEC. IV proposed 70-foot road from Bedford Street to Pleasant Street at the Cambridge-Concord Highway, he presumed ' that the portion of the same road passing through his subdivision would also be approved. Therefore, he planned to return the drawings for planning board en- dorsement as soon as they were completed. Mr. Snow stated that he had not been able to find any written Planning Board records in regard to this section of the subdivision other than those in the ,Board minutes and the subdivision file folder which contained only two preliminary plans. He also said that Mr. Carrig filed with the Town Clerk on October 21, 1953 a statement that he had submitted the Section IV subdivision plans to the Planning Board. However, Mr., Carrig had not obtained from the Town Clerk a cer- tificate that the Board had failed to act upon the ap- plication for approval within 45 days after the subdi- vision plans had been submitted. Mr. Stevens advised asking Mr. Carroll not to issue such a certificate without first letting the Planning Board know of the request. Mr. Hathaway wanted to know what Mr. Carrig would be. required to do in constructing a roadway within the proposed 70-foot right of way. Did Mr. Carrig expect the Town to pay for the road?' Mr. Stevens presumed that the Board was in the same position in regard to the road as if it had approved the- subdivision plans. 1 The question was also raised as to the value of the 70-foot road or the need for its relocation if the State, in planning Route 2 as a limited access highway, did not provide an interchange at Pleasant Street. Mr. Adams read a letter written in the name of the Board to Mr. Houdlette of the Department of Public Works requesting that the State give consideration to the proposed scheme that Pleasant Street have access onto Rt. 2. Mr. Adams stated that at the present time the Board had not re- ceived a reply to the letter. In not having any of the usual subdivision documents in writing and not taking formal action on the subdivision plans at the proper time, Mr. Adams stated that the Board had a real problem on its hands but that there might be some technical ways of getting out of the difficulty. Mr. Stevens said that he did not know of any at the moment ex- cept the fact that the Board of Health had not approved the land as suitable for local sewage disposal. Mr. Adams suggested deferring any action by the Board until Mr. Carrig made the next step. At 7045 the public hearing was declared open on the application of Techbuilt, Inc. for definitive approval of TECHBUILT a subdivision plan entitled "A Plan of Lots in Middle MIDDLE Ridge, Lexington, Mass." There were 16 citizens present. RIDGE Mr. Adams read the notice which had been sent to all abutting property owners and which had been duly adver- PUBLIC tised in the local newspaper. He then stated that the HEARING definitive plan under consideration was part of an overall scheme for the tract of land which Techbuilt owned. Since no representatives of the corporation were present, Mr. Adams stated that the Board would endeavor to answer such questions as they could in regard to the plans. Mr. Reed introduced himself as representing Mr. Hennessy and looked at the plan. Mr. Ward wanted to know What was to be done to the brook behind his property.. He stated that the land was low and soggy all the time. He also wanted to know what was being done to correct the surface drainage crossing his lot. Mr. Adams stated that shown on the plan was a drain which would improve exist- ing wet conditions and conduct surface drainage to that running along Route 128. Mr. Snow indicated that the easement for the drain from Robinson Road was wholly within Lot 36 and would not touch Mr. Ward' s property. Mr. Birch of Grove Street wanted to know about the exist- ing Grove Street water main. Mr. Adams stated that the Board had no information about that but would seek any information necessary. Mr. Sullivan of Techbuilt arrived at 7:55 and was accompanied by Mr. Nylander, civil engineer for the pro- ject. Mr. Sullivan stated that he had several sets of II Prints of the plans that anyone who wished to do so could examine and that Mr. Nylander would answer any questions in regard to the drainage of the subdivision. In regard to surface drainage, Mr. Nylander thought that some of it would be cut off by the proposed drainage system as shown on the plans. The existing ground surface would not be changed. Az to subsurface drainage, it was not required on a plan such as was under donsideration. Mr. Sullivan said that Techbuilt had no plans to use the Ward lot to take care of sur- face drainage. A person asking where the water drain- age from the subdivision would eventually go was told by Mr. Sullivan that it would probably go under Route 128, then under Grove Street, and back again under Route 128 to the Mink Farm. A person asked about the floor area of Techbuilt homes. Mr. Sullivan said that the usual floor area in feet measured 20 x 40 or 23 x 48. Another person asked if Techbuilt was planning to build anything on the wooded side of Robinson Road. Mr. Sullivan replied that future plans for the area have not been fully de- velaped, that the corporation has not done any speci- fic planning pending the outcome of the hearing, until the Board of Health has made its investigation, and until the corporation has more knowledge of what lies under the surface of the ground. Mrs. Ward wanted to know if a brook easement must be 20 feet wide by law. Mr. Nylander said not neces- sarily. Mr. Reed wanted to know if the two sheets showing the lot layout were those to be approved at the hearing. Mr. Adams replied in the affirmative stating that the public hearing concerned only these plans and the necessary accompanying street and pro- file plans, that this was all the Board was considering at the time. In reply to a question about the removal of trees from the land, Mr. Adams said that the Planning Board had no control over the cutting of trees. Mr. Sullivan said that Mr. Burns of Techbuilt favored the use of foliage in subdivision development. A person asked if any consideration had been given the request for a rec- reation area in the vicinity and Mr. Adams said there had. Another person asked what the limit was in regard to the number of houses allowed on a dead-end street. Mr. Adams said from 10 to 20.. Mr. Sullivan stated that it was planned that the overall project would have a second egress in about a year and a half and that the access would be on Grove Street through the Anastasy II property. Mr. Ward wondered if further development would depend on access. Mr. Adams replied that any further development plans must have a public hearing before being approved. A person asked what schools would service the area and Mr. Adams replied that the School Committee 'would handle that matter. Mr. Adams then asked if anyone wished to be recorded in favor of or against the application. Mrs. John Ward of 15 Robinson Road said she wished to be recorded in favor of the sub- division plans if they do hot interfere with drainage of their lot. The hearing closed at 8:25. It was moved by Mr. Grindle and seconded by Mr. MOORE Hathaway that the tracing of the definitive plan en- ESSEX STREET titled "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass." with the SUBDIVISION supplementary title "Plan and Profile of Essex Street" be endorsed with the statement "Approved June 1,3, 1955 subject to the condition that the parcel marked IRight of Way' is approved only as a right of way for pedes- trian use and isn't approved as a way on which any dwelling or other building may be erected". At 8:27 the Board considered with Mr. Stevens ROSS the request of Eleanor L. Ross, surviving trustee of CONSTITUTION Battle Green Village Trust, in reference to the Sub- ROAD division Plan entitled "Plan of Lots at Battle Green SUBDIVISION Village, Lexington, Massachusetts owned by Mrs. Eleanor L. Ross," dated August 19, 1954, approved by the Board under a Conditional Approval Contract and recorded in M1.ddlesex South District Registry of Deeds, Book 8378, Page 482. It was reported that the ways and other im- provements being considered by the subdivider are ap- proximately three-fourths completed and that as Mrs. Rca s desires to sell some or all of the lots she has requested the Board to release the land from the re- strictions, against -the sale of lots and the construc- tion of buildings that are contained in the Conditional Approval Contract, in return for her agreement to com- plete the a hstruction of the way and other improvements by October 11, 1955 and s ecure such agreement by the deposit of $2,700. After consideration it was moved by Mr. Irwin, seconded by Mr. Gindle and unanimously VOTED: to accept the agreement of Eleanor L. Ross, surviving trustee of Battle Green Village Trust dated July 1, 1955, which was presented to the meeting and the $2,700 deposited as security therefor, and to release the land in the subdivi- sion from the restriction against sale of lots and against the erection or plea- ing of a building on any lots that are contained in the Conditional Approval Con- tract dated November 24, 1954 and recorded in Middlesex South District Registry of Deeds, Book 8378, Page 480. .Mr. Stevens left the meeting at approximately 8:35. At 8;37 formal discussion was called for on the pro- posed Lidberg Subdivision. Present were Messrs. Lidberg, Cunningham - attorney for Mr. Lidberg, Jones, and Spagnuola - father and son. An application for tentative approval of a preliminary subdivision plan had been disapproved pre- viously by the Board because, among other details, the LIDBE$G plan did not have sufficient means of access to adjacent SUBDIVISION properties. Mr. Cunningham stated that Mr. Jones had modified the preliminary plan which had been disapproved and that Mr. Snow and Mr. Burns had examined the modi- fied proposal which was being presented. Mr. Jones then pointed out the modifications which had been made following most of the suggestions for access to adjacent properties as marked on the plan returned to Mr. Lidberg. With the Town Engineer stating that he would be willing to accept the location of the road going around the low land adjacent to the Pihl property, Mr. Jones said that the modified plan did not incorporate the suggestion of having a road parallel to and a distance of 200 feet from the Pihl property line. As to the rest of the road system, it remained substantially as first presented to the Board. Mr. Jones said that he did not think in a sense that the Board could avoid a traffic problem no matter what was done in the way of a road pattern within the subdivision. Mr. Adams wanted to know what the difference in total footage was between the Planning .Board and Spagnuola schemes. Mr. Snow said that there was very little dif- ference. Mr. Hathaway wanted to know how many lots the Spagnuola scheme would lose in carrying out the modified proposal. Mr. Jones said two, lots 51 and 53. Mr. Adams said that the proposed exit out of the Lidberg property onto Burlington Street created a very bad intersection at a blind corner. Mr. Jones wanted to know if the Board had thought of directing traffic one way. Mr. Adams wished to know how many lots it was proposed to develop at the time application was made for definitive approval. Mr. Spagnuola replied about 20 lots at a time. Mr.. Adams stated that the Board must discuss the subdivision scheme further before making any decision in regard to the proposal. Mr. Jones said that Mr. Lidberg did not want to wait too long for the decision. Dis- cussion ended at 8:55. At 8:56 the Board took under consideration a petition in regard to Pinefield Path which was de- clared to run from 119 Grove Street to Robinson PINEFIELD Road. Persons present: , Mrs. Smith who owns the PATH land involved in the petition and the petitioners, HEARING Arthur H. Johnson of 28 Winter St. , and Howard T. Small of 296 Woburn St. , both of Lexington. Mr. Adams read a letter, dated July 5, 1955 and signed by the petitioners, requesting a ruling by the Planning Board on the question of whether or not subdivision con- trol approval would be required for a housing develop- ment the petitioners were contemplating. Also read was a letter to the petitioners from Johnson and Johnson, attorneys of Woburn, Mass. reporting the results of a title examination made by them for the petitioners with reference to Pinefield Path. Accom- panying the letter were various exhibits referred to in the letter from Johnson and Johnson. After discussing the matter briefly with those present, Mr. Adams stated that the Board felt it must obtain from the Town Counsel a ruling on the material submitted. The petition and its accompanying ex- hibits were accepted and the hearing declared closed at 9:05. TECHBUILT The Board recessed until 9:20 at which time it MIDDLE RIDGE discussed Techbuilt's Middle Ridge subdivision. Mr. SUBDIVISION Hathaway said he did not like the sharp bend in the road just before the turnaround. However, he stated that if Mr. Burns said it was all right, then it was good enough for him. Mr. Snow said that the Board in its subdivision regulations called for a minimum centerline radius of 100 feet and that the curve had a radius of 120 feet. Mr. Abbott said that the regu- lations did not say anything about how sharp an angle a road could be turned. Mr. Snow commented that he did not see how the Board could ask for a larger radius, particularly on a minor road, when the designer had exceeded the Board' s minimum specificatiohs. Mr. Adams said that perhaps 100 feet was too short a radius, that the Board should change it and hold a public hearing on this and other possible changes in the subdivision regulations.gul tions. To an inquiry regarding the steepest part of the road, Mr. Snow said that there was 125 feet of the road at a 10% grade,• the maximum allowed in the subdivision regulations* Mr. Abbott wanted to know if it would be sensible to require 50 foot streets in areas zoned for large lots. The Board indicated that it would approve the plans as drawn but could not do so until it had notified and heard from the Board of Health in regard to the suitability of the land for subdivision purposes. The proposed subdivision of the Lidberg property was next taken under consideration. Mr. Adams asked LIDBERG if all the proposed lots could be connected to a town SUBDIVISION sewer. Mr. Snow said that he thought they could not, some land being too low for a gravity flow sewer con- nection. Mr. Adams then stated that the next question the Board must decide upon was the kind of traffic pat- tern to be developed in the area and that at present the Board' s study had only feeder roads leading out of the entire area. Mr. Snow stated that the scheme Mr. Jones presented showed one main road from Burlington to East Streets with a number of secondary roads leading onto the pro- posed road. Mr. Adams wanted to know if this was not desirable, having the one main road 50 feet in widtht, Mr. Hathaway wanted to know if such a road would not relieve traffic on Burlington Street. Mr. Jaquith said that a main road through the Lidberg property might eliminate widening Burlington Street. Mr. Adams said that when the new Route 3 is developed that people in the Burlington Street - Manor area may want to go through the Lidberg property as a short out in reaching the new route. Mr. Jaquith asked if there were any new way of directing such traffic onto Lowell Street. ,Mr. Jaquith suggested that the Board make the road through the Lidberg property a feeder road and make Redcoat Lane a through way. Mr. Hathaway said that the Board should have a closed meeting next Mon. day evening to discuss these matters more fully and study the plans that Mr. Snow had so carefully made. It was agreed that the Board had a key decision to make and decided that the next regular meeting would be closed to discuss this specific problem. At 10:05 it was moved by Mr. Hathaway, seconded BILLS by Mr. Grindle and voted -- Mr. Adams not voting -- that the following bills be paid: Adams Press, advertising, $5.00; State Dept. of Commerce, maps, 1.00; Spaulding-Moss Co. , drafting supplies, $15.85; Louise M. Baker, secretarial ser- vices and reirhbursement for postage, $20.74; Samuel P. Snow, reimbursement for book, postage and car mileage, $18.65. Mr. Jaquith suggested Mr. Snow make a breakdown on car allowance so there would be no questions from the Accounting Department and Mr. Snow replied that he had a detailed statement and would attach it to the bill. II At 10:07 the Board took under consideration ap- plications for determination of Planning Board ju- FORMS A risdiction. It was moved by Mr. Irwin and seconded by Mr. Hathaway and unanimously VOTED: that the tracings accompanying the fol- lowing applications be signed bearing the endorsement "Lexington Planning Board approval not required under the subdivision control law". #55-55, submitted by Helen A. and Nicolo L. Anastasy on July 1, 1955; tracing entitled *Subdivi- sion of Lot A-9, Land Court Case No. 5982E, Lexington, Mass. ," scale 1 = 140' , dated June 29, 1955, William J. Ford, Jr. , C. E. , 302 Walnut St. , Newtonville, Mass. #55-54, submitted by Roy C. Peterson on June 29, 1955, tracing entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass.,"' scale 1" = 40' , dated June 27, 1955, plan by MacCarthy Engineering Service, Inc. , Natick, Mass. At 10:10 Mr. Adams read the notices for hearings BOARD OF before the Board of Appeals on July 6 and 13, 1955. APPEALS The Board decided not to take action on any appeal before the Board of Appeals on the above dates. At 10:25 it was moved by Mr. Grindley seconded by Mr. Hathaway and unanimously voted that the tracing of MOORE the definitive plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, REALTY Mass.," with the supplementary title "Plan and Profile TRUST of Essex Street" be endorsed with the statement "Approved June 13, 1955 subject to the condition that the parcel marked 'Rt. of Way' is approved only as a right of way for pedestrian use and is not approved as a way on which any dwelling or other building may be erected". The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. C arias T. Abbott Clerk • 1 1