Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1955-08-08PLANNING BOARD MEETING August 8, 1955 A regular meeting of the Planning Board was held in the Town Engineerts Office, Town Office Building, on Monday evening, August 8, 1955 at 7:30 P.M. Chairman Adams, Messrs. Abbott, Grindle and Jaquith were present. Mr. Snow, Planning Director, and the secretary were also present. Mr. Stevens, Town Counsel, was present from 9:15 to 11:15 P.M. Before the hearing opened Mr. Snow exhibited a compiled plan he had prepared of land bounded by the Lexington -Woburn -Winchester town line, Woburn and Lowell Streets and a northwesterly portion of the DeVries property, and showing,@riginal topography'of the area, the Kelly development, proposed Sun Valley lotting and the intervening vacant land. Upon this base he had drawn a study plan indicating how he thought the vacant Kelly land could be developed in order to show what he considered to be the most logi- cal connection between proposed Tyler Road of the Sun Valley subdivision and Appletree Lane of the existing Kelly subdivision. It was agreed that some provision should be made for this future street connection, the street coming somewhere within Lot 151 as shown on the Section 8 definitive plan submitted by DeVries Construc- tion Co. PUBLIC HEARIN( SUN VALLEY SEC. 8 Mr. George DeVries was the only person who appeared for the formal hearing which opened at 7:35 P.M. Mr. Adams stated that it was his understanding that it had always been the Board's feeling that there should:_be a street connection between the Kelly and Sun Valley subdivisions, this intent being indicated by the ap- proval of the Kelly development plans which left a stub of road at the southeasterly end of Appletree Lane, and by the preliminary plans submitted by Pleasant Associates, former owners of the Sun Valley property. The proposed plan for Section Eight of Sun Valley showed no such connection. Mr. DeVries said that he recalled the matter was discussed at his first or second meeting with the Board when tentative plans were considered. However, he was of the opinion that the Board had approved the overall development plan of January, 1954 which did not show any street connection with the Kelly land. He ' further stated that he did not think such a street was necessary. Mr. DeVries was then shown the Board's study for a road connection between the Kelly property and Section Eight of Sun Valley. The study decreases the area but keeps the frontage of Lot 151, reduces the frontage on Tyler Road below the required minimum for Lot 152 but at the same time increases the size of said lot and provides enough frontage for division into two lots mn the pro- posed Appletree Lane extension. The reason for the application was also read: that the Lexington Board of Appeals had refused on two occasions to grant variances to permit the Appli- cant to use the lots shown on the Subdivision plan for building purposes, the lots not conforming to the requirements of the Lexington Zoning By-law as amended subsequend to the approval of the subdivision plan by the Planning Board but prior to the recording of the subdivision plan; and that the applicant was not in a financial position to proceed with the subdivision. ' by reducing the number of lots so as to creat lots that would comply with the amended Zoning By-law. When asked what it would mean to the corporation to include such a road on the Section Eight Plan, Mr. De - Vries baidothat he would have to study the matter before coming to any conclusion. The Board agreed that there should be a road connection, if possible, and requested Mr. Snow to prepare a detailed plan for the same. No one wished to be recorded as in favor of or opposed to the subdivision plan as presented by Mr. DbVries. Agree- ing to confer with Mr. Snow before the 'Planning Board made a final decision on the subdivision application, the Board closed the hearing and took the plans urdir advisement. ' At 7750 P.M. the Board opened the public hearing PUBLIC in regard to the application for recision of approval HEARING of a definitive subdivision plan submitted by the Vine VINE VALLEY Valley Realty Corp. Five persons were present at the REALTY CORP. hearing. Mr. Adams pointed out that under the sub- division control law the same procedure and time sched- ule would be followed in regard to applications for recision as for those for approval of subdivisions. 'He then read the formal application which requested that the Board rescind its approval of the corpora- tion's subdivision plan, that the subdivision agree- ment entered into with the Board be eanebled, and that the bond securing the agreement be returned. The reason for the application was also read: that the Lexington Board of Appeals had refused on two occasions to grant variances to permit the Appli- cant to use the lots shown on the Subdivision plan for building purposes, the lots not conforming to the requirements of the Lexington Zoning By-law as amended subsequend to the approval of the subdivision plan by the Planning Board but prior to the recording of the subdivision plan; and that the applicant was not in a financial position to proceed with the subdivision. ' by reducing the number of lots so as to creat lots that would comply with the amended Zoning By-law. 1 1 Mr. Troisi, President of the Corporation, and Mr. Michael Ahern, Treasurer, introduced themselves and stated that they were representing the corporation at the hearing. In the discussion which followed no ad- ditional information other than that which was in the formal application was presented. This being the case, the hearing was closed at 8:00 P.M. and the matter taken under advisement. -The Planning Board next took under consideration BOARD OF notices of hearings to be held by the Board of Appeals APPEALS onrAugust 23, 1955. It was decided that the Board HEARINGS would -take no action on the petitions to be heard. With Mr. Hathaway arriving at 8:10 P.M. Mr. Adams was excused while the clerk presented the fol- lowing bills: Robert L. Higgins, for professional services from July 25 through August 5, 1955, $100.00; Louise M. Baker, for secretarial services, $5.00; Adams Press, for advertising -Vine Valley and Sun Valley, Sec. 8 public hearings, $10.00. Mr. Grindle moved, Mr. Hathaway seconded the motion, and it was unanimously VOTED: that the bills be approved as read. Mr. Adams next brought the attention of the Board to copies of the recent legislation regarding the establishment of historic areas on Beacon Hill and Marthats Vineyard. It was suggested that Mr. Jaquith be appointed a committee of one to study the laws with regard to proposing similar legislation for Lexington. An application was submitted for approval as a subdivision the property between the existing sec- tions of Ledgelawn Avenue and known as a "Plan of Lots in Lexington, Mass., owned by Dianne Estates, Inc.," the plan being dated July 23, 1955. The -ap- plication having been found in order, it was decided to set the date for the public hearing on the ap- plication for August 22, 1955 at 7:h5 P•M• Mr. Snow brought before the Board for approval the draft of a memorandum incorporating Lexington population data which had been assembled and analysed during the previous weeks. Mr. Snow thought that as part of a good public relations program the Board should issue from time to time similar memoranda in mimeograph form to interested citizens and town agen- cies informing them of the Boardfs progress and find- ings in the preparation of a long-range town plan. BILLS LEGISLATION ESTABLISHING HISTORIC AREAS DIAN NE ESTATES LEDGELAWN AVE. PLANNING BOARD MEMO #1 This idea was endorsed by the Board and a change made in the drafted memorandum. It was suggested that the issues be dated and the first one entitled "Lexington Planning Board - Memorandum Number One.'4' At 9:00 P.M, the Board took under consideration FORMS A the following applications for determination of planning board Jurisdiction: . #55-62, submitted August 8, 1955 by John J. Driscoll; tracing entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass.,' Scale 1" = 401, dated Aug. 1, 1955, Miller & Nylander, C. E.'s and Surveyors, Lexington, Mass. #55-63, submitted August 8, 1955 by, Cary Realty Trust, Alfred P. Tropeano, attorney; tracing entitled "Subdivision of Land Court Case No. 69629 Land in Lexington, Mass." Scale 1" = 401, dated July 28, 1955, Miller & Nylander, C. E.1s and Surveyors, Lexington# Mass. It was moved by Mr. Hathaway, seconded by Mr, Grindle and unanimously VOTED: that the original tracings accotppanying , applications #55-62 and #55-63. be en- dorsed with the statement Lexington Planning Board approval not required under the -Subdivision Control Law", When Mr. Stevens came to the meeting at 9.15 P.M,, MINUTE MAN the Board took under discussion the proposed subdivi- HIGHLANDS sion entitled "Minute Man Highlands, Section Four, SEC. Lexington, Mass.," owned by James A. Carrig, 1374 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, plans dated Oct. 309 1953. The Board first read a letter from Mr. Ckirrig, dated August 1, 1955, in which he stated that he had decided that he would not contribute tothe cost of the 70 -foot roadway (i.e., proposed Worthen Road as it passes through his subdivision). It was the con - census of opinion that since Mr. Carrig was lotting along Worthen Road as an integral part of the sub- division, that he should construct the road at least to subgrade and to construct and install all other im- provements necessary for this subdivision, At 9:30 P.M. Messrs, James and Robert Carrig,' Nylander and John A. Daley, lawyer representing the Carrigs, were asked to sit with the Board to discuss further the matters concerning Section Four of the ' Minute Man Highlands subdivision. The Carrigs first submitted Form A applications Nos. 55-6h and 55-65 together with tracings showing lotting along Pleasant Street, Cambridge -Concord Highway and Wellington Lane Avenue. It was pointed out that all lots had the mini- mum frontage required by the Lexington Zoning By-law and the lots conformed to the Section Four subdivision plans. The Board found that three lot lines did not correspond and took the plans under advisement. In regard to the subdivision plans, Mr. Daley stated that the Carrigs would like to enter into a conditional approval contract with the Board and discuss the con- ditions of such a contract, the crux of the matter being what was going to be done about the 70 -foot- proposed road through the subdivision. He understood that the Town had voted to construct one end of the 70 -foot road beginning at Bedford Street, plans to carry the project through to Pleasant Street, and that Mr. Carrig who had planned to build a 40 -foot road in the proposed location had changed his road width to 70 feet on the theory that eventually the entire project would be completed. He added that the Board had held a public hearing in November, 1953 in re- gard to this subdivision, had neither approved nor dis- approved the plans, and that it was Mr. Carrig's view that under the statute the �5-day period within which the Board should have taken action had expired. Continuing, he pointed out that the question of who is going to pay for and how much of the 70 -foot road - some 2000 feet long within the subdivision - i8 en im- portant item to Mr. Carrig. He would give without charge and without betterments the whole 70 -foot strip. How- ever, having in mind that the proposed road is really a through way designed to divert the excess traffic from the town center and that the primary purpose of the 70 -foot way instead of a 40 -foot road through the sub- division was to benefit the Town, he felt that it was asking too much of him to build the road to subgrade in- cluding installation of utilities. In reply Mr. Adams said that it was logical pro- cedure to think of greater widths for more important rights-of-way in a subdivision than the minimum 40 -foot width required by the Town's subdivision regulations, that there was a situation in Lexington similar to Mr. Carrig's involving an intertown road, and that the sub- divider in this particular case was constructing the road and installing utilities including a sewer. ' Mr. Daley stated that he thought the situation in regard to this subdivision was a unique one, that what started out to be a normal hO-foot road, and which might have required some minor adjustments, now had become a main 70 -foot road, and that Mr. Carrig felt that the whole burden of the cost of 2000 feet ought not to tie borne by him simply because he happened to be the sub- divider. Mr. Stevens said that the Board at its. previous meeting had considered all aspects of the problem and that the Board felt Mr. Carrig should build the 70 -foot road including a 12 -inch water line, the Town compensat- ing Mr. Carrig for the difference in cost of material between the 8 -inch line needed by the subdivision and the 12 -inch size required by the Town for a main. Mr. Stevens added that without a road in the 70 -foot strip, the people to whom Mr. Carrig had sold lots along the strip would want the Town to construct the road as a town way. Mr. Adams asked if there were any conditional Vr y of coming to an agreement. Mr. Daley replied that he did not know of -any, that he had said as much as he could, that he felt he had to protect Mr. Carr°igt s rights but that he would see if they could "block out" anything from what had been discussed. He added that ' Mr. Carrig felt that the 45 -day period for action by the Board had expired and he had to make a formal request for the return of the plans, giving such notice to the Town Clerk. When asked bz Mr. Stevens what they were going to try to "'block out , Mr. Daley said -a conditional approval contract that N;, Carrig will not sell any lots unless the 70 -foot road is constructed and that the conditions for constructing the 1O -foot roads in the development are to be exactly the same as in any other subdivision. Messrs. Carrig and party left the meeting at 11:00 P.M. In private session the Board decided to draw an agreement just as planned before the discussion with the Carrigs and party, the agreement to include the con- struction of the 70 -foot road to subgrade, said agree- ment to be secured by a conditional approval contract. TECHBUILT, INC. The Board next took under consideration the sub - MIDDLE -division plans submitted by Techbuilt, Inc. From a RIDGE list of historic names pertinent to the area, it was decided to approve the name "Turning Mill Road" for the 50 -foot road in the subdivision, and "DeMar Road" I for the �O-foot road. Thereafter it was moved by Mr. Jaquith, seconded by Mr. Irwin and uananimously VOTED: That''.the definitive subdivision plan entitled "Plan of Lots in Middle Ridge, Lexington, Mass.," dated June 10, 1955s which was submitted to the Board by Techbuilt, Inc. on July 5, 1955, accom- panied by an application for approval of definitive plan, Form C, dated June 20, 1955, be and hereby is approved. The meeting adjourned at 11:15 P.M. Charles T. Abbott Clerk 1