Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1956-04-16PLANNING BOARD MEETING April 16, 1956 A regular meeting of the Planning Board was held in its office in the Barnes Building on Monday, April 16, 1956 at 7:30 p.m. Present were Chairman Adams, Messrs. Abbott, Burnell, Grindle, Hathawav and Jaquith, Mr. Snow, Planning Director, and the secretary. Mr. Stevens, Town Counsel, was present from 9:15 to 9:40. The Board approved the following bills presented for pavment: Anne H. Milliken, secretarial services-- BILLS $5.93; Louise M. Baker, secretarial services -44.77. The Board took under consideration the April 16, 1956 request of the DeVries Construction Company to change its performance guarantee for work to be done in the Section 12, Sun Valley, subdivision from a con- ditional approval contract to a bond. It was stated that the Superintendent of Public Works had estimated that the cost of the uncompleted work in the subdivi- sion would amount to $10,000. The Board decided to allow the company to substitute for its conditional approval contract a bond provided said bond was secured by a certified check for $10,000. Mr. Snow was asked to discuss the matter further with the Town Counsel and have him prepare the necessary papers for the company and the Board to take action upon. Mr. Burnell arrived at 7:40 p.m. In connection with the DeVries' Sun Valley devel- opment, the matter of sidewalks was discussed at this time. Mr. Snow stated that he thought a sidewalk study was needed for the whole town, not just in this devel- opment. He also said that he did not believe that the 40 -foot minimum road width required under subdivision rules and regulations was adequate for a 24 -foot pave- ment, sidewalks on both sides of the streets and tree planting. He suggested that when the subdivision rules and regulations are next amended that a 50-1:oot right of way be the minimum standard. SUN VALLEY SECTION 12 SIDEWALKS Mr. Abbott said that he did not like the idea of sidewalks all over town. He thought they were neces- sary on the main streets near the schools but that you did not need them in developments similar to Sun Valley. Mr. Hathaway asked how it could be decided where sidewalks were or were not needed when it could be expected t hat there would be two school children to each house in a development. Mr. Jaquith said that his thinking was that sidewalks were necessary on feeder streets. Mr. Abbott also said that he thought trees should not be planted within the street rights-of-way but on private land and that the trees should be planted and maintained by the Town. He reported that towns which have such a practice have provisions for the same in their by-laws and that some towns control the planting and maintenance of trees within a certain distance frau the street. It was thought that the Superintendent of Public Works should be invited to discuss policies in regard to sidewalks and trees. It was decided to make an appointment and to try to have the Superintendent of Schools and a School Committee member, preferably Mr. Clark, present to discuss the formulation of a town - wide policy in regard to sidewalks. The Board next considered proposed legislation known as House 836, "An Act Establishing a Boston Area Planning District and a Boston Area Planning Council." In addition to the bill itself, the Board reviewed various pieces of explanatory liter- ature which had been distributed by organizations and agencies advocating the bill's enactment into law. Mr. Stevens attended the Board's meeting and entered into the discussion at this time, especially in regard to its mandatory provisions and the means of financing a regional planning commission. It was decided to notify the Selectmen concern- ing the bill's existence and how Lexington would be involved should the legislation be reported out of committee for favorable action. Mr. Burnell volun- teered to have reproductions of the bill made for the use of the Board and the Selectmen. Read to the Board was a notice of a special business meeting of the Massachusetts Federation of Planning Boards to be held on April 21,1956. After studying the proposed amendments to the federa- tion's constitution, the Board decided not to send a representative to the meeting and not to take action in regard to the proposals. Read to the Board was the Town Counsel's April 13, 1956 letter stating that he had obtained from Peacock Farms, Inc. and from its grantees and their mortgagees the water line easements in the ways shown on subdivision Sections One, Two and Three and drain easements across the portions of lots that are marked "Easement" on the subdivision plans. The Counsel's letter also stated that he knew of no fur- ther easements which were required at the time. REGIONAL PLANNING M F P B MEETING PEACOCK FARMS SECS.1, 2 and 3 1 I D It appearing to the Board that all matters in ' connection with the above three subdivisions were in order, it was moved by Mr. Hathawav, seconded by Mr. Burnell and unanimously VOTED: That the streets and water mains to be constructed and installed in Sections One, Two and Three of the Peacock Farms subdivision in Lexington under the terms of two written agreements between Pea- cock Farms, Inc. and the Town of Lexing- ton, dated respectively April 13, 1953 and June 18, 1953 ,and the Peacock Farms, Inc. application for approval of Section Three, dated June 28, 1954, have been completed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer and are approved by the Lexington Planning Board; and that the surety com- pany bonds securing performance of said agreements and of the terms of the afore- said application are hereby released. The Board considered John F. MacNeil's April 11, 1956 letter in regard to a zoning variance which the Planning Board had been opposed to granting and which ' the Board of Appeals had denied him. It was thought that Mr. TacEeil should petition for re -zoning of that portion of his land now in an R-1 district. Mr. Jaquith commented that the town should make a one- way access to Merriam Street through the existing way and extending past the White Cross Laundry. So that he would have a detailed statement of the Planning Board's position in regard to his petition, it was decided to send Mr. MacNeil a copy of its April 3, 1956 letter to the Board of Appeals. -2 - MACNEIL BOARD OF. APPEALS PETITION The Board also considered writing a letter to the Building Inspector in regard to the engineering ZONING firm which was conducting a business in the East Lex- VIOLATION ington railroad station which is not in a business zone. No action was taken in regard to the matter. Mr. Snow reported that he had three inquiries in regar-1 to student employment, all applicants being from Northeastern University where he placed an advertisement for part-time assistance. It was decided that one student be employed at the maximum wage of $,1.50 per hour for not more than 15 hours per week. ' Mr. Abbott said the Board was not making the most efficient use of its technical help and that the Board needed a lull -time clerk who, among other skills, would be able to draw. STUDENT EMPLOYMENT The Board discussed the proposed road connecting Wood and Bedford Streets, said road to be built with Federal funds and laid out by the State Dept. of Public Works. In order that the road serve ade- quately its intended purpose, namely, a convenient and second access to Hanscom Field. facilities, the Board thought that such a road would be highly de- sirable from Lexington's point of view but that the road should be of a limited access nature and should not be built without a water line in it. It was decided to have a closed meeting on April 30, 1956. The meeting ad iourned at 11:15 p.m. Levi G. Burnell, Jr. Clerk j PROPOSED WOOD -TO - BEDFORD ST. ROAD 1 1