Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1960-04-04 PLANNING BOARD MEETING April 4, 1960. A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board was held on Monday, April 4, 1960 at 7:35 p.m. in the Planning Board' s office, Town Office Build- inr. Present were Chairman Burnell, members Grindle, Mabee, and Soule, and Planning Director Snow. The Board approved the minutes of its March MINUTES 14, 1960 meeting The Board ' s attention was called to the Town Clerk' s endorsement of the Green Valley, Sec . de- GREEN finitive subdivision plan certifying that no notice VALLEY of appeal had been received during the twenty days SEC . 5 next after the Town Clerk ' s receipt of recording of - notice from the Planning Board of the approval of BUSA said plan . The Board endorsed the definitive plan. Mr. Snow was asked to prepare it in final form for recording* in the Registry of Deeds and to giveit to the Town Counsel to hold for said recording until such time as the latter had obtained from Antonio Busa properly executed grants of easements in said subdivision . The Board's attention was also called to Mr. John J. Carroll' s letter of March 31, 1960 describ- SUB. RULES ing and enclosing typical cross sections of streets, & REGULATIONS sAid cross sections having been adopted on March 17, 1960 by the Town Dept. of Public Works as its stand- STREr'1 CROSS ards for streets to be constructed in nroposed sub - SECTIONS divisions As had been previously requested by the Plan- ning Board, there were nresented for its considera- BOARD OF tion drafts of letters in regard to the McCormack APPEALS and Corcoran petitions to be heard by the Board of Anneals on Anril 5, 1960. The Planning Board approved said drafts which were signed by the Chair- man . (See addendum ) The attention of the Board was called to the Town Accountant ' s memoranda of March 31, 1960 noti- 1960 fving the Planning Board that the following appro- APPROPRIA- pri_ations were voted at the annual town meeting for TIONS the use of the Planning Board during 1960 . Personal ervices-410, 191, General Expenses-43,550 ; addi- tion to Ontions Account-4500 - Total $14,241. Considered next by the Board was the draft of a letter addressed to the Town Counsel and dated April 4, 1960 requesting a ruling in regard to yard MAPLE ST & regulations set forth in the !Zoning By-laws under WALTRAM ST . garden apartment districts . The Board anproved said GARDEN draft which was signed by the Chairman and given to APARTMENT the Town Counsel when he met with the Board from 8 :30 DISTRICTS to P :45 p.m. to discuss various matters currently before the Board . (See addendum. ) Read to the Board and considered by it were two letters from the Board of Appeals, the first , dated March 31, 1960, notified the Planning Board of the receipt from Vine Brook Realt•T Trust of a petition accompanied by plans for approval of site and building plans for the Waltham Street garden apartment district, and transmitting said n Tans to the Planning Board for a report thereon. The second letter, dated April 1, 1960, was similarly worded with reference to a petition from Messrs . Ippolito and Longo In regard to plans for the Maple Street garden apartment district. The Board reviewed said plans, decided to study them further at an informal meeting in the Planning Board' s office on April 9, 1060 at 10 .00 n.m. , and o ask the Board of Appeals to meet with the T'lann.ing Board to discuss the plans In a general way. Mr. Snow gave a report of his conference with ITEK John Carroll, Supt . of Public larks, in regard to the CCRPORATTON site plan for Itek Corp ' s proposed development to Lexington ' s light manufacturing district. Mr Snow was asked to draft for the Board ' s consideration at its next meeting a letter addressed to said corpora- tion setting forth the recommendations which he and Mr . Carroll had made in regard to said plan. Considered next was a letter dated April 1+, L0PITIG HILL 1960 from Messrs . Blodgett and Outhet requesting ESTATES an extension to and including Monday, April 25, 1P60 SEC . 3 of the time within which the Planning Board should act upon their application for approval of the Loring OUTHET Hill Estates Sec . 3 definitive subdivision plan. REALTY TRUST U*,on motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously VOTES : that pursuant to the written request from the applicants the time of annroval of the defini- tive subdivision nlan entitled "Loring Hill Estates Section Three Lexington , Mass. ' , dated Oct , 10, 1059, be and hereby is extended to and including April 25, 1960 . The meeting adjourned at 10 :45 n .m. Irving H. Mabee, Clerk -3- Board of Appeals ADDENDUM April 4, 1960 Town Office Building Lexi_-lmton 73, Mass Re M J. McCormack petition Gentlemen . The Planning Board has given consideration to the peti- tion of m. J. 11cCormack to subdivide a parcel of land numbered 475 Concord Avenue into two lots and as part of said consideration members of the Board have viewed the parcel and clans of adjacent parcels and lots of land. It appears to the Board that while a variance to sub- divide the parcel into two equal lots having a uniform width of about 118 feet would in no way impair the status of the neighborhood, a subdivision as shown on the plan accomnanyine the petition would be a derogation from the intent and purpose of the zoning by-law. In this case it appears that irregular shaped lots as pro- posed bY the petitioner are not justified even though there is in existence an old garage around which a lot line has been drawn. It was observed that the barn was beim used as a garage and that the garage marked on the plan was being used for other purposes. In addition it seemed apparent that the garage is of such condition that it is of little worth economically and that there would be little if any hardship involved in either mov- ing or destroying it so that a lot line could be drawn through the building' s present location. The Planning Board recommends , therefore, that the petition be de- nied until ,uch time s the garage is removed and there can be createdtwo equal lots as described above Sincerely yours, LEXINGTfN PLANNIyG BOARD /s/ Thomas S. Grindle, Vice Chairman Pnril 4, 1060 Board of Anneals Town Office Building Re: ailliam J. Corcoran Lexington 73, Mass Welding Shop petition Gentlemen Reference is made to the petition of 'illiam J. Corcoran for permission to operate a welding shop at 36 rear Waltham Street, Lexington . The Planning Board has considered this petition and presents herewith for your further attention 1L-4-60 -4- the following comments anc recommendations A welding shoe , commercial welding, or the storage of weld- ing equipment and supplies are all classified as light in- dustrial or manufacturing use Such uses are not listed in C 3 districts under our present permitted uses It is recommended, therefore, that a light industrial or manufac- turing use such as the Corcoran petition not be granted another matter to which the Planning Board wishes to call to your attention is the partial conversion of an accessory building, in this case a garage, into a use which is no longer accessory to the principal building used for resi- dential purposes The Planning Board does not know the history of this conversion. It does believe, however, that it violates the intent of the Town ' s zoning by-law and in the opinion of the Board should not be extended. Sincerely yours LEXINGTON PLANrTING BOAPD /s/ Thomas S. Grirdle, Vice Chairman April 5, 190 rir. Harold T Stevens Town Counsel of Lexington 84 State St . , Boston, "lass . Dear Harold : You will perhans recall that at one of its meeting some time ago the Planning Board had an informal discussion with You in regard to Yard regulations in garden apartment dis- tricts as set forth in Sec . 8 (f) 1 a. (2) of the Zoning By-law The question of how to interpret the particular paragraph in regard to these regulations has arisen again, particularly in regard to the nreliminary site plan for the Maple Street garden apartment district . A print of said site plan which has been submitted to the Planning Board is enclosed and illustrates a point which the Board has in mind, namel-r, the minimum distance which it is thought can be required between buildings. Believing that the matter can be interpreted in at least two ways, the Board requests a ruling from you in regard to the -card regulations in an A 1 district in general and, in particular, the minimum dis- tance for side yards which must be maintained between build- ings Sincerely Yours, /s/ Levi G. Burnell, Chairman