Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1960-04-18PLAN7`NG BO�.RD MTV TTTG ' April 18, 19(10 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board was held on Monday, April 18, 1960 at 7:30 p.m. In the Planning Board's office, Town Office Building. Present were Chairman Burnell, members Grindle and Meyer, and Planning Director Snow. The Board approved the minutes of its April 4, 1960 meeting. The attention of the Board was called to its scheduled informal planning session to be held on April 20 and to the subdivid.er's request that be- cause of special considerations the Board, if poss- ible, endorse on said date his Glen Estates r'efini- tive subdivision plan apnroved by the Board on March 291 1960. Noting that on April 19 there expired the appeal period next after receipt and recording with the Town Clerk of notice from the Planning Board of the approval of said -plan, the Board decided to hold a special official meeting for the purpose of endors- ing said plan and then to a.d.journ to hold its ' scheduled planning session. Mr. Snow was requested to record wi_tr. the Town Clerk the required notice of said special meeting*,. Considered next by the Board were the follow- ing Form A ap-plications for determination of Plan- ning Board jurisdict'on: #60-27, submitted April 18, 1960 by Edward G. Barker; plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lex- ington, Mass.", dated April 2, 1960, Seale- 1" = 1�0', Arnold B. Davis, Edward G. Barker, C.E.'s &. SurvelTors. 460-28, submitted April 18, 1960 by F. L. Higr*ins, Engr. for Town of Lexington; plan entitled "Plan of Land Peacock Farm Road Lexington, Mass.", scale: 1" = 40', dated April 153 1960, John J. Carroll, T.E. LTpon motion duly made and seconded,°it was unanimously 'TOTTM: that the plans accompanying Form A applications #60-27 and #60-28 do not ' require approval under the Subdivision Control Law, and that said plans be so endorsed. MINT=S INFORMAL SESSION GLFI' ESTATES AVADANIAN SHAFF 7 FORM A APPLICATIONS 4-1" -60 -2- BOARD OF With reference to the petitions to be heard APPEALS by the Board of Apneals on May 3, 1960, it was decided ' to take no action on said petitions. With reference to application from Moore Realty BTTPNFAM Trust for annroval of preliminary subdivision plan of FARMS the nronosed Section Five of the Burnham Farms develop - SFC. 5 menti upon motion duly made and seconded, it was unan- - imou s ly MOORE VOTFD: that the nreliminary subdivision plan entitled ttplan of Proposed Lots in Lexington, Mass.", dated Jan. 18,1960, which was submitted to the Board on February 29, 1960, and which was modi- fied by a subsequent preliminary subdivision plan entitled "Plan of Proposed Lots in Lexing- ton, Mass., dated March 31, 1960, wricb was submitted to the Board on April 4, 19601 be and hereby is tentativel-T annroved. The attention of the Board was called to the GARDFN Chairman's letter of April K and the Town Counsel's APARTMENT reply of April 13 (see addendum) with. regard to garden DISTRICT apartment district site plans. (See minutes of Plan- SITE PLAINS ning Board meeting; of April 4, 1960.) Conies of each letter were �1-iven to each member of the Board and dis- cussed. Discussed also and studied by the Board were , the site plans of the Waltham. and Maple Streets garden apartment districts. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Levi G. Burnell, Chairman ADDT,7TDT7M April 13, 1960 Levi G. Burnell, Chairman Lexington "lanning Board Town Office Building Lexington 73 Mass. Dear Levi: This is in answer to your letter of Anril 51 1960 in reference to yard regulations applicable to Al districts, which S answered orally to you on April 9th. ' Thegard regulations are set forth in Section 8(f) of the Zoning Br -Law and snecify minima for f ront yards, side yards and rear yards. Front, side and rear yards are de- L4.-18-60 -3- In other words, the Board of Appeals, with the advise of the Planning Board, has discretionary authority to determine in each particular instance what distances between garden apart- ment buildings is necessary or adequate to constitute the apartments to be a desirable development that will not be detrimental to the neighborhood. I return herewith three conies of your letter that were attached to the ori.�zinal as I assume these were meant for file conies. Sincerely yours, Isl Harold F. Stevens ' FFS : epk me . fined in paragraphs (n) and (o) of °'ection 2 of the By -Law and, as ,you will see, apply only to the areas be- ' tween buildings and the streets or other boundaries of the lot on which the building stands. Thus, the minima for these yards in Al districts apply,* only to the distances between the garden apartment buildings and the lot bound- aries and have no direct ann_lication to the distances that may exist between buildings on the lot. The latter are governed only by the provisions requiring the plans to be anproved by the Board of Appeals following report and recom- mendation from the Planning Board. In other words, the Board of Appeals, with the advise of the Planning Board, has discretionary authority to determine in each particular instance what distances between garden apart- ment buildings is necessary or adequate to constitute the apartments to be a desirable development that will not be detrimental to the neighborhood. I return herewith three conies of your letter that were attached to the ori.�zinal as I assume these were meant for file conies. Sincerely yours, Isl Harold F. Stevens ' FFS : epk me .