HomeMy WebLinkAbout1960-10-10PLAT7TNG BOARD MEETING
1 October 10, 1960
A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning
Board was held on Monday, October 10, 1960 at 7:30
o.m. in the Board's office, Town Office Building.
Present were Chairman Burnell, Members Grindle,
Mabee, Meyer and Soule, and Planning Director Snow.
The Board anp_roved for rayment the follow-
ing bills which had been presented: Hobbs & T,Tarren, BILLS
Tnc., record book raner--419.15; Samuel P. Snow,
September car allowance --120.00.
Read to the Board and discussed by it was a
letter, dated October 5, 1960, from Miss Williams,
Clerk of Senior Living, Inc. inquiring about
matters relative to the use of the cornoratibn's
and adjacent land in the vicinity of Cottage Street
for Qarden apartment or boarding house purposes.
Mr. Snow was requested to reply to Miss Williams'
Inquiry. (See addendum.)
Also read to the Board and discussed by it
' was Mr. Frank M. Hodgdon's letter of October 62
1960 to the Planning Board relative to the proposed
Country Club Manor, Sec. 1 subdivision which was
approved by the Planning Board on August 8, 1960.
Mr. Hodgdon's letter was placed on file.
Considered next were the Corazzini, Ehlers,
and three Hamilton petitions to be heard by the
Board of Appeals on October 11 and 182 1960. Mr.
Burnell and Mr. Snow discussed information they
had assembled in rer*ard to said petitions. On the
basis of this information it was decided to go on
record opposing the first named petition for the
reason that ',Tr. 'orazzini had sufficient land to
create a house lot to conform with the zoning by-
law and the Ehlers neti.tion for the same reasons
set forth in the planning Board's letter in re-
gard to the Swanbon petition (see minutes of Feb-
ruary 251 1059 ^lanning Board meeting.)
In regard to the Hamilton netitions to be
heard on October 18, the Board approved the draft
of a letter to the Board of Appeals relative to
the proposal to subdivide a parcel of land located
at the corner of Ash and peed Streets (see adden-
dum).
dden-
dum). Mr.. Burnell was asked to discuss the other
two petitions with the Chairman of the Board of
SENIOR
LIVING
COUNTRY. CLUB
MANOR, SEC.1
POND pFALTY
HODGDON
BOARD OF
APPEALS
10-10-60
Appeals pointing out the Planning Board's concern that
the granting of these petitions might lead to the seek-
ing of variances to build on adjacent parcels of land
which would not meet the minimum zoning requirements
for residential lots.
-2-
Town Counsel Stevens met with the Board from
8:30 to 9:40 p.m. Discussed with him were the follow -
Ing Form A annlications for determination of Planning
Board jurisdiction:
#60-73, submitted Oct. 10, 1960 for James E.
Storer by his attorney, Stephen T. Russian; plan
entitled "Plan of Land in Lexinr-ton, Mass.",
Scale: 1`4 = 40t, dated Oct. 8, 1960, Miller &
Nylander, C.E.'s & Surveyors.
!,60-74, submitted October 10, 1960 for Town of
Lexington by Tarold F. Stevens, Town Counsel;
,olan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington., Mass.
belonging to the United States of America,"
Scale: 1 = 40', dated Dec. 291 1959) John J.
Carroll, Town Engineer,
#60-751 submitted October 10, 1960 for Town of
Lexington by Harold E. Stevens, Town Counsel;
I
-olan entitled "Right of Wav across Parcel �l
Mr. Wilbur M. Jaquith met with the Board from
KINGSTON
8:00 to 8:30 p.m. He 'discussed first with the Board the
HOMES, INC.
possibility of .rezoning for some type of commercial use
REZONING
the five acres of land owned by Kingston Homes, Inc.
PROPOSAL
and located at the northeasterly corner of the Lowell -
North Streets intersection. Mr. Jaquith said that after
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts land taking for pro-
posed Route 3 only about 16,000 sq. ft. of the Kingston
Homes land remained in the previously zoned C 1 district.
Mr. Jaquith had no specific proposal or plan of land to
present so the Board took no action in regard to the
matter.
Mr. Jaquith next discussed the land of the Barnes
LAND FOR
estate fronting on Adams Street and abutting the footway
RECREATION
to the Fiske School and said school land itself.. He
PURPOSES
said he was the attorney for the estate and asked if the
Board was still interested in acquiring a portion of this
land for recreational purposes. When it was indicated
that the Board was very much interested in having some of
this land as well as the adjacent Warren property ac-
quired for a coasting or skiing slope and other uses, Mr.
Jaquith said he would obtain a plan of the Barnes prop-
erty and then discuss the matter further with the Board.
Town Counsel Stevens met with the Board from
8:30 to 9:40 p.m. Discussed with him were the follow -
Ing Form A annlications for determination of Planning
Board jurisdiction:
#60-73, submitted Oct. 10, 1960 for James E.
Storer by his attorney, Stephen T. Russian; plan
entitled "Plan of Land in Lexinr-ton, Mass.",
Scale: 1`4 = 40t, dated Oct. 8, 1960, Miller &
Nylander, C.E.'s & Surveyors.
!,60-74, submitted October 10, 1960 for Town of
Lexington by Tarold F. Stevens, Town Counsel;
,olan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington., Mass.
belonging to the United States of America,"
Scale: 1 = 40', dated Dec. 291 1959) John J.
Carroll, Town Engineer,
#60-751 submitted October 10, 1960 for Town of
Lexington by Harold E. Stevens, Town Counsel;
I
-olan entitled "Right of Wav across Parcel �l
10 -10 -SO
and land of B & M RR Depot Square Lexington -
Mass.", Scale: 1" = 40', dated Sept. 30, 1960.
Unon motion duly made and seconded, it was
unanimously
VOTED: that the Lexington Planning Board determines
that the plans accompanying Form A applica-
tions #60-73, #60-74 and #60-75 do not re-
quire approval under the Subdivision Control
Law, and that said plans be so endorsed.
After a discussion of other current matters be-
fore the Board, it attended the Selectmen's meeting
from 0:45 to 1 :40 p.m. to discuss, at their request,
the status of the Buckman Drive Extension and the Wor-
then Road and Emerson Roac projects. (See minutes of
Selectmen's meeting for a record of the discussion.)
-3-
BUCKMAN
DRIVE
EXTENSION
CENTRAL
SCHOOL AND
RECREATION
PROJECT
The Board returned to its own office at 10:45
p.m, to discuss arrangements for a meeting called by
the Selectmen to be veld in Estabrook Hall for the
nurnose of having Mr. Snow present to several boards
and committees his general development plan for a cen-
tral school and recreation area from the Waltham-
Muzzey-Parker Street areas to Marrett Road. It was
understood that the following boards and committees
were to be represented at said meeting: Selectmen,
Planning, recreation, School, Standing School Build-
ing, School Sites, and Appropriation.
The Board adjourned its meeting at 11:00 n.m.
Irving H. Mabee, Clerk
ADDENDUM
Oct. 14, 1960
Miss Constance Williams* Clerk
Senior Living, Ine.
264 Boylston street
Boston 16, Massachusetts
Dear Miss Williams:
`Tour letter of October 5 to me has been referred to and
discussed by the Planning Board. In reply to your in-
quiries it is our opinion that the unnamed way on wrich
-3-
BUCKMAN
DRIVE
EXTENSION
CENTRAL
SCHOOL AND
RECREATION
PROJECT
1C-10-60
the lots 20 to 2L. inclusive front is only a paper street.
If, as you su.7gest3 Senior Living, Inc. should acquire lots
17, 18, and 19 and combine tk*em with those now owned by the
corporation, it would only have a frontage of 71.07 feet on
Cottage Street. However, if it were found that the corpora-
tion owns the fee in the said unnamed way, the frontage on
Cottage Street would then be increased by at least the way's
width, i.e., 25 feet. Of course, as you realize, this is
insufficient frontage under the zoning by-law to erect either
a garden apartment building or a building to be used as a
boarding house.
In regard to the idea of petitioning the Board of Appeals for
a variance to build a boarding house for older people, I would
be inclined not to do so until I had determined, first, if
there was a need for such a building and, second, if the exist-
ing site were the best one which could be obtained to serve
this purpose. It is my opinion that there is very little, if
any, need in Lexington for a boarding house such as you have
in mind. However, should it be determined that there is such
a need, I would choose another site for the house other than
the one Vrich Senior Living, Inc, now owns unless, as I dis-
cussed with you originally, the corporation acquires all the
nronerty in the Cottage Street area and redevelops it as a
private project.
My reason for making this statement in regard to the bresent
site is based on my belief that those who would be paying for
board in a house to be managed by Senior Living would seek
better environmental standards than those which now exist in
the Cottage Street area. In my opinion, at least a drastic
conservation program is needed to improve the area. The
people living there now can neither afford such a program nor
a much simpler one which would involve only the paving of the
street under the >etterment Act. Without a better approach
to the present Senior Living; site, I doubt if it is one on
which it would be desirable to build a boarding house.
While the above views are personal ones, I hope they will be
of some value to you. No doubt ,you will want to obtain the
oainions of other residents and those serving in various
official capacities. If there is any way I may be of further
assistance, I shall be pleased to do so.
Sincerely,
/s/ Samuel P. Snow
Planning Director
lo -10-4,o -5-
October 10, 1960
' Board of Appeals
Tawn Office Building Re: Richard D. Hamilton
Lexinnton 73, Mass. Petition to subdivide parcel of
land at corner of Reed and Ash
Streets
Gentlemen:
The Lexington Planning Board has considered the petition of
nichard D. Hamilton to subdivide the parcel of land referred
to above into three lots, two of which would have insuffi-
cient area or frontage. It is the Board's opinion that a
subdivision of the land involved into two lots, one of which
would front on Ash Street, would avoid the necessity of
seeking a variance, would prevent the over -crowding of land,
would conserve the value of land and buildings in the vicinity
of said parcel, and would preserve and increase the amenities
of the area in general whereas the subdivision as proposed
would be detrimental to the neipb borhood. It is recommended,
therefore, that the petition be denied.
Sincerely yours,
LEXINGTON PLA MTING BOARD
/s/ Levi G. Burnell, Chairman
1