Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1960-10-10 PLATTING BOARD MEETING October 10, 1960 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board was held on Monday, October 10, 1°60 at 7 30 n.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 anproved for payment the follow- ing bills which had been presented Hobbs & 'iarren, BILLS Tnc. , record book naner-- 9.15; Samuel D. Snow, September car allowance--820.00 Read to the Board and discussed by it was a letter, dated October 5, 1960, from Miss Williams, SENIOR Clerk of Senior Living, Inc . inquiring about LIVING matters relative to the use of the corporation ' s and adjacent land in the vicinity of Cottage Street for garden apartment or boarding house purposes . Mr. Snow was requested to reply to Miss Williams ' inouiry (See addendum. ) Also read to the Board and discussed by it COUNTRY CLUB was Mr. Frank M. Hodgdon ' s letter of October 6, MANOR, SEC 1 1960 to the Planning Board relative to the proposed Country Club Manor, Sec . 1 subdivision which was POND REALTY approved by the Planning Board on August 8, 1°60 Mr . Hodgdon ' s letter was placed on file. HODGDON Considered next were the Corazzini, Ehlers, and three Hamilton petitions to be heard by the BOARD OF Board of Appeals on October 11 and 18, 1960 . Mr. APPEALS Burnell and Mr. Snow discussed information they had assembled in regard to said petitions On the basis of this information it was decided to go on record onnosing the first named petition for the reason that Tr Corazzini had sufficient land to create a house lot to conform with the zoning by- law and the Ehlers petition for the same reasons set forth in the Planning Board' s letter in re- gard to the Swanton netitien ( see minutes of Feb- ruary 25, 1050 "lanning Board meeting. ) In regard to the Hamilton petitions to be heard on October 18, the Board approved the draft of a letter to the Board of Appeals relative to the pronosal to subdivide a parcel of land located at the corner of Ash and peed Streets ( see adden- dum) . Mr . Burnell was asked to discuss the other two petitions with the Chairman of the Boarc of 10-10-60 -2- 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 lets. 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 REZONTNG the five acres of land owned by Kingston Homes, Inc. PFD POSAL 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 applications for determination of Planning Board jurisdiction: #60-73, submitted Oct. 10, 1060 for James E. Storer by his attorney, Stephen T. Russian; plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington , Mass ", Scale : 1" = 40 ' , dated Oct . 8, 1960, Miller & Nylander, C E. ' s & Surveyors. #60-74, submitted October 10, 1960 for Town of Lexington by Farold F. Stevens, Town Counsel; plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass. belonging to the United States of America," Scale: 1" = 40 ' , dated Dec . 29, 1959, John J. Carroll, Town Engineer #60-75, submitted October 10, 1960 for Town of Lexington by Harold E. Stevens , Town Counsel; plan entitled "Right of Way across Parcel #1 10-10-00 -3- and land of B & M RR Depot Square Lexington- Mass. ", Scale 1" = 40 ' , dated Sept. 30, 1960. Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously VOTED: that the Lexington Planning Board determines that the plans accompanying Form A anplica- 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 BUCKMAN from 0:45 to 10 40 p.m. to discuss, at their request, DRIVE the status of the Buckman Drive Extension and the Wor- EXTENSION then Road and Emerson Road projects (See minutes of Selectmen' s meeting for a record of the discussion ) The Board returned to its own office at 10:45 n.m. to discuss arrangements for a meeting called by CENTRAL the Selectmen to be held in Estabrook Hall for the SCHOOL AND nurnose of having Mr. Snow present to several boards RECREATION and committees his general development plan for a cen- PROJECT 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, -3ecreation, School, Standing School Build- ing, School Sites, and Appropriation. The Board adjourned its meeting at 11:00 p.m. Irving H. Mabee, Clerk i; ADDENDUM Oct . 14, 1060 Miss Constance Williams, Clerk Senior Living, Inc . 264 Boylston street Boston 16, Massachusetts Dear Miss Williams : Your 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 which -4- the lots 20 to 21.iinclusive front is only a paper street If, as you su=ggest, senior Living, Inc. should acquire lots 17, 18, and 19 and combine them 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 which 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 present 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 Petterment 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 opinions of other residents and those serving in various official capacities. If there is any way I may be of further assistance, I shall be »leased to do so. Sincerely, /s/ Samuel P. Snow Planning Director I 1.0..10A0 -5- Board of Anpeals Town Office Building Re : Richard D. Hamilton 10, 160 Lexington 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 Diehard D Hamilton to subdivide the parcel of land referred to above into three lots, two of which would haTre insuffi- cient area or frontage It is the BoardTs opinion that a subdivision of the land involved into two lots, one of which would front on Ash Street, would avroid 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 neighborhood. It is recommended, therefore, that the petition be denied. Sincerely yours, LEXINGTON PLANNING BOARD /s/ Levi G. Burnell, Chairman