HomeMy WebLinkAbout1962-05-21I
PLANTITNG BOARD MEETING
May 21, 1962
A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning
Board was held in the Board's office, Town Office
Building, on Mondavi, T"av, 21, 1062 at 7:30 —
o--m-Present were Chairman Grindle, members Bryson,
Camnbell, Mabee and Meyer, and Mr. Snow, planning
Director.
'-'he Board anproved the minutes of its March
26, May 71 101 11 and 16, 1962 meetings.
Considered next was the following Form A
anplication for determination of Planning Board
jurisdiction:
#62-271 submitted May 11, 1962 by Outhet
Realty Trust, Ernest F. Outhet, Trustee;
nlan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexin?ton,
IIass.", scale: 1 it = 40 ft, dated May 9,
1962, Miller F Nylander, C.F.Is &. Surveyors.
' Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was
unanimously
VOTED: that the Lexin-'ton T'lanninM Board determines
that the plan accompanying Form A applica-
tion 462-27 does not require approval under
the Subdivision Control Law, and that said
plan be so endorsed.
Town Counsel Stevens met with the Board
briefly. Discussed with him was the elan entitled
"Plot elan of L^nd in Lexington,Mass.t4, dated
'Varch 1, 1962 and nr-nared by the firm of Mi_11Fr &.
Nvlender, toget?^er with silo additional data and
plans Mr. Snow was able to assemble in regard to
the plot nlan in question and adjacent nronerties.
Tt was noted that the said plot elan was registered
as one lot in the Land Court as Case No. 2270,4A.
?lith reference to the request of Messrs.
Nelson and phi.11inns (see minutes of Planning Board
meeting; of nnril 16, 1962) for an informal opinion
in regard to said nlot nlan, it was determined that
the proposed relotting would be a subdivision for
the reason that the oronosed lots would neither rave
' the frontage or area required under the zoning by-
law and in addition would front on a private way
which in the opinion of the Planning Board was not
MINUTES
FORM A
BOARD OF
APPEALS
PHILLIPPS
r-21-62
-2-
adequately constructed to serve the proposed lots.
M ,
r. Snow was asked to write a letter to the Board of
Appeals together with a letter to "Ir. Phillinns set-
tinr forth the facts in the case as they were under-
stood by the Planning Board and the reasons why it
would determine that the elan would be considered a
subdivision should said plan be submitted to the Plan-
ning Board formally for a determination of its juris-
diction (see addenda).
The remainder of the moeting was devoted to
a discussion of an outline of a report Mr. Snow was
in the process of completing for a comprehensive
long-range elan for Lexington.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
(�� T �
rthur E. Bryson
Clerk
ADDENDA '
May 25, 1 962
Board of Appeals
Town Office Building
Lexington 73,?7assachusetts
Re: 'linthrop J. '0h1llipps
Gentlemen:
Attached herewith Is a cony of my letter, dated May 24.9
lQ62, to Mr. Phillipps, said letter being written at
the request of the Planning Board. Set forth below also
Is so -e additional information T assembled in order to
obtain further backrrround in the case.
It appears that from October 1915 to Pugust 1950 Pndrew
and Margaret Adamson assembled lots 39 to 49 inclusive,
fronts -g on Garfield Street in Block l in the so-called
Meagherville subdivision, combining said lots into one
residential lot on a plan, dated December lir, 1950,
which was filed in the Land Court. A final plan pre-
pared by the Court and numbered 22794A was filed in the
Land Registration Office on January 26,1 9151. The newly
created lot has a frontage of 250 feet and an average '
depth of 123 feet. A single family residence is situated
on the lot. The residence is not shown on. tle Yarch 1,
5-21-62
'
1962 plan which was filed wit", the Board of Appeals.
The Land Court lot and the residence thereon was trans-
ferred from the Adamsons to Uilliam r. and Barbara A.
Church, in 1954, from the Churches to Carlton A. Andersen
in 1956, and from Andersen to Miller Kind in 1961. Foch
time said lot was transferred from one ownership to an-
other, th? Tand Court had to issue a certificate of title
for the whole lot for the reason that th-re had not been
filed with the Cou-t a nlan having an endorsement that
annroval of a surdivision shown on such a plan had an
endorsement that anproval of the plan was not required by
the Lexington Plannin(7 T'oard.
As incicat(-,d to 7r. pzillipps in the attached letter, if
a subdivision plan of L.C. Case No. 22794A were submitted
to the Planning; 7?oard, It would detnrmine that the plan
did requi=re approval. This approval under the Subdi=vision
Control Law would be requred regardless of �wh ether or not
the lots involved met the requirements of the Lexington
?on -ng By-law for the reason that Garfield Street is a
nrivate way and in the section on which the proposed lots
would front does not at present rave municipal services
installed and is not adequately constructed to serve said
lots. 'A ether or not the owner, Mr. lKing, of said Land
Court lot, would be willingtto perform such construction
and installation under the Planning RoardTs subdivision
rules and regulations, I do not know.
I trust this information will be of assistance to you in
actin? upon this case. If there is any other assistance
I can render, please do not hesitate to call upon me.
Sincerely,
/s/ Samuel P. Snow
Fnc. Planning Director
May 2h, 1962
Mr. `'1inthrop J. Phi llinns
21!P Tlm Street
'.4alnole, Massachusetts
Dear Mr. Prillipps:
Reference is made to the meeting you and Mr. William
Nelson had wits the Lexi_nmton Planning_ Board on April 16
In regard to your Petition before the Board of ^.repeals for
' a variance to subdivide the lot of land numbered 714 Gar-
field Street into three lots, each having; an area of about
10,000 square feet. n cony of the plan which you filed
5-21-62
with the
Board of Appeals has
been obtained. This elan
'
has been
com-hared with that of
Land Court No. 22794A.
Facts of
this case have also
been assembled, the site
viewed on
the ground, and the
matter discussed by the
Planning
Board at its meeting
on May 21.
It is the Planning Board's opinion that if the proposed
relot.ting plan were drawn on tracing cloth and submitted
formally to the Planning ?hoard with an application for a
determination of ?Tanning Board jurisdiction, a copy of
which is enclosed, said Board would no doubt determine
that the elan required annroval under the subdivision
control law. Approval in this case would not only re-
quire each lot to have the area and frontage as set
forth under the town's zoning by-law but also that Gar-
field Street, a private way, in front of said lots be
constructed and municipal services installed in accord-
ance with the rules and regulations governing the sub-
division of land in Le.xine7ton.
Yours very truly,
Is/ Samuel P. Snow
Planning Director
Enc. I
cc: Board of Appeals