Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-11-05PLANNING BOARD HEARING November 5, 1965 The Lexington Planning Board held a public hearing in Estabrook Hall, Cary Memorial Building, on Thursday, November 5, 1964 at 8;00 p.m. on the petition of more than 100 registered voters to consider a proposi- tion to add to the C 1 Local business district an area of approximately 283000 sq. £t. of land on Marrett Rd. owned by Daniel P. and Eleanor M. Curtin. Present were Chairman Meyer, Members Bryson, Campbell, Riff in and Secretary Macomber. Daniel A. Lynch of 5 Goodwin Rd., attorney representing Mr. Curtin, explained that this meeting was for the purpose of hearing arguments on both sides in order that the Planning Board might have facts on which to base its recommendation to the Town Meeting at which time the town meeting members would vote on the issue. Nothing decisive could come from this hearing. Part of Mr. Curtin's piece of property is zoned for business, C 13 and always has been so zoned. In 1927 this property was granted a gasoline filling station permit. It still has that permit. It is still being operated. Many uses can be put in that location of approximately 54,000 sq.ft. In that zone many uses may be made of the property without let or hindrance from anybody. (Read from the zoning by-law the uses permitted in C 1.) Many other uses can be permitted by Board of Appeals - a large filling station, supermarket, etc. Mr. Curtin is asking for change in zone to C 1 on another piece of adjoining property which he acquired in 1954. His house is on it. In 1950 this piece was also in business zone and was tkaen out at the request of the then owner so it would be taxed for residential instead of business. Mr. Curtin is.planning to put up a neighborhood shopping district in early American architecture. The build- ings would be of one story - anything above a first floor would be used for storage; they would be frame buildings with asphalt roofs -- all in accord— ance with building and zoning laws of Lexington. It would be a nice devel- opment of about 12 retail stores - no liquor or manufacturing. There would be provision for 160-165 automobiles - no parking on the street. There would necessarily be some increase in traffic - if you have twelve stores and people going in and out to shop there would be more traffic. A traffic light could be put in at Spring St. and Marrett Rd. if necessary. (Here pictures of the development were shown on the screen.) It will be an ad- vantage to the neighborhood to have these stores. It will increase the taxes received on this property about ten times. If this is not rezoned, the other piece could be used for a large filling station or rented as a single operation by a large supermarket. A question was asked as to access to which Mr. Lynch replied that the access would be from Marrett Rd. This was a State road and access to the property was controlled by the State. It is the only one available at ' present. Mr. Campbell of the Planning Board asked if they intend to continue 11- 5- 6h -2- the use of the filling station in this complex, and Mr. Lynch replied no, it would mean the elimination of the gas station. ' Mr. Brooking asked what effect this would have on the tax rate if taxes on this property were increased ten times, to which Mr. Lynch replied that he didn't know. Mr. Jones said it appeared the difference would just about pay for the policeman it would be necessary to have, and was told that additional policemen were paid for by the store and not the town. Mr. Myers of Outlook Dr. noted that on the basis of the taxes currently being paid on both pieces, the additional amount would be about $4,000. Mr. Meyer stated that the increase in taxes would have an infin- itesimal effect on the tax rate. Mr. Storts said he understood there was a petition of 100 names and he would like to know what part of town these signatures came from he didn't think it was from the neighborhood. After comments of like nature from several citizens Mr. Meyer stated that it made no difference where they came from - in order to get an article on the warrant there must be a petition with 100 valid signs tures of voters of Lexington. These signatures were not considered by the Planning Board when making its decision - they were merely for the pur- pose of getting the article on the warrant. The question was asked as to what factors the Planning Board did consider when making its decision, to which Mr. Meyer replied: the wel- fare of the town as a whole, the effect on the value of the neighborhood and its need or convenience for such a change; is it going to be of bene. - fit to the town; traffic and safety; is it something we would like in our neighborhood; etc. Mrs. Hutcheson asked that if it was desirable to ask for a traffic light, would it have to be through the legislature. She was told it would be through the Selectmen who would then go to the Dept. of Public Works to get it started. Mr. Miller of Outlook Dr. asked if the Planning Board would consider a petition of 100 signers to change from C 1 to R 1, and was told yes. The question was asked as to how soon the development would start to which Mr. Lynch replied that if this is rezoned the land would be cleared as soon as possible. Mr. Curtin would give the house if any- body wanted it. A statement was made that some years ago a letter had been re- ceived I from Mr. Worthen saying that this house was historically valuable. The previous owners had the property changed back to residential to show l- 5- 64 -3- they had done the best they could for the people in the neighborhood, ' as they had to sell it, and the neighbors were very grateful for what the Lowes did. Mr. Frank Crosby stated that he had sent notices to every -one in the neighborhood at his own expense and time so all would be familiar with what was happening. He read a letter containing 18 questions, most of which had already been incorporated in this discussion. Mr. Corydon Wyman of the Lexington Historical Society stated he had made a research into the historical background of the Curtin house and found it dated back to 1722. He then read a short history of the Bridge family, who came to Cambridge in 1632 and shortly after to Lex- ington and settled in this area, the Curtin house being one of the homes built later. (See addenda.) It was suggested that perhaps the Histor- ical Districts Commission should consider this area for another historic district to encompass the several houses in the area, which are as old as any in town. Mr. Lynch said he thought everybody was being very generous with Mr. Curtin's property but he hadn't heard any offer of money for it, to which someone replied that he had already said Mr. Curtin would give away the house. Mr. Eric Kula stated that so far they hadn't been told what sort of stores were coming in -- there was a very complete neighborhood shop- ping center a short distance down Marrett Rd. and he didn't think there was any need for another. Elizabeth Taylor said that about ten years ago Mrs. Ross asked for a rezoning to C 1 and it came before the town meeting. Mr. Curtin was present and he knows it was unanimously denied. He bought the house shortly after that. She objected strongly to a "creeping zone." She stated that her house, and land across the street and on both sides was also business and put back into residential and people bought the land with the idea it would remain residential. If this piece is changed why can't all the owners around ask for and expect a change to business also. Several citizens spoke in opposition, arguing in general from the standpoint there was a lack of need, and of increased traffic hazard for school children. Mr. Bartholomew, owner of the Woodhaven Country Store on the corner opposite the piece being asked for zoning change, stated that he was one of the signers of the petition. He had many friends in the neighborhood upon whom he depended for his livelihood. However, he felt Mr. Curtin was a good friend and neighbor and was a good business opera- tor, and he would like to be one to stand up and wish him success. In addition to the "historical background" and Mr. Crosby's letter already referred to, the Planning Boara received a letter in opposition ' signed by Jacqueline Davison and Harry Myers, Jr., and 'a counter petition bearing 46 signatures. The hearing was declared closed at 9:35 P•m- 11-5-64 -4- ADDENDA I BRIDGE FAPIILY IN LEXINGTON (1) 1. Departed Braintree, England 1631 JOHN BRIDGE 2. Arrived Mt. Wollaston, Quincy, 1632 1578 1665 3. Settled in Cambridge 1632 "THE PU TAN" 4. Supervised The Construction of First 87 yea s Public School 1635 5. Co Founder Harvard 1638 6. Large landowner, Cambridge 7. First Deacon of Church 1636 8. Selectman 1635 1652 9. Farmed in Cambridge Farms (Lexington) ' near Vine Brook prior to 1641 10. Granted 400 acre tract in Lexington 1642 11. Two children �I (2) 1. Born in England, sailed with father MATTHEW BRIDGE 1615 1700 2. Built farmhouse vicinity Vine Brook 1661. Although active in town affairs, he did not move to Lexington until 1683 3. Helped organize Township 1692 !�. Member Ancient & Honorable Artillery Co. 1643 5. Assessor 1713 6. Seven children 7. Made preparations for arrival of Rev. Hancock I 1698 with construction of Hancock Clark House 1 1 D 11-5-64 (3) MATTHEW BRIDGE 1650 - 1738 88 years (4) JOHN BRIDGE 1700 - 1776 77 years �I t SAMUEL BRIDGE 1705 -1791 —$b -years _-- -5- 1. Selectman 2. Treasurer 1713 3. Town Clerk 1712 1713 4. Soldier King Phillips War 1675 5. Battle of Quebec 1696 6. Father of four sons: Joseph, John, Samuel, Matthew 7. Buried in Lexington Old Burying Ground 8. Nine children 1. Married Jan. 4, 1730 2. Presented home this date by father. Still remains on Middleby Rd. Owned and restored by Mr. Ralph Frissore 3. Distinguished citizen 4. Selectmen 1746 and 1756 plus other civil offices 5. 100 acres of land given with house 6. Six children 1. Married 1 1734 2 1738 2. Received homestead 1739 and remaining acres of land.- Home still remains at 271 Marrett Rd. Restored and owned by Heywood family. 3. Selectman 1758 1760 4. Member of Committee to Present Resolutions in Regard to "Committee of Correspondence and Safety." 5. At 70 years of age volunteered for mili Lary duty. Lexington Alarm Co. 1775 Bennington 1777 New Jersey 1776 6. Twelve children 11- 5-64 (4) JOSEPH BRIDGE 1698 - 1778 80 years (4) MATTHEW BRIDGE 1694 - 1761 67 years 1. Married 1722 2. Presented home and 100 acres of land this date. This home is presently owned by Mr. Daniel Curtin and still remains at 419 Marrett Rd. in excellent condition. 3. Life long resident 4. Selectmen 1758-1760 5. Assessor 1741 6. Six children 1. Married 1720 2. Presented home and 100 acres of land this date. The home was still standing in excellent condition 1924. 3. Home located in Lexington until becoming part of Waltham 1751. 4. Captain of militia. - 5. Selectmen 1732, 1733, 17403 1744, 1745 6. Assessor 1733, 1735, 1739 7. Town Treasurer 1730, 1732, 1740 8. Town clerk 1740 9. Four children I For additional information "John Bridge Family in America" 1632 - 1924 Rev. Wm. D. Bridge Norman Bridge Murray Printing Company, 1924 7 C 1 PLANNING BOARD HEARING ' November 5, 1964 The Lexington Planning Board held a public hearing on Thursday, November 5, 1964, in Estabrook Hall, Cary Memorial Building, to consider a proposal to amend the zoning by-law of the Town of Lexingtom by changing from R 1 to A 1 Garden apartment district a parcel of land located between Hill St. and Worthen .id. and bounded as follows: northwesterly by Hill St.; southwesterly by land of Bullock; northwesterly by land of Bullock and Ruge; southwesterly by land of Ruge; southeasterly by land of Seth & Maxner and by land of Custance Bros., Inc.; and northeasterly by land of McCarthy, Colbert and land of owners unknown; northwesterly by land of Spellman, Driscoll, and Saganich; and northeasterly by land of Saganich, Shirley St., Murphy, and land of owners unknown, comprising 10 acres more or less and as shown as Parcel B on Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass., dated October 4, 1964, Miller & Nylander, C.E.'s & Surveyors. Mr. Campbell asked if they had rights over the Bullock land, to which Mr. Williams replied that they were in the process of having a title search made to clarify the matter. However, they would be able to complete plans for construction even if the small strip was not available. He ex- plained that they did have the power of eminent domain but were reluctant to use it. Mr. George Bullock stated that the small strip of land had been in his family and taxes paid on it for 58 years. If the strip was taken it would leave but six feet at the side of his house, and if it was taken it would mean a court case. ' Mr. Williams said that the strip was claimed by the Seths and showed on the piece of property being offered to them, therefore the title search had been instigated. Present were Chairman Meyer, members Bryson, Campbell and Riff in, and secretary Macomber; also approximately 75 interested citizens. Chairman Meyer declared the hearing open at 9:40 p.m. and explained that the above-mentioned parcel was being asked for rezoning by the Lexing- ton Housing Authority for a government-sponsored site for inexpensive homes for elderly citizens. Mr. Burton Williams, Chairman of the Housing Authority Committee, stated that the committee was present to answer questions. He stated that three additional acres had been added to the original proposal presented to town meeting and denied, and they were now asking for approximately 10 acres. They have eliminated one of the objections in that the owners were not placing any restriction on the sale of land by including the entire parcel but were asking only for rezoning for use of the land by the Housing Author- ity. He also stated that since the refusal the committee has been searching diligently for a site which would be favorable for this purpose and have been unable to find any. This site has been approved by the State Housing Authority. Mr. Campbell asked if they had rights over the Bullock land, to which Mr. Williams replied that they were in the process of having a title search made to clarify the matter. However, they would be able to complete plans for construction even if the small strip was not available. He ex- plained that they did have the power of eminent domain but were reluctant to use it. Mr. George Bullock stated that the small strip of land had been in his family and taxes paid on it for 58 years. If the strip was taken it would leave but six feet at the side of his house, and if it was taken it would mean a court case. ' Mr. Williams said that the strip was claimed by the Seths and showed on the piece of property being offered to them, therefore the title search had been instigated. 11-5-64 -2- When asked about exits, Mr. Jilliams stated that this had not been , formally decided but was being left to the judgment of the architects. How- ever the land has been examined by the State authority and they determine whether or not all necessary requirements can be fulfilled; also the Author- ity has the benefit of the State Authority's engineers, advice, etc. They are not concerned about the small strip in question. Exits will also de- pend upon the Fire Dept.'s requirements, where the sewer and water will tie in, etc. One lady said she didn't believe this land was close enough to the center for old people. Mr. Williams replied that he had been to many of these homes and hadn't seen any that were closer to town. Many were at a great distance from town. Also it must be considered that there is apparently no land available nearer the center and if there were the price would be prohibi- tive, for the rents would have to be so high it would defeat the purpose of a low cost living for the elderly who need it. When asked if this would be enough land to take care of the units desired, Mr. Williams replied that they originally had 7 acres on which approximately 40 units could be built. At that time it was questioned whether there would be a demand for that number of units in Lexington. However 72-75 responses were received from people interested. At that rate the State, who has had experience in these matters, figure that Lexington would need twice that many units, or closer to 150. Mr. Williams stated ' that of the 10 acres, 3 are not usable and would become permanent park area. The Conservation Commission has expressed an interest in seeing that nothing else happens to it. The Authority would now have 7 buildable acres as opposed to the original 4, on which 60-65 units could be erected. Mr. Williams was asked if they had considered the front land on Worthen Rd. and replied that in the first place it hadn't been offered, and in the second place the price would be prohibitive. It was valuable land and they would be in competition with Niles. Mr. York asked that in view of the fact that town meeting members turned this down did they have an alternate area to consider or is this the only one, to which Mr. Williams replied that this is the only one. Mr. Meyer stated that the Planning Board, too, had been looking, but had been unable to find any. He also stated that the Board had been concerned about keeping the two parcels separate so the housing would not be used as a short cut to Worthen Rd. Mr. Whitman asked if there was a possibility of a foot path being created to the First National on its land to avoid walking on Bedford St., and it was thought this might be possible. Mr. Dunbar suggested that the Authority look into the matter of acquiring town -owned land located between Worthen Rd. and Waltham St. for I additional property. 11-5-64 -3- ' Mr. Ralph Semon asked if the difference in price would not be com- pensated for by the greater convenience to the inhabitants by being closer to the stores. Mr. Williams stated that the difference is quite significant - 10 acres at $25,000 could not be bought anywhere in Lexington. The land in that particular area would be between $14,000 and $15,000 per acre as opposed to $25,000 for 10 acres. Mrs. Harvell said she didn't believe the land was worth $15,000, especially if it were not rezoned to A 1, because much of it was swampy. Mr. Meyer stated that the land is at present zoned for residential use and .residential property is very valuable - some is selling for $10,000 per lot. Mr. Williams was asked if the title search would b': completed in time for the informational meeting to be held in two weeks, to which he re- plied in the affirmative. There being no further discussion the hearing was declared closed at 10:30 p.m. 1