Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1965-02-15PLANNING BOARD HEARINGS ' FEBRUARY 15, 1965 The Lexington Planning Board held public hearings in Esta - brook Hall, Cary Memorial Building, on Monday evening, February 15, 1965, on four proposals for amendments to the Zoning By-laws to appear on the Warrant for the annual town meeting, and on proposed revision of Subdivision Rules and Regulations. Present were Chair- man Bryson, Members Campbell, Greeley, Meyer and Riffin; Planning Director Zaleski; and Secretary Macomber. Chairman Bryson opened the meeting at 7:40 to discuss the first proposal to amend the Zoning By -Law which reads as follows: "to strike out Section 1 thereof and inserting in its place a new Section 1 reading as follows: SECTION 1 PURPOSE For the purposes set forth in General Laws, Chapter 40A, Sections 1 to 22 inclusive, and all acts in amendment thereof and in addition thereto, and under the authority thereof and of General Laws, Chapter 143, and any other ' enabling laws, the inspection, materials, construction, alteration, repair, height, number of stories, area, size, location and the use of buildings and structures, the size of lots, yards, courts and other open spaces, and the use of land in the Town of Lexington are hereby regulated as herein provided, and the Town is divided into districts, as hereinafter defined and as shown on the Zoning Map prepared by the Planning Board, as amend- ed, a certified copy of which is filed with the Town Clerk, which map is hereby made a part of this By -Law." It was explained that the by-laws now refer to a map as en- gineered by William M. Burns, Town Engineer, dated 1950. The pur- pose of this change is that when reference is made to the Zoning Map it would mean the latest map and that the map may be changed from time to time to accord with changes which have taken place by amendments or by changes resulting from building. Mr. Ephriam Weiss spoke in favor and an expression of opin- ion being called for, those present represented themselves as being in favor. The hearing was declared closed at 7:45 p.m. The second article was then taken up, which reads as follows: ' "by striking out the last sentence of Sec. 19 thereof and inserting in place thereof the following two sen- tences: Hearings 2-15-65 -2- "by striking out the last sentence of Sec. 19 thereof and inserting in place thereof the following two sentences: Any failure to alter or delay in altering the Zoning Map shall not postpone or otherwise affect the effect- iveness of any amendment. The Zoning Map may be revised from time to time by the Planning Board by addition, deletion, or relocation of streets and other geographical features required to keep the map reasonably current and to facilitate orientation, but such revisions shall in no way affect or change the location and boundaries of zoning districts as defined in the text of this By -Law, as amended from time to time." The Chairman explained that this was to make clear that if the map and the printed descriptions did not agree, the printed de- scriptions would be the ones with the legal status. There were no questions or discussion, and approval was expressed by those pres- ent. The hearing was closed at 7:50 p.m. Taken up next was the revision of Subdivision Rules and Regulations. Chairman Bryson explained that these regulations had not been revised since 1954, that State Laws had made many changes necessary, and that Lexington requirements had also changed in many instances. It was proposed to delete the entire set of Rules and Regulations and substitute therefor a new set. Mr. Weiss asked what was being used now, and was told that the 1954 Regulations were the only ones available, and that the Planning Director and an assistant had worked them over very care- fully during the summer and had come up with the ones now under discussion. One of the advantages of the new set is references to contents appearing in the margins which make them easier to read;. The old sections have been expanded and rearranged ar d some new sections added, together with new forms which will make the actual procedure for submitting subdivision plans much easier for both the subdivider and the Board. Mr. Bryson explained that this would not appear on the warrant but a public hearing must be held before the Planning Board can make a decision. Mr. Weiss asked if copies would be available and was told that when the Planning Board approved them they would be printed and available for a price, but that the sub- division rules were really not of great concern to the general pub- lic but for the guidance of subdividers. One of the helpful additions is a typical cross section of a subdivision road which shows the required construction of roads, sewers, water mains, etc. There are several additional forms to help clarify the paper work in applying for a subdivision approval. Mr. Zaleski explained that one of the changes is that where a pave- ment used to be 2-1/2" thick it will now be 3" thick upon recommenda- tion of the Town Engineer. Another is the plantingoof trees - it will be required that at least three trees shall be provided, either existing or new, to be in conformity with the general neighborhood 1 1 Hearings 2-15-65 -3- planting. When constructing a street the subdivider will be required to put in driveway aprons because in many instances the street had been damaged when aprons were added. Another new item is a required fire alarm where it is possible for the developer to connect to the system. Mrs. Marek asked if the trees will be controlled by the Park Dept. and was told that the Supt. of Public Works is at present in charge of the Forestry Dept. and so it would come under his jurisdic- tion, although it will probably be a matter of agreement between Mr. Carroll and the subdivider, as long as trees are put in which do not die. The trees should be such as to conform with others in the neighborhood. Mr. Zaleski explained that these Rules and Regulations are an attempt to bring the old ones up-to-date and he is sure there will have to be amendments after they are tried out for awhile. If it is found that a certain requirement does not work out then it can be corrected by amendment. It is possible this is one of the matters which will have to be corrected. Mr. Parks asked what about sidewalks. Mr. Bryson read the section relevant to sidewalks. Mr. Parks asked how flexible this could be and Mr. Bryson replied that the Planning Board may waive the requirements. For instance, it could always be waived in the case of a small dead-end street where there would be no need for a sidewalk. ' Mention was also made of the fact that whenever a subdivider brings in a plan for approval of a subdivision, a public hearing is held, duly advertised in the newspaper, to which anyone can come and voice their Mrs. Morey asked "why the aprons?" She said the town does not put in aprons when they construct a street and why make the sub- divider do it? Mr. Zaleski explained that the idea has really noth- ing to do with the street. 'When the town does it there are existing houses, when the subdivider does it there are no houses, and when the houses are built later streets are many times damaged by the drive- ways. It would be part of the "package" so no damage will be done to the street. The subdivider would be required to repair any damages resulting at his own cost. It was pointed out that the aprons did not have to be constructed at the same time the streets were built but could be done at a later date when there was need for an apron. The bond would not be released until all required work is completed. Mrs. Morey said she still felt the subdivider should not be required to do this. Charles Cole stated he didn't think it would work out be- cause there probably would be t-wo contractors - one for the street and one for the apron - and there would likely be disagreements. Mr. Meyer stated it was more or less hypothetical because a bond is not released until all the work is done. The houses are built before the bond is released. Mr. Zaleski explained that these Rules and Regulations are an attempt to bring the old ones up-to-date and he is sure there will have to be amendments after they are tried out for awhile. If it is found that a certain requirement does not work out then it can be corrected by amendment. It is possible this is one of the matters which will have to be corrected. Mr. Parks asked what about sidewalks. Mr. Bryson read the section relevant to sidewalks. Mr. Parks asked how flexible this could be and Mr. Bryson replied that the Planning Board may waive the requirements. For instance, it could always be waived in the case of a small dead-end street where there would be no need for a sidewalk. ' Mention was also made of the fact that whenever a subdivider brings in a plan for approval of a subdivision, a public hearing is held, duly advertised in the newspaper, to which anyone can come and voice their Hearings 2-15-65 -%- opinions as to the need for sidewalks. Mr. Weiss said he thought the Board had done a very good job and he was in favor. The hearing was declared closed at 8:15 p.m. Taken up next was the following: "To see if the Town will vote to name Blossomcrest Road the way laid out by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts between existing Blossomcrest Road and Meadow Brook Avenue, includ- ing the change to Blossomcrest Road of the name of Vineyard Avenue and the name of that portion of Blossom Street lo- cated substantially within said way laid out by the Common- wealth of Massachusetts." Mr. Bryson explained that Blossom St. is now divided by Rte.2, part being on one side and part on the other. A proposal for a name change to Vineyard Ave. was made at the November town meeting to which residents objected and this proposal is brought in to replace the other. There were no questions or objections and the hearing was closed at 8:2b p.m. The last proposal considered is as follows: "To see if the Town will vote to change to Arbor Road the name of Franklin Road, a public way running easterly from Somerset Road to Castle Road." The Chairman explained that -in view of the fact that there existed a Franklin Road and a Franklin Ave. the Fire Department had requested a change in one of the names. There are 8 houses on Frank- lin Rd. which is near the center of town. Franklin Ave. is in the east section, part of it is in Arlington, therefore the inconvenience to residents of a name change would be about equal. Since part of the street is in Arlington over which the Board has no control, it would make a name change in the middle of a street. Considering these factors the Board thought it would be wiser to change Franklin Road rather than Franklin Avenue. Mr. Reed of 10 Franklin Rd. said their street was 35-40 years old - Franklin Ave. was comparatively new. Mr. Stevens of 17 Franklin Rd. asked if the Board had approached the Arlington Board - he said there was also a Franklin St. in Arlington and they might not object to changing this. Mr. Kingsley said Franklin Ave. was not an accepted street in 1 1 11 J Hearings 2-15-65 -5- Lexington but a private way. Charles Cole said it would be harder for the people on Franklin Road to change because they have been there a long time and are well known. Mr. Campbell brought out the fact that Waltham St. changes to Lexington St. when it becomes part of Waltham, and that Bedford St.� becomes The Great Road when it reaches Bedford, so there really isn't too much inconvenience when it crosses a town line. Mr. Jaquith brought out the fact that the whole thing might be thrown out on a legal technicality since Franklin Rd. was adver- tised as going to Castle Rd. whereas in reality it only went to Meriam St. Mr. Parks said he had lived there 40 years and everybody knows Franklin Rd. but Franklin Ave. is new and nobody knows it. Mr. Collins wished to be recorded as opposed, as did Mrs. Kingsley. The hearing was closed at 8:30 p.m. Secretary