HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967-12-11PLANNING BOARD MEETING
'
December 11, 1967
A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board
was held in its office, Town Office Building, on Monday,
December 11, 1967. The meeting was called to order by
Chairman Greeley at 7:30 p.m. with members Fowle, Lund,
Riffin and Worrell, and Planning Director Zaleski present.
Minutes of the Meeting of December 4, 1967 were
MINUTES
approved.
Draft of the 1968 Annual Report was reviewed, modi-
ANNUAL REPORT
fied, and approved as modified (see Addendum).
At 8:00 p.m. the duly advertised public hearing was
BATTLE GREEN
held on the application of Seth and Maxner et al for the
OFFICE PARK
approval of a definitive subdivision plan of land entitled
SETH-MAXNER
"Battle Green Office Park" dated Nov. 2, 1967 by A. A.
-
Miller and W. C. Nylander. The hearing was attended by
HEARING
Messrs. 0. Brown, A. Douglass, T. Niles, S. Williams of
Lexington Housing Authority, and Attorney F. Conroy who
outlined the proposal. Letter from the Town Engineer mak-
ing several technical recommendations was read. The
question of the 30" drain size recommended by the Town
Engineer was discussed and it was decided to review it
'
with engineers for this subdivision and for the Housing
Authority.
Letter to Raytheon relative to Macalaster Scientific
CORRESPONDENCE
Co. was read and approved.
Raytheon
Letters to the Selectmen relative to Zoning By -Law
Zoning By -Law
and to the filling of North St. pits were read and approved.
North St.Pits
Letters to the Board of Appeals relative to Coca-
Coca-Cola
Cola Co. and Tillinghast petitions were revised and approved.
Tillinghast
The Board next met with the Conservation Commission
to discuss open land acquisition program preparatory to the
CONSERVATION COMM.
December 13 meeting with Selectmen and Capital Expenditures
Committee. Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Board
voted to go into executive session to discuss matters the
premature disclosure of which would adversely affect the
financial interests of the Town. Following a discussion of
land acquisition the Board voted to resume open session.
Upon a motion duly seconded the Board unanimously
BRIDLE PATH
VOTED: The construction of ways and the installation of
utilities in Bridle Path subdivision (Paddock La.)
(PADDOCK LA.)
-
'
having been partially, but not fully, completed, the
STOICO
penal sum of the bond furnished to ensure said con-
12-11-67
-2-
struction and installation and the obligations of
the developer are hereby reduced from $22,000 to
$6,000. The Town Counsel is authorized to withdraw
and return to Louis and Catherine F. Stoico the
deposits in excess of $6,000 now held by the Town
as a security for the above bond.
Upon a motion duly seconded, the Board unanimously
VOTED: the construction of ways and the installation of
ADAMS ESTATES utilities in the Adams Estates, Section IV subdi
(BRENT RD.) vision (Brand Rd.) having been partially, but not
fully, completed under the terms and conditions of
CASTOLDI the Agreement and Bond dated October 28, 1965, the
penal sum of said bond and the obligations of the
developer thereunder are hereby reduced from
$35,000 to $4,000. The Town Counsel is authorized
to arrange for this withdrawl and return to John
W. Castoldi of deposits in excess of $4,000 from
the bank books now held by the Town as a security
for the above bond.
OAK PARK SUB- The Board then authorized the Town Counsel to
DIVISION replace Chrysler and Ford stock now held by Town with
an equivalent amount of bank deposits as security for the
BUSA construction of ways and utilities in Oak Park subdivision.
A map and statement on non -school sidewalk program
SIDEWALKS prepared by the Planning Director from a physical survey
by the members of the Board was reviewed next. It was
decided to bring it to the attention of the Selectmen and
of financial committees.
ESSARIAN Preliminary subdivision plan of Essarian's land off
Nickerson Rd. was accepted for review.
It was decided to have a special meeting of the
SPECIAL MEETING Planning Board on Wednesday, December 27, 1967 for con-
sideration of 1968 Town Meeting articles.
Mr. A. Douglass submitted additional information
DOUGLASS on the proposed funeral home on Worthen Rd. now pending
FUNERAL HOME a Finding and Determination by the Board of Appeals. The
plans were turned over to the Planning Director for review
and recommendations.
Following a discussion of the method of presenting
information at the special meeting with Selectmen, Appro-
priations and Capital Expenditures Committees and the Con-
servation Commission on December 13 to discus land
acquisition programs, the mee g adjon� 10 5 p.m. vert N. Fofwl/eCler
L'
1
1
1967 ANNUAL REPORT
Massachusetts General Laws provide that the annual report of a
Planning Board must contain information regarding "the condition of
the Town, plans and proposals for its development and estimates of the
cost thereof."
With 1965 median income per household of $14,689, Lexington resi-
dents are near the top of income range of Metropolitan Boston and Massa-
chusetts municipalities. According to Massachusetts Taxpayers Association
our tax rate is also high, only 8 cities and 5 towns among 351 Massachu-
setts municipalities have adjusted tax rate higher than Lexington. The
accompanying table shows Lexington's position among neighborhing or compar-
able towns along Rte. 128.
Rezoning more land for business and industry will not in itself change
the land use or reduce the tax rate. Vacant land in Lexington now includes
the following: 4 acres zoned for retail business, 177 acres zoned for
research and offices and about 182 acres zoned for light manufacturing. We
encourage entrepreneurs seeking Lexington location to use land already zoned
rather than attempt rezoning of additional residential land. This policy
has proven successful, stimulated largely by the Planning Board -sponsored
relaxation of lot size and yard requirements in Hartwell Ave. are. The
following new firms have located in Lexington since 1966: Amicon, Hewlett-
Packard, Honeywell, Instrumentation Lab, and Weston-Rotek. Coca-Cola Co.
and Ginn have announced their intention to move to Lexington and several
other research and office operations of the same high caliber are now ne-
gotiating and may be expected to announce the move to Lexington in 1968. As
a general policy, until the available land already zoned for industry and
business is largely utilized, the Planning Board does not expect to support
proposals for additional rezoning unless there is assured immediate demand
which cannot be met by land already zoned non-residential; the rezoning
proposal is for a location and a type of use which will not be seriously
detrimental to the surrounding areas, either now or in the future; and is
not in a location which will put extra heavy demand on town services or
streets, compared to other areas which could be utilized.
The above policy is based on our conviction that zoning in itself
does not and should not be used to bolster the tax base. Rather it should
be used to control and guide the development of the town in a desirable
manner and according to long-range plans.
It is the belief of the Planning Board that Lexington should consider
what it can do to help alleviate the housing situation in core cities in
Metropolitan Boston. The Board is studying zoning amendments designed to
facilitate moderate -income housing. To the extent that such housing may be
provided by individual lots the Planning Board believes that such small lot
developments must be properly planned with adequate nearby open space and
that the continued building on small lots laid out long before the emergence
of modern concepts of decent housing is not the answer.
Green open spaces are one of the most desirable characteristics of
' Lexington. Their preservation is an important task and an urgent one, as
pressures for land development make it economically feasible to build on
lands considered unbuildable ten to fifteen years ago. The practical value
of open space, swamps and trees for control of climate, flooding and erosion
-4 -
as well as its aesthetic value, have been recognized by the Town and
resulted in votes authorizing open space acquisitions. Our ability to
negotiate and to purchase has been lagging behind the authorizations and
the Planning Board proposes that a full-time or part-time negotiator be
engaged to carry out the land acquisition program. It is believed that
otherwise many essential purchases will be lost or else the price will
increase beyond what the town is willing to pay. The saving due to the
early acquisition at a lower price will be much greater than the cost of
a negotiator.
The Urban Beautification Committee authorized on recommendation
of the Planning Board has met with town officials, landscape architects
and representatives of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development.
It has become obvious that Lexington is committed to increased expendi-
tures in the years to come, such as for the beautification of the center
or for the landscaping and the development of play fields in the former
Lincoln St. disposal area. The Committee is continuing its studies and
will present an interim report to the 1968 Annual Town Meeting.
The Long Range Study, a federally supported study carried out by the
consulting firm of Metcalf and Eddy, is expected to be completed in the
near future. The results and recommendations will be distributed to town
boards, town officers, town meeting members and will be available to other
interested citizens prior to the 1968 annual town meeting. Assisting
Metcalf & Eddy were citizen study committees: 1) Population and Housing,
2) Schools and Education, 3) Roads and Circulation, 4) Public Works,
5) Recreation, Conservation, Parks, 6) Historic Values and Tourism,
7) Economic Resources, Tax Base, 8) Municipal Services and Buildings,
and 9) Future Land Use. The Planning Board wishes to especially thank
Mr. Robert V. Whitman, General Chairman of the Citizens Planning Organi-
zation, and the members of the above committees who contributed material
essential to the study.
In 1967 the Planning Board held 43 meetings, 1 public information
meeting and 25 advertised public hearings on zoning amendments and land
subdivisions. In addition to endorsing 53 plans requiring no public hear-
ing and approval, the Planning Board has approved 6 residential subdivisions
with 90 new lots and 1.35 miles of new streets. There are now 29 subdivi-
sions in Lexington in various stages of development and the construction
of streets and utilities in these subdivisions is secured by bonds and
bank deposits amounting to $601,500. It must be noted that while the
number of new house lots approved each year is not as large as 10-15 years
ago, there are many more problems connected with the approval and con-
struction of new subdivisions because they are frequently located on lands
by-passed years ago because of soil, drainage or legal problems.
In summation it can be stated that Lexington is a town of which its
residents can be justly proud, but continued planning and work are needed
to ensure that it remains a town worthy of this pride.
D
' Property
% Growth Population Persons per Adj.Tax Rate Value per
1955-65 1965 Sq. Mile '65 1965 1965 Capita
AVERAGE 46.0 30,200 3,100 31.05 32.90 7200
(Source: 1965 State Census and Mass. Taxpayers Assn., property value per capita
is derived by dividing the total personal and real estate valuation by 1965
population and is high for towns in which industry and business represent a
large segment of the total tax base.)
1
LEXINGTON
41.0
31,388
1,905
42.60
47.00
6100
Arlington
11.3
52,482
10,132
33.90
36.30
5400
Bedford
22.9
10,787
786
32.60
35.90
8000
Belmont
0.
28,794
6,273
22.50
23.60
8200
Burlington
272.7
19,473
1,645
31,50
40.50
6350
Dedham
24.1
261618
2,535
24.10
32.00
6200
Lincoln
51.3
4,463
307
26.40
32.10
10300
Needham
35.9
29,303
2,344
26.10
27.40
9650
Newton
2.3
88,514
4,945
34.40
37.90
7500
Norwood
37.6
28,978
2,768
30.00
,30.40
5700
Wakefield
15.6
25,571
3,479
28.70
29.10
6250
Waltham
14.0
57.134
4,604
33.00
34.00
6200
Wellesley
20.9
261297
2,617
25.50
28.40
9850
'
Westwood
Wilmington
43.0
62.2
12,123
15,261
1,087
893
31.50
37.00
36.00
34.00
7400
6450
Winchester
19.4
21,634
3,667
30.80
33.60
8100
Woburn
35.9
35,149
2,733
38.30
38.60
5000
AVERAGE 46.0 30,200 3,100 31.05 32.90 7200
(Source: 1965 State Census and Mass. Taxpayers Assn., property value per capita
is derived by dividing the total personal and real estate valuation by 1965
population and is high for towns in which industry and business represent a
large segment of the total tax base.)
1