Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
10 CJ <br />Pichette <br />& Ahern <br />Applica- <br />tion. <br />Rowland <br />Applica- <br />tion. <br />BOARD -OF APPEALS MEETING <br />MAY 1, 1931. <br />A regular meeting of the Board of Appeals was held <br />at the Selectmen's. Room, Town Office Building, at 8 P.M. <br />Messrs. Maddison, Baldrey, Glynn, Custance and Slocum <br />were present. The Secretary was also present. <br />Mr. Pichette of Pichette and Ahern whose application <br />for a public garage and filling station is being considered <br />by the Board, appeared and presented a plan of the proposed <br />garage with some changes made as suggested. The plan <br />presented showed a flat roof, and Mr. Baldrey ofjected to <br />the flat roof and made suggestions of various changes that <br />could be made.. He suggested instead of having all floor <br />space in a square block that perhaps something could be <br />worked out whereby cars could be parked in an open space,. <br />Mr. Pichette felt that was exactly what they wanted <br />to get away from. <br />Mr. Baldrey felt, however, that the cars could be <br />in:an enclosure like a rear yard. He stated that there <br />was a new garage in Harvard Square from which he could get <br />some suggestions. <br />After Mr. Pichette had retired, the Board voted on <br />the matter of the application of Pichette and Ahern to <br />reconsider same and on motion duly made and seconded, <br />action in relation to this matter at a meeting held March <br />20, 1931, was rescinded. <br />It was then voted that the Pichette and Ahern application <br />be laid upon the table until further information was re- <br />ceived. <br />A copy of the letter written by Frederick L. Emery, <br />Chairman of the Planning Board, to Mr. Ernest R. Rowland <br />was before the Board of Appeals. The letter advised - <br />Mm. Rowland to proceed to apply to the Board of Appeals, <br />and that they recommend that the Board of Appeals grant <br />him a non -conforming use suitable for his store.' <br />Mr. Glyhn explained that at the hearing held on <br />Mr. Rowland's petition, everyone in that section was in <br />favor of rrranting the petition. The Planning Board nee <br />not in favor of establishing business zones fof a small <br />area and they feel that that particular section has not <br />yet been developed so that it could be decided where the <br />future business will be, especially when the roads are <br />being considered connecting Winchester and Lexington. <br />Therefor, they felt that if the Board of Appeals desired <br />to give Mr. Rowland permission to move back his store <br />and enlarge it that the premises could still be held in <br />