1935-05-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

165 Chairman asked him if he would have only one front door and he replied that he would, and only one heater. The Chairman asked if there were any other two family houses in the vicinity, and he said that there were not, Mr, ulynn asked Mr. Cosgrove if the Board granted him a permit to alter the house for his family's use if he would be satisfied and he said that he would and that he would not want strangers in the house. He could have rented the house before but he did not. The Chairman read a card received from Miss Willa Kilcup stating that she had no objection to the granting of the permit. No persons appeared in opposition.and the hearing was declared closed at 8:00 P. M. Mr. Glynn stated that Mr. Cosgrove talked to him about the matter and he advised Mr. ''osgrove that he thought the case was worth putting before the Board of Appeals. He thought it was a question as to whether or not it would be worth while to grant the permit with the provision that the house be occupied by the present occupant and his son. It was voted to grant the permit in the following form: BOARD OF APPEALS PERMIT The Board of Appeals, acting under general Laws, Chapter 40, Sec. 27, having received a written petition addressed to it by William J. Cosgrove, a copy of which is hereto annexed, ' held a public hearing thereon of which notice was mailed to the petitioner and to the owners of all property deemed by the Board to be affected thereby as they appgear on the most recent tax list and also advertised in the ear Minute-Man, a newspaper published in Lexington, which hearing was held in the Jelectmen's xoom, in the Town Office Building on the 8th day of May, 1936. All of the members of the Board of Appeals were present at the hearing. A certificate of notice is hereto annexed. At this hearing evidence was offered on behalf of the petitioner tending to show: That the house at 30 Grove Street was occupied by two families prior to 1919, and there are still two kitchens in the house; that the petitioner now desires to rent a portion of the house to his son. No persons appeared in opposition. At the close of the hearing, the Board in private session on May 8th, 1936, gavd consideration to the subject of the pe- tition and voted unanimously in favor of the following findings: 1. That in its judgment the public convenience and welfare will be substantially served by the making of the exception re- quested. 2. That the exception requested will not tend to impair the status of the neighborhood. 3. That the exception requested will be in harmony with ' the general purposes and intent of the regulations in the Lexington Zoning By-law.