1938-09-16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

227 He said this was not a personal protest but he did not want any depreciation in the value of his real estate. The Chair- man Pro -tem asked if he felt that there would be a deprecia- tion. Mr. Daley said he felt it would not be an asset, but knowing Mr. Lawrence for so long, he was reluctant to oppose the petition. He asked if this would benefit the town as a whole. Mr. Lawrence thought that that corner was going to develop as a business corner. He said his house was almost as near as the Daley house. The Chairman Pro -tem asked Mr. Lawrence if he had thought of putting up a building and he said that he had not as he did not know how well the business would go. The Chairman Pro -tem informed the group that a letter had been received from the West Lexington Civic Improvement Association stating that it was opposed to the granting of the petition. Mr. and Mrs. Charles E. Teeter, Jr. of 463 Concord Ave. were present. Mr. Teeter said that he appreciated Mr. Lawrence's position and was sorry that he must oppose the petition from the point of view of its effect on the section as a whole and also from his own personal position. He said he had a piece of land between Concord Ave. and the new highway and hoped to sell part of it. He had remodelled an old house and they hoped that houses of a desirable type would be built on the remainder of the land, and then the town would get revenue because of taxes. Most people would enter his land from Concord Avenue and if there are a lot of trailers there, he thought the impression would be un- favorable. The Chairman Pro -tem read a letter received from one Lily C. Johanson representing the Cutler Farm on Concord Ave., opposing the petition. No other persons wishing to be heard, the hearing was declared closed at 8:17 P. M. and the people retired. The records of the meeting held on September 9th were declared approved. The Board in private session considered the application of Viarren B. Lawrence and felt that an activity or develop- ment of the kind might very easily lead to unsightly premises which would depreciate the value of any residential property and that it would not be consistent with its previous decisions that garages receiving permits to operate should not store cars or other equipment outside of their buildings. Upon motion of Mr. Robbins, seconded by £r. Ferguson, it was unanimously voted to deny the petition in the following form: