1946-07-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

m ' published in Lexington, which hearing was held in the Select- men's Room, in the Town Office Building on the twenty-fifth day of July, 1946• Three regular and two associate 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 Mr. Cataldo wished to erect a display counter, covered by an awning, attached to the house at the corner of Lowell and Woburn Streets; slid counter running along the front of the house, 12 feet on the front of the house and 10 feet along the Woburn Street side, on the premises owned by Howard M. Munroe; that he wished to sell products grown on the premises; the stand would be operated between 10:00 A.M. and 9:00 P.M., seven days a week, during the months that the outside stand could be operated; that sufficient space had been provided so that it would not be necessary for cars to park on the street while patronizing the stand; that there,would be no flood lights and only such illumination as necessary to properly illuminate the counter. Three persons spoke in favor of granting the petition. Letter was received from Howard M. Munroe, owner of the property, opposing the issuing of a permit for a stand on the above location. No reason for his opposition was given in the letter. , At the close of the hearing the Board in private session July 25, 1946, gave consideration to the subject of the petition and voted unanimously in favor of the following fifldings: 1. That in its judgment the public convenience and welfare will be substantially served by the making of the exception requested. 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 Lex- ington Zoning By-law. 4. That owing to conditions especially affecting the said parcel but not affecting generally the Zoning district in which it is located, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Lexington Zoning By-law as to the locus in question would involve substantial hardship to the petitioner and that desirable relief may be granted without substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of such Lexington Zoning By-law. l