Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1936-12-18245 BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING December 18, 1936 A meeting of the Board of Appeals was held in the Selectmen's Room, Town Office Building, at 8:00 o'clock P. M, Chairman Maddison and Messrs. Kimball, Glynn, Ferguson, and Robbins were present. The Secretary was also present. At 8:00 o'clock P. M. hearing was declared open upon the petition of Harry E. Johnson for permission to use Lot #37, Cary Street, Lexington, for the construction and main- tenance of a house. the notice of the hearing was read by the Clerk, Mr. Robbins. Mr. Harry E. Johnson appeared in favor of the granting of the petition. Mr. Johnson stated that Lot #37 had a front- age of seventy-two feet, and said that he wanted to build a house on the lot. The Chairman asked Mr. Johnson what reason he had for coming to the Board of Appeals on the matter, and asked if it was topographically impossible to build on the lot as it was. Mr. Johnson stated that the people next door had a lot with a frontage of only seventy-two feet, and he gave them three ' feet from his lot. Miss Diary E. Blight of 5 Cary Street stated that her lot called for a frontage of seventy-five feet, and that she had made Johnson give her that much. Mr. Glynn asked Johnson how many lots he had in all, and he said that he owned twenty-three lots. Mr. Glynn asked if Johnson had divided the land him- self, and if all lots were supposed to have $ontages of seventy-five feet each, and he replied in the affirmative. Johnson said that the lot in question had 9500 sq. ft, even though it had only a 72' frontage. He said that the sub -divi- sion was made about two years aggo. Mr. Glynn asked if Lot #37 now had a frontage of seventy-five feet, and if he wantedia take three feet of it and give it to Miss Blight, and he replied in the affirmative. Mr. Ferguson asked what the frontage was on the lot on the other side of Lot #37. Johnson said that it would have had a frontage of only seventy-two feet, but he faced it on another street. Johnson said that a Mr. Selwyn was the engineer, and that he came from Belmont. Mr. Fred Longbottom, the building Inspector, said that the development was laid out by Selwyn and that there was plenty of room for seventy-five foot frontage lots to have been laid out. He said that if Mrs. Minnie S. May would sell Johnson three feet, the matter would be straightened out satisfactorily. He ' said that Mrs. May told him that she would be willing to sell a three foot strip of land to Johnson. No other persons appeared in favor of granting the petition. 246 t" Mrs. John A. May, daughter-in-law of Mrs. Minnie May, , stated that she asked Mrs. May about selling Johnson the three foot strip, and she said that Johnson never asked her to sell any of her land. Lir. Alfred Tropeano said that he talked with the elder Mrs. May today and she had informed him that Johnson never asked her about selling any of her land. his brother, Tvar Johnson, did mention it, but no price was mentioned. Johnson wanted to buy a corner five feet wide and five feet deep, only a very small piece. Tropeano said that Mrs. May was willing to sell the necessary three foot strip right back to the end of the lot upon the provision that Johnson's garage would not be built on her side. jhe only discussion that she had on the matter was with Ivar Johnson, who said that his brother wanted to buy a small fan -shaped piece of land in order to have the necessary frontage. The Chairman asked Johnson if he remembered that. He replied that he remembered trying, and his brother trying, , to buy the land, and that neither was successful. The Chair- man asked if he tried to purchase only a small fan -shaped piece of land, or a three foot strip of land back to the end of the lot. !Johnson said that Mrs. Nay had a mortgage on the property, and that the mortgagee was not willing to sell any of her land, as he called on the bank. Tropeano said that there was no mortgage on the property. ' He said that Mrs. May was a woman of substantial means. The Chairman asked what bank Johnson went to about buying the strip, and he'said that it was his brother who tried, and he did not know what'one it was. The Chairman asked Johnson if he sold the lot to Mrs. May, and he said that he did. the Chairman asked Johnson if he had ever tried himself to purchase a piece extending the length of the lot or simply a small piece in the front. Johnson said that he talked with Mrs. May on the matter early last summer, and that he asked her for three feet. The Chair- man asked him how far back this three foot strip was to extend, and Johnson said that that was not mentioned. the Lhairman asked him if Mrs. May said that she was not interested, or if she merely acted that way. Johnson said that Mrs. May told him she was not interested, and that no price was mentioned, as she was not interested. Mrs. John A. May said that she was present at the time Johnson talked.with her mother-in-law. She told him that she understood that he had to have a piece of her land, and John- son said that all he wanted was a little piece. Mrs. May said that she of course would not sell a little piece, just a corner such as he wanted. She would like to see a house built on the lot. Johnson never again applied to Mrs. May regarding the matter. The Chairman asked Johnson if Mrs. May's statements ' refreshed his memory, and if her mother-in-law's conversation with him was substantially as stated, and he said that he could not remember. He said that he talked with Mrs. May several times, and also asked the ;Arlington Five Cents Savings Bank for a three foot strip of land, and they wanted 42,0009 for it. The Chairman said that Johnson stated that he had 247 at least two conversations with Mrs,. May, and her daughter-in- law said that he talked with her.only once, and asked if Mrs. May, Jr. was not telling the truth. He did not answer. The Chairman asked if Mrs. May, Jr. was present when the conversation took place, and he replied in the affirmative. Johnson said that the mistake was the engineer's, and not his. He said he would appreciate it if the Board would grant his petition. Mr. John T. Cosgrove, the Town Engineer, said that the trouble all started with inaccuracies in engineering. He said that since the trouble started, at least two engineers had worked on the plans, and he himself had looked them over, and found no two plans alike. He said that no one could straighten them out as they are now. He said that most of the trouble was with the layout of the streets. The original Board of Survey Flans that are on file are obsolete. Mrs. May, Jr. said that the matter had been discussed previously at a Selectmen's Meeting, and the Selectmen asked him what he was going to do, and he said that he would try to purchase the three feet from Mrs. May, Sr. The hearing was declared closed at 8:30 P. M., and the people retired. The Building Inspector, the Town Engineer, and. the Supt. ' of Public Works were present at the discussion of the matter. Mr. Longobttom stated that he talked with Mrs. May, who said she was willing to sell three feet extending to the rear of the lot, but that Johnson wanted to take on17 the three feet on the front. Upon motion of Mr. Ferguson, seconded by Mr. ulynn, it was voted to deny the petition in the following form: The Board of Appeals, acting under General Laws, Chapter 40, sec. 27, having received a written petition addressed to it by Harry E. Johnson, 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 appear on the most recent local tax list, and also advertised in the Lexington Minute - Man, a newspaper published in Lexington, which hearing was held in the selectmen's noom, in the Town Office 'wilding on December 18, 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 he was the owner of Lot #37, Cary Street, and owing to an error on the part of his engineer showing a layout of ' this and adjoining lots, he had sold the adjoining lot #38, 248 ►-c which really had only about 72' frontage, as having 751 ' frontage; that he desired to give the adjoining owner a sufficient amount of land from Lot 7#37 to make up for the Oil error, which would leave Lot #37 with a frontage of 71' 11 No evidence was offered opposing the grantfng of the petition. At the close of the hearing the Board in private session on December 18th, 1936 gave consideration to the subject of the petition, and inasmuch as Mr.,Johnson did not seem to the Board to have made every effort to obtain additional land on the other side of the lot so that Lot #37 would then have a 751 frontage, the Board voted unanimously in favor of the following findings: 1. That in its judgment the public convenience and welfare will not be substantiallg'served by the making of the exception requested. 2. That the exception requested will tend to impair the, status of the neighborhood. 3. That the exception requested will not 4De in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the regulations in the Lexington Toning By-law. 4. That the enforcement of the Lexington coning By-law as to the locus in question would not involve practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship and the re?ief requested may not be granted without substantially derogating from -the intent and purpose of such Lexington,Loning By-law, and'with- ' out substantial detriment to the public good. Pursuant to the said findings, the Board hereby denies the said petition of Harry E. Johnson for permission to use Lot #37, Cary street, for the construction and maintenance of a house, with frontage of less than 75 feet. The Board hereby makes a detailed record of all its pro- ceedings relative to such petition and hereby sets forth that the reasons for its decision are its,findings hereinbefore set forth and the testimony presented at the said hearing, including that herein summarized, and directs that this record immediately following this decision shall be filed in the office of the Town Clerk of Lexington and shall be a public record and that notice of this decision shall be mailed forth- with to each party in interest. BOARD OF APPEALS OF LEXINGTON. (Appointed under G.L.Ch.40, sec. 27) A. N. Maddison Edward W. Kimball C F ward Tian Charles -01. Ferguson Howard W. Robbins I. Howard W. Robbins, Clerk of the Board of Appeals of Lexington, appointed under General Laws, Chapter 40, Section 27, hereby certify that I sent by postage certificate of mailing on the 28th day of November, 1936, to Francis and Mary Matulaitis, Edward I. and Meyer Berman, Antonio and Mary I;hella, Aristides A. Stathopoulos, Samuel Smorack, Esther Berman, Annie Bornstein, David H. Govenar, Tr., Nellie H. Viano, Walter H. Lennon, Arlington Five Cents Savings Bank, Pasquale and Hermina Luongo, Catherine C. VYhalen, Medora R. Crosby, Ragna H. Goodmansen, Hugh Wyllie, Catherine Irwin'. Anna Hellman, John J•. and Catherine Coleman, Arthur W,. Johnson, Catherine J. and Margaret R. Mc'saac, Karl and Mary Schmid, John J. and Eileen McCarron, Thomas and Honora Sullivan, Watertown Co-op. Bank, Blackstone Savings Bank, Helen Bloustein; Mary A. and Pasquale Tarrazzana, Joseph Lassof, et als, Anna L'aron, Gertrude Govenar, Leo A. & Eva Boynton, Emil Zacharias and hartha C., William J. Roberts and Julia M., Joseph Bs�lanoff, et al, manna Goloboy, Helen M. and Thomas E. Ahern, Ida F. Landon, Mary A. Shea, Mary and Anna Canty, Minnie S. May, Lexington Co-op. Bank, Norman C. and Howard B. Fleming, Victor B. & Ida P. Erickson, Cora E. Davies, Bernard C, and Melita M. Nickerson, William T. and Florence E. McCarthy, Esther R. M. Hedburg, Ivar Johnson, Mary Blight, Allan J. MacGillivray, Jennie C. Parker, Frank J. and Mary E. Thompson, Mary E. Boyce, Margaret G. Healey, James W. and xlice P. Lowry, Fannie L. Mallett, Mary 0. Sousa., Francis P. Stymest, and Harry E. Johnson, and also advertised in the Lexington Mingte-Nan on November 25th, 1936, a notice of which the following is a true copy. Howard W. Robbins Clerk, Board of Appeals November 24, 1936. Lexington Board of Zoning Appeals Town Office Building Lexington, Mass. Gentlemen; The undersigned hereby petitions the Lexington Board of Appeals, appointed under General Laws, Chapter 40 Section 27, to vary the application of section 9 (B) of the Lexington Zoning By-law with respect to thepremises at lot #37, Cary Street, owned by Harry E. Johnson of Arlington, Mass. by Per- mitting the following: The use of the lot for the construc- tion and maintenance of a house. Harry E. Johnson Signature 50 Brighton St. Belmont, Mass.