1931-06-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

131 BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING JUNE 26, 1931. A meeting of the Board of Appeals was held in the Selectmen's Room, Town Office Building at 8 P.M. Messrs. Maddison, Custance, Slocum•and Glynn were present. The meeting was called to order at 8 P.M. by Chairman Maddison. C. E. Glynn acted as Clerk pro - tem. On the petition of Frank Dias for a roadside stand on the premises owned by Isabella Fardy on Waltham Street, near Concord Avenue, it was moved and unanimously voted that same be denied. On the petition of Mary A. Whelan for a tea room and accommodations for tourists at 259 Bedford Street, it was moved and unanimously voted that same be granted for a term of 2 years beginning July 1, 1931, provided the business is conducted by said Mary A. Whelan and on the further proviso that no additions or structural alterations are to be made to or in the premises. The Board voted to pass the following order refusing permission to Frank Dias to operate a roadside stand. The Board of Appeals, acting under General Laws Chapter 40, sec. 27, having received a written petition addressed to it by Frank Dias, Concord Avenue, Lexington, 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 Dias local tax list, and also advertised in the Lexington order. Times -Minute Man, a newspaper published in Lexington, Which hearing was held in the Selectmen's Room in the Town Office Building on the 5th day of June, 1931 at 8:15 o'clock P.M. A majority of the members of the Board of Appeals were present at the hearing. After hearing the widence offered by`the petitioners andsuch other evidence as was offered, the Board in private session at a meeting held June 26, 1931, gave consideration to the subject of the petition and a majority of the Board voted that in its judgment the public convenience and welfare will not be substantially served by the use of the premises described in the petition and that such use may tend to impair the status of the neighborhood.