1924-02-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Fab. 26s 19,04. Joint Meeting Planning board & Conference Committee. The second meeting of the Joint Committee met at Cary hall on Tuesday evening, Feb. 26, at 8 o'clock, there being -present Messrs. Emery, L.S. & W,D .Brown, Kilgour, Tladman, Harrington, Cutler, McIntosh and Harrod; Ur. Duffy being present the latter past of the time. The meetingcoming to 6rder, Mr. Wadmen reads a draft of a com- plete now set of by-laws he hasdrawn up and in which only on.e,gen- eral residential section In provided;'the various neighborhoods be- ing permitted to settle their own status by vote. The Chaiman points out that this cannot be done under the Zoning ordinances of the Statutes After an informal expression of feeling on the part of the mem- bars, as vote is taken on the question: " Do you favor a.dhereing to the scheme already proposed by the Planning board of separate single residence and two family residence areas a`s opposed to one general residence area to include both? " Messrs. Wadman.. Kilgour,.Ha:rrington and Harrodvoted, in the negative and Cutler, McIntosh, L.S.browx, W.D.Brown and Emery in the affirm- Ative An to UANUFACTURING Mr, Kilgour proposes that it be permitted continuously along both .sides of the Railroad tracks from the Arl- ington to the Bedford town lines. ,On being put to vote this is favored by Messrs. wadman,`Kilgour, . Harrington and Harrod and opposed by Messrs. Cutler,'MaIxtesh, L.S.,brown, W.D.Brown and Emery. As the minority members refuse to entertain any modification of their proposals as.to'theme two fundamental considerations it would appear that any hope entertained of united action must be given up and majority and minority reports be submitted instead* Mr. McIntosh urges,,however, that the Committee stick together swhile longer and in consequence the balance of the $y -laws are gone over. As to BUSINESS AREAS there would appear to be ne,great divergence of opinion-. The "IUHT AND ARi;A Regulations will prove acceptable when made to conform to the Building Laws, save that the latter shall provide ' that no lot shall have a frontage of -less than 50 feet. Yr. McIntosh suggests that BUSINESS AREAS ON STREET INTER&r CTIONS be required to have set back of from 10 to 20 feott.