Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1931-10-02BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING October 2, 1931, The Board of Appeals held a meeting at the Town Office Building, October 2, 1:331, at 8 P.M. Messrs. Maddison, Baldrey, Glynn, Slocum and Custance were present, The Secretary was also present. Hearing was declared open upon the application of Mary A. McNamara of aomerville for permission to erect a show and salesroom for plants and flowers grown in greenhouses on Valley Road. Mr. McNamara appeared in her interest. The Clerk read the notice of the hearing. Mr. McNamara was requested to outline what he had in mind. He stated that it was his intention to build what is called a flower pot 50 to 75 to 100 feet from the road; also a small conservatory to show off various flowers. His greenhouses are where no one can see them on Valley Road. He stated that since he built these greenhouses on Valley Road he petitioned for electric lights and three lights have been placed there. He put in 600 feet of water pipe and thereby cut down the insurance rate of the people on the street. He also petitioned for the widening of Valley Road and will have this in for the March town meeting. He felt that he was a benefactor to the neighborhood. The Chairman requested his plans for the Flower Pot, but he stated that he did not bring them. He explained, however, that there was only one other Flower Pbt similar to that which he intended to build and that was in Los Angeles, California. This structure was to be of wood standing ten feet high in the shape of a flower pot with a wooden flower on the top of it which would be painted. In reference to the location of the conservatory, he stated that he would place it back 50 to 75 to 100 feet from the road; it would be run along the road that is there on the property, and would face south. The entrance would be into the flower pot and then into the conservatory from that. The flower pot would be about 14 feet in diameter and the conservatory 15 feet wide on the outside. No other persons sp6ke in favor of the petition. Mr. Fred Woodford of 189 Bedford Street inquired if there was to be anything else beside flowers sold there. He was informed that there were to be plants and cut flowers and nothing else. Dr. Harry B. Osgood inquired if the applicant still owned 'the land back where the greenhouses are. Mr. McNamara ,4 2 .explained that the owners are in business with him. Dr. Osgood explained that his house was across from where this building was intended to be built and only today he saw a car trying to enter the road on which the building is to be built and there were two or three cars back of that one. The sidewalk is full of children and this car Came very close to two or three of the children. This is a school zone and the cars travel along there very fast as the streetiis on a level. There have been some serious accidents in that locality on Sundays and holidays as the traffic is very congested. He also called attention to the incline that cars would have to go up into this property and felt that it was five or six feet above the level of the street. Of course they might lower the driveway but the entrance would be an added danger in a school zone. Mr. McNamara took exceptions to the height from the street. Dr. Osgood questioned whether the petitioner intended to be open on Sunday, and he replied that he did not. Mr. Leon Burt of 25 Harding Road inquired if the project was not successful what would become of the business. He was informed that the permit was only granted for one year and to the present petitioner. Mr. McNamara pointed out on the map the location of the right of way which he explained belongs to George and Charles Smith but he has a right of way over it. Mr. Leon Burt of 25 Harding Road stated that he agreed with Dr. Osgood that there was a lot of travel on that road and there was quite a grade from the level of the street to these lots, and that anything that would make it more dangerous would be a bad proposition. mr.-D. H. Freeman of 187 Bedford Street understood that this was strictly a residential district. Mr. William H. Driscoll of 54 Harding noad stated that he moved up here from Somerville having understood that this town had an iron bound zoning law. He is in the transportation business running 18 trucks and he considered the traffic on Bedford Street dangerous. He had children 'and was opposed to business in a residential district. Mr. William D. Hagerty stated that he came here two years ago and lives justupposite the Dailey house. lie had -`two children going to shhool and will have another onetnext year. He was opposed inasmuch as any day of the week there was a lot of traffic there. Mr. Leon C. Burt stated that most of the people in that section came here from Somerville and they like Lexington because it is zoned and they did not expect at this early 7 113 date to -have thezoninglaws changed. Mr. Frederick C. Woodfoed of 189 Bedford Street felt that if a sketch was presented, they might know what is intended. He objected because Mr. McNamara did not have anything definite. He had two children and felt that they would need two police officers inttead of one, as they now have, if this petition were allowed. Mr. Glynn questioned Mr. McNamara and he explained that he had a forty foot right of way which comes over the property down to Bedford Street. It was laid out for a street from Bedford Street to Vaille Avenue. He was to erect the house on his bwn land but was to use this driveway. The right of way runs 275 feet back and is 40 feet wide. Mrs. Harry B. Osgood also voiced her objection. The hearing was declared closed. Mr. Robert P. Trask, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen, came before the Board and explained to them that at the meeting of the Selectmen Tuesday night the Board voted to advise the Town Counsel to bring suit against Joseph V. and Harry F. Boinay for violation .of the Zoning Law. The Selectmen received a letter since that meeting from Joseph V. Boinay of Pleasant Street, asking for permission to put up a small building in place of the roadside stand he now has. • Mr. Trask desired to get the opinion of the Board as to whether they felt the town should proceed against the owner and occupant of this property. The Board of appeals informed Mr. Trask that Mr. Boinay did not conform to the conditions of the permit granted to him, also that when the permit had expired he did not make application to renew same, and they felt that the Selectmen should proceed against Mr. Boinay. The Board considered the application of Finlay Mclsaac to subdivide lots on Charles Street and voted to pass the following order: The Board of Appeals, acting under General_Laws Chapter 40, sec. 27, having received a written petition addressed to it by Finlay ilcIsaac 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 Townsman, a newspaper published in Lexington which hearing was held in the Selectmen's Room, in the Town Office Building on September 10, 1931. All 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 is the owner of three lots of land on Charles Street between Cary Street and 1 F. 4 land of Boice each lot having a frontage of thirty (30) feet on Charles Street with a depth of ninety (90) feet, and he was desirous of splitting up the lot adjoining_; that on which his house is located so that fifteen (15) feet frontage would be included in lot on which his house is located and the other half become a part of the lot next to Boice which would make two lots with a forty-five (45) foot frontage each and an area of 4050 feet each; that it is his intention to build a house on a forty-five (45) foot frontage adjoining land of Boice; it was his desire to build said house nearer the street than permissable under the Zoning Law to conform with the houses on each side. Evidence was offered on behalf of citizens opposing the granting of the said petition tending to show No evidence was offered: At the close of the hearing the Board in private session at a meeting held October 2, 1931, gave consideration to the subject of the petition and voted unanimously in favor of the following findings: 1. That in welfare will not of the exception 2. That the impair the status its judgment the public convenience and be substantially served by the making requested. exception requested will tend to of the neighborhood. 3. That the exception requested will not be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the regulations in the Lexington Zoning By-law. 4. That the enforcement of the Lexington Zoning By-law as to the locus in question would not involve practical difficulty and unneccessary hardship and the relief requested may not be granted without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of such Lexington Zoning By-law. Pursuant to the said findings, the Board hereby denies the said petition of Finlay Mcisaac. The Board hereby makes a detailed record of. all its proceedings 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 open to public inspection and that notice of this decision shall be mailed forthwith to each party in interest. 173 -BOARD OF APPEALS OF LEXINGTON (Appointed under O. L. Ch. 40, sec. 27) Arthur N. Maddison C. Edward Glynn Roland W. Baldrey Curlys L. Slocum Theodore A. Custance. I, Roland W. Baldrey, Clerk of the Board of Al -peals of Lexington, appointed under General Laws, Chapter 40, section 27, hereby certify that I sent by registered mail on the 26th day of August, 1931 to Carl W. Johanson Tr., William Welsh, Mary Murphy, Justin Shea, Catherine C. tidhalen • Ragna H. Goodmansen, Charles H. Marsolais, Pasquale Hermina LuongoJohn and Isabel Harwood, Nora M. Rome,Agnes Wennberg, Fannie L. Mallet, Maria J. Cassidy, Francis P. Stymest, Patrick J. Heaney, Mary Andresen, Isabell Yeates, Mary 0. Sousa, Addie C. Cook, Finlay Mcisaac, Manual A. & Maria C. Maderios, Charles D. MacGillivray, Margaret C. Healey, Mary E. Boyce, Eldred F. Cheney, Roy A. Cook, Francis Dailey, Edward C. Farren, Allen J. MacGilvary, Jennie C. Parker, Mattie L. Townsend, Frank J. & Mary E. T Thompson, Jeremiah J. McCarthy and Alfred Tremblay Trs., Horace & Eva M. Jackson, Olaf W. & Sophia W. Vannberg, Arvilla Derrah, Euphemia & John C. Cairns, John H. Stanley, and also published in the Lexington Townsman, on August 27, 1931, a'notice of which the following is a true copy. Roland W. Baldrey Clerk, Board of Appeals August 25, 1931. Lexington Board of Zoning Appeals Town Office Building Lexington, Mass. Gentlemen: The undersigned hereby petition the Lexington Board of Appeals, appointed under General Laws, Chapter 40, Section 27, to vary the application of section 9 of the Lexington Zoning By-law with respect to the premises at No. 38 Charles Street owned by Finlay Mclsaac of Lexington by permitting the following: to build on lot 28, and to add half of lot 29 to lot 28, and the other half of lot 29 to lot 30 which is 38 Charles Street. Finlay McIsaac 38 Charles St., Lexington, Mass. -N 0 T I -C E Lexington Board of Zoning Appeals. Notice is hereby given that the Board of Appeals of Lexington appointed under General Laws, Chapter 40, Section 27, will give a hearing in the Selectmen's Room, Town Office Building on the 10th day of September, 1931, at 8 o'clock P.M., on the petition of Finlay McIsaac of 38 Charles Street,-exington, that the Board vary the application of section 9 of the Lexington Zoning By-law by permitting the following: The construction of a building on lot 28, and dividing of lot 29, one-half to be added to lot 28 and the other half to lot 30, these lots being 38 Charles Street, Lexington, Mass. Arthur N. Maddison Chairman, Board of Appeals. The Board considered the application of Mary A. McNamara and voted to pass the following order: The Board of Appeals, acting under General Laws Chapter 40, sec. 27, having received a written petition addressed to it by Mary A. McNamara 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 Times Minute -Man a newspaper publiehed in Lexington which hearing was held in the Select- men's Room, in the Town Office Building on October 2, 1931. All members of the Board of Appeals were present at the haring. A certificate of notice is hereto annexed. At this hearing evidence was offered on behalf of the petitioner tending to show: .that he, being the husband of Mary A. McNamara, petitioner, had greenhouses on the Valley Road side of his property which extends from Valley Road to Bedford Street and was desirous of constructing a show room for the sale of flowers and plants grown in his greenhouses; that he desired to construct such building in the shape of a flower pot fourteen (14)• feet in diameter with a conservatory adjoihing, about seventy-five (75) feet by fifteen (15) feet on Bedford Street. fronting oma. his lot seventy-five (755 io one hundred feet from the street line, using a right of way for entrance thereto. Evidence was Offered on behalf of citizens opposing • the granting of the said petition tending to show; that the proposed use was a definite business in an R. 1 District and that Bedford Street in front of the location is in a school zone with very heavy traffic which would tend to make it a very dangerous place for cars to enter and leave the right of way. 117 At the close of the hearing the Board in private session gave consideration to the subject of the petition and voted unanimously in favor of the following findings: 1. That in its judgment the public convenience and welfare will not be substantially 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 be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the regulations in the Lexington Zoning By-law. 4. That the enforcement of the Lexington Zoning By-law as to the locus in question would not involve practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship and the relief requested may not be granted without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of such Lexington Zoning By-law. Pursuant to the said findings, the Board hereby denies the said petition of Mary McNamara. The Board hereby makes a detailed record of all its proceedings 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 open to public inspection and that notice of this decision shall be mailed forthwith to each party in interest. BOARD OF APPEALS OF LEXINGTON. (Appointed under G. L. Ch. 40, Sec. 27.) Arthur N. Maddison C. Edward Glynn Roland W. Baldrey Curlys L. Slocum Theodore A. Custance. I, Roland W. Baldrey, Clerk of the Board of Appeals of Lexington, appointed under General Laws, Chapter 40, section 27, hereby certify that I sent by registered mail on the 17th day of September, 1931 to Charles E. Wheeler, Harriett W. Smith, Frank Johnson et al, Lilla P. Brackett & Marjorie M. Dempsey, Standard Oil Co. of N. Y., Eugene E. Loupret, Frederick C. & Katherine T. titoodford, Walter J. &'Mabel A. Bryant Daniel H.Ereenan, Lucius C. & Evelyn N. Fairchild, Alice J. Hagerty, Herbert F. Shannon, Hallie C. Blake, Mary E. Shea, Althea B. Woodman, Jeremiah T. & Mary E. Sanborn, Edmund D. & Mona H. Ayres, Palmyra P. Cabeciras, Ethel G. Hamilton, Doris & Mary E. nendrick, Ethel 8 Osgood, George F. Smith Charles F. Smith, Alexander Parks, John J. Brady, Charles Vii. Dempsey, Cornelia Bierenbroodspot, Dorothy T. Taylor Gdn., Eliot F. Kendall, David J. Harrigan, Lexington Coal Co., Howard E. Custance, Doria M. Johnson, Hilda Andreson, Edwin B. Worthen, Alan Liortgage Co., Leon C. & Grace L. Burt, Grace M. VanSteenburgh, Kathryn H. Morris., Hallie C. & Lulu M. Blake, Joseph L. VanSteenburgh, Waverly Co-operative Bank, Constantino Alberto, Victoria G. Driscoll, Town of Lexington School Dept., and'aiso published in the Lexington Tines -Minute Man on Sept. 18, 1931, a notice of which the following is a true copy. Roland W. Baldrey _ Clerk, Board of Appeals Sept. 11, 1931. Lexington Board of Zoning Appeals Town Office Building Lexington, Mass. Gentlemen: The undersigned hereby petition the Lexington Board of Appeals, appointed tinder General Laws, Chapter 40, Section 27, to vary the application of Section of the Lexington Zoning By-law with respect to the premises at No. Bedford Street, owned by Mary A. McNamara of Somerville by permitting the following: To erect a show room on the premises for the sale of flowers and plants grown in greenhouses on Valley Road, Lexington. Mary A. McNamara (Signature) Somerville (Address) NOTICE Lexington Board of Zoning Appeals. The Board of Appeals will hold a hearing on the matter of varying the application of the Zoning Law by permitting the erection of a show room on the premises.on Bedford Street owned by Mary A. M Namara for the sale of flowers and plants grown in greenhouses located on Valley Road, under Section 9 of the Lexington Zoning By-law and in accordance with Chapter 133 of the Acts of 1924. The hearing will be held on October 2, 1931 at 8 P.M. in the Selectments Room, Town Office Building. j.. Arthur N. J Iaddi son Chairman, Board of Appeals. 1 9 The' meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.M. A true record, Attest: