HomeMy WebLinkAbout1932-02-161 a
BOARD OF APPEAL S MEET
FEB. 162 1932.
A meeting of the Board of Appeals was held in the
Town Office,Building at 7:30 P.M. Messrs.Maddison, Baldrey,
(locum and Custance were present.
Joint hearing of the Board of Appeals and Board of
Selectmen on the application of Frank W. rerkins for
permission to install gasoline tanks with a cpabity of
2000 gallons at his premises #536-542 Mass. Avenue, Lexington,
was declared open.
The Chairman read the notice of the Board of Selectmn,
and the notice of the Board of Appeals was read by the Clekk.
Judge Pierre Y orthr�p represented Mr. Perkins, the
applicant. He stated that the petition as originally set
forth states that it was brought under section 9 of the
Zoning Law, but he wished to call attention to Sgction 8
which refers to accessory use. He called attention to the
previous hearings had before the Board of Selectmen and
the denial of the former petitions. He called attention
to the ruling of the Board of Selectmen in allowing the use
of the premises for a repair shop. He went back to 1812
when the Russell family built the premises and used it as
a blacksmith shop and general repair of vehicles. He
felt that automobiles have now taken the place of other
vehicles and that it was proper that this shop should be
used now for the repair of automobiles and he felt that
business was allowed under the General Laws on these
premises under the non -conforming use of Section 10.
He stated that the use granted by the Selectmen for this
property did not includd a gasoline permit. He stated
that Mr. Perkins has been in the repair business for 27
.years and that this was his sole occupation and he was a
disabled war veteran. He stated that he has harried
on a garage and repair business at the corner of Oak Street,
-Lie stated that Mr. Perkins did not want a filling station alone,
he merely wanted it in conjunction with the repair business,
lie had in mind putting in three pumps. He intended to move
his house back and tear down one of the buildings that now
stands to the right of the lot.
Judge Northrup also called attention to the fact that
there was not another place to purchase gasoline on the.
right hand side of the street from Viano's down to -the
Arlington line, and he felt that there was notbetter place
for gasoline on the fight hand side of the street than
this location. He felt that persons do not want to cross
the street and usually wait until they find a statign on
the right hand side. He presented a chart showing the
business operated in this sect`on on both sides of the
street. On the left hand side he called attention -to the
First National Store, then two doors down the Ohemberlabi
house which advertises tourists, then across the street
there is a large billboard also another tourists place and
the Cottage Hospital then there is a residence and Mr.
Perkins' premises. Below is the printing shop on the
other corner of Oak Street. On the other side there is
the Old Paint Shop that was used for business, and then
Mr. Cummings at his premises operates a milk business.
He felt, therefore, that although this was a residential
1
1
sect;on it showed that -it was mostly a business section.
a
He stated that Oak Stmt was a dangeraus street and that
if Mr. terkins moved hi house back it would open up this
corner tb:.that it would not be so dangerous. a•He'felt that
the changes suggested by 7Mr. Perkins would improve the
place and that he could not see how the additlnn of three
pumpo in front of the premises would be nny detriment.
If this locality was strictly a residentl&l zone,
he would feel differently about it. He therefore asked the
Board to grant the petition requested.
Mr. Northrup did not have any plan showing the location
of the pumps but he stated that he believed they were to
be twelve feet out from the present building. Mr. Northrup
presented a petition signed by residents in the vicinity
in favor of granting the permit.
Mr. Daniel J. O'Connell stlAed that he was asked to
appear in behalf of a property owner,in the vicd.AAty.'He
appeared at a`.former hearing.and opposed the granting of
a petition. He stated that he was familiar with the
location and he did not believe that one could call the
Cottage Hospital a business or that the tourist signs that
were in front of the residences could be called a business,
and that the repairing of cars was a business of a different
nature. He q,aestioned the right of the Selectmen to
rule that the premises formerly used arca blacksmith shop
could now be used for a business of repairing automobiles.
However the residents in the neighborhood do not object
to. Mr. terkins' carrying on a repair shop and do not want
to deprive him of a living; but feel that he should not
carry his application to.$he point of applying for gasoline.
' He felt that Mr. Perkins'.principal business would then
become the sale of gasoline rather than the repairing of
automobiles. He felt also tbat the ruling of the Selectmen
does not decide for all time'the fact that these prwmises
can be used as a repair shop. He felt also that there
are filling stations enough in this section, and he has
heard Massachusetts Avenge referred to as GasdIllne Alley.
Mr. O'Connell felt that`thet.three pumps that Mr. Northrup
spoke of would not be so objectionable, but that the driving
in of cars at all hours to fill up with gasoline is what
is objectionable. As far as the placing of business was
concerned on each side of the street, he felt.that the
same argument could be used in any other kind of business
that if. the business were operated on one side of the street,
it also should be operated on the opposite side. He felt
that public convenience and necessity did not require a
filling station, but there is more gasoline in Lexington
than Lexington can use now. He felt:�that as soon as Mr.
Perkins got the permit for a small amount of gasoline, he
would then be requesting additional gasoline and the
situation in East Lexington might be as it has been in
East Boston recently with all the gasoline stations that
are located in that vicinity. He felt that Mr. Perkins
was only interested in his own welfare and that the Board
should take cognizance of the feelings of the people in
' the neighborhood.
Mr. O'Connell stated that Mr. Joy was in St.
Petersbure,Florida, and asked that he protest in his
behalf and he believed that a letter had been sent by Mr.
Carrigan objecting. Mr. O'C6nnell stated that he
represented Mr. Joy, Mr. Carrigan, Mr. Cummings, Mr. Healey
1
and P'r. Bignotti.
+�
Mr. Bignotti called attention to the fact that the
non -conforming use of these premises was at #542. He stated
C17
that he was objecting for the taxpayers and for familes
that did not want to see the Zorf ng Law changed. He called
attention to the fact that the Town has now to provide an
'
officer at the crossing of Oak Street for the children and
if there was a filling station there, they would have to
have an officer all the time ina-much as there would be more
congestion. He believed that the purpose of the Zontng Law
was to protect; the neighbors in just such cases of this kind.
He stated that when he purchased his place the sign that
was there was "Ye Old Blacksmith Shop" and he did not believe
you could say the repair of automobiles was similar to a
blacksmith shop. He stated that he was on the Zoning Board
in the city of Somerville and he had seen many of these things
done, and that a beautiful picture was painted but as soon
as the permit is given things are different. He would not
like to sit outside his house and get the smell of the
gasoline fumes day and night. He felt that the present
building becomes a public garage as soon as three cars are
stored there and that there are certain restrictions laid down
by the State Fire Marshall for fire protection. He felt
that this property in its present condition was a fire hazardp
Mr. Francis Chamberlaid stated that he was also opposed
to the erection of a filling station, although he was not
an abuttor.
Mr. Stanbridge of 564 Mass. Avenue stated that he
lived directly in sight of the property and he would not
like to see the hazards increased at this location.
Mr. Northrup desired to summarize all the objections
'
and to his point of view, he felt that Mr. Joyts property was
around the corner and out of sight of theproperty in question;
Mr. Carrigan lived in the property next to the Cummings property
which was dome distance away; Mr. Chamberlain watt speaking
for someone else as he did not live in the immediate vicinity.
He therefore felt that there was a small amount of
objection.
Those present and recording themselves against the
Petition were Mr. George Mielick, Mr. Cummings, Mrs. Healey,
,r. Clare, D. L. Cronin, Mr. Dolan and Mr. Coyne, Mr.
Peavy and Mr. Bignotti.
The hearing was declared closed at 9.15 P.M.
A true record, Attest •
Clerk.
1