Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1933-11-24BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING NOVEMBER 24, 1933. The meeting of the Board of Appeals was held at the Selectmen's Office, Town Office Building, on Friday, November 24th, 1933 at 8:00 P.M. Messrs. Maddison, Ferguson, Bald rey, Glynn and Robbins were present. The Secretary was also present. The Chairman, Mr. Maddison, opened the hearing and the notice of the hearing was read by the Clerk, Mr. Robbins. fp Mrs. Margaret L. Ducharme, petitioner, came before the Board in reference to her petition. She stated that she came to town eight weeks ago unaware of the Zoning Law. She came with an established business and it has been more or less of a disappointment to her not to be able to carry on, and therefore she was appearing to request the Board to amend the Zoning Law. -.. The Chairman informed her that the Board of Appeals could not amend the Zoning Law. She then requested if some way could be devised so that she could be granted a victuallers license. The Chairman informed her that the Board of Selectmen grant the victuallerts license and the Board of Appeals grant the exception to the Zoning Law. The Chairman inquired if she ' expected an amendment or if she desired permission to run this tea room. Mr. William P. Martin, Attorney, and former owner of the Martin property where request is being made for a tea room, appeared for Mrs. Duchgr me and stated that Mrs. Ducharme did not underhand, but she did not desire a change in the Zoning Law she desired a tea room. Mr. Martin_ explained that this is the old Martin farm where the business- is intended to be carried on. Mr. Glynn inquired what she considered to be a tea house. Mrs. Ducharme stated that her desire is to cater to the public generally, to serve dinners, lunches and tea. She had been operating a similar place in Burlington. She stated that 50% of her business is from social organizations that come both summer and winter, and she felt that the grounds and house were very well suited for this business. She stated that she would not have rooms to let, and that she was planning to use the upper floor for her own family. There are four rooms on the upper floor. In Burlington she had a beer license. Mr."Martin described the location of the property. Plage consisted of seventy five acres of land which is valuless unless it would be used for commercial purposes. It is a house of twelve rooms with the town water installed for which he paid for the construction for seven years. The house is ' located in fro{n the street and there is a dining room thirty feet long and connected with that is another room 121 x 151. He stated also that he was personally interested in the application. He described the location by explaining the surrounding territory from the Five Forks Corner where the land of Mr. Innis is located on which there is a golf course, permit for which was granted by the Board of Appeals. He stated that his own land was not worth a nickle for building pur- poses outside of about one acre;the balance of the land was swampy, On the property he had a six room cottage, hen houses, tool house and barn that are all of no practical value for farming. He stated that the place could not be sold for a gentlemants farm, because he would not want the buildings. He stated that the applicant proposed to put,in tennis courts and bring into the town a good first class set of people that would not be a detriment to the neighborhood. He called attention to the fact that on the southerly side of the street is the farm of Mr. Sarano, and while they have made improve- ments on the place, it still is a poultry farm that extends beyond the business district and almost down to the front of his property, and the only building land there is the Innis property opposite the Sarano property. He felt that residences were not likely to be built opposite a poultry farm, and in his judgment any building there would be more of a liability than an asset. Beyond his place there is no water or lights, and he did not know where a cesspool could be built. Sometime in the future he had an idea that there will be a golf course built on the 75 acres. The Chairman requested Mr. Martin to stick more closely to the petition. Mr. Martin stated that the house sets back about 150 feet and they have a big parking space and the street would not be cluttered up, and what they desire is to run a good first class tea room. She, of course, would have to have a victuallers license, and for the time being she would like to have the Zoning Law modified so that she can run a tea room or lunch room. She had several groups who desired engagements for dinners. Mr. Maddison advised that the Town Counsel has instructed the Board of Appeals that they have no right to grant a permit for a tea room. Mr. Martin stated that when the Zoning Law was established it was felt that changes of this kind were to be made; otherwise so much land would not have been put into first class residence zone. He stated that under the law he felt a permit could be granted under the clause "without substan- tially derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law", Mr. Maddison explained that the Zoning By-law provided for lunch rooms that may be established and therefore Counsel has ruled that a permit cannot be granted. Mr. Martin felt that he could satisfy Mr. Wrightington in regard to the opinion that a permit could be granted. He felt that the whole district is practically a business zone. He called attention to the business being done at the "Old House" which is arresidence zone and he felt that if this place could operate that this applicant should be given an opportunity.; and of course, if she does not operate an orderly pla ce she can be stopped in five minutes. He stated that 1 J The Board of Appeals, acting under General Laws, Chapter 400 sect. 27, having received a written petition addressed to it by Laurette Ducharme, 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 Room, in the Town Office Building on November 24, 1933. 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 she had purchased the William P. Martin buildings and ten acres of land on Marrett Road, north of Lincoln Street, and intended to carry on a ' tea room business particularly for groups or organizations of people desiring to have outings or meals. Evidence was offered on behalf of citizens opposing_the granting of the said petition tending to show - No persons appeared in opposition. just before the Zoning Law went into effect that some ' people took his place and tried to run a tea room but did not make a success of it. He stated that the location of the place is wonderful. They can set tables between the house and the barn and there being plenty of parking space there dould be no detriment to the Town. He stated that ten acres of land stands in the name of Mrs. Ducharme and that the only neighbor is Mr. Custer who lives directly opposite. Mr. Custer stated that he lived directly across and he was appearing in favor of the application. He stated that he had experienced difficulties and he realized that Mr. Martih should be able to get some income from the place and he felt that the location was ideal for a tea room. Mr. Martin also stated that Sword Brothers ran dances in the barn. They were the most recent owners of the property. Miss Bradford, real estate agent, stated that she showed the property to a party interested in a farm and they stated that they would not be interested as the house was not suit- able as a private residence. No persons appeared in opposition to the petition, and 'Che hearing was declared closed, after Mrs. Ducharme had made the statement that she had put in about $600 or $700 in renovating the property and repairing. She did not intend to make any ' alterations. The Board in private session voted to approve the records of the meeting of August 4th. In reference to the application of Margaret L. Ducharme for permission to have a tea room on Marrett Road, it was voted unanimously to deny the petition, in the following form; The Board of Appeals, acting under General Laws, Chapter 400 sect. 27, having received a written petition addressed to it by Laurette Ducharme, 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 Room, in the Town Office Building on November 24, 1933. 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 she had purchased the William P. Martin buildings and ten acres of land on Marrett Road, north of Lincoln Street, and intended to carry on a ' tea room business particularly for groups or organizations of people desiring to have outings or meals. Evidence was offered on behalf of citizens opposing_the granting of the said petition tending to show - No persons appeared in opposition. At the close of the hearing the Board in private session gave consideration to the subject bf 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 nvt,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 ffom the Intent and purpose of such Lexington Zoning By-law. Pursuant to the said findings, the Board hereby denies the said petition of Margaret L. Ducharme. 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 herein- before set forth and the testimony presented at the said hear- ing, 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, See, 27) A. N. Maddison Charles E. Ferguson C. Edward Glynn Howard IN. Robbins Roland W.'Baldrgy I, Howard IN. Robbins, Clerk of the Board of Appeals of Lexington, appointed under General Laws, Chapter 40, section 271, hereby certify that I sent by postage prepaid mail on the lst day of November, 1933 to Catherine F. Herbert, Mary T. B. Wellington, Edward J. Gavin, Sr. Francis and Hugh Thompson, Toros H. and Bedros H. Bashian, Robert L. Innes and Dougal McLennan, Pauline Bonanno, C/o William P. Martin, Everett J. Custer, Helen B. Sarano and Margaret L. D ucharme. Howard W. Robbins, Clerk, Board of Appeals. SE 1 1 In regard to notifying the parties at interest, it has been the. custom of the Board to notify only the petitioner of the decision of the Board, and the question arose whether or not persons notified of the hearing should also be informed. It was decided to ask the advice of the Town Counsel'on the matter. It was also decided to ask the Town Counsel whether or not postage prepaid will be sufficient rather than registered mail as required by the present form of order prepared by him. If it is true that postage prepaid can be used instead of registered mail it will save expense and"the rate charged to - applicants of $10. for a hearing could be reduced to $5.00. The Chairman stated that according to the new law on Zoning any exception or variance would require a unanimous decision and the vote of each member recorded. He also stated that a separate copy of the records should be filed with the order of the Board of Appeals filed in the Town Clerk's Office in which some of the details of the hearing should be stated. Michael Interante of 794 Mass. Avenue made application for appeal from the decision of the Building Inspector on his application for an open air market for fruit and vegetables. The becretary stated that the Building Inspector refused a permit for a building in front of MV. Interante's house for an open air market. This property is in the business district and he formerly used his house for a store and the I Building Inspector informed him that he could continue to use the house for business, but he would not permit him to build a separate structure unless it complied with the building law. It was suggested that Mr. Ferguson see. the Building Inspector in regard to the matter. The Chairman stated that under the new Zoning Law passed in 1933, the Board of ApYeals must adopt rules and he would find out if other towns have other forms of petitions. It was also voted to wend copy of the decisions to the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Glynn called attention to the fact that there should be some reference in the Zoning Law relative tC1 the at:pointment of the Board of Appeals. A true record, Attest: Cl erk.