HomeMy WebLinkAbout1936-10-16PLANNING BOARD MEETING
October 16,1936
' Present:- Messrs. Borden, Ellis, Ferguson, Nickerson, and Kimball
of the active board and, by invitation,'Messrs. Duffy,
71. R. Greeley, R. B. Greeley, William D. Milne, W, D.
Brown, Sheldon A. Robinson, H. S. 0.'Nichols, and E.B.
Worthen, members of past boards.
The active board meet at 7.-30 P. M. with Mr. Robert
Merriam to discuss the proposed development of the Goodwin
property on Ierriam Street. Draft plans prepared by H. J.
Kellaway providing for two treatments were reviewed. One pro-
vided for a street opposite Chandler Street swinging through
the property and back to IvIerriam Street to Oakland Street, and Goodwin
the second a continuation of the present so-called Blake Road Develop -
in a southerly direction, thence easterly to Merriam Street. ment
In general the lot areas will run from around 9,000 to 16,000
square feet. Questions of drainage services and contours were
discussed and the Board voted to approve, in principle, the
second layout.
emeral meeting
The convened at 8:10 P. M. with Chairman Borden outlining
the topics on which the Board was seeking advice. Mr. Roland
Greeley opened a discussion on the proposed new gasoline zone
with a question as to its validity when set up as a zone identity.
Mr. Wrightington expressed the opinion that if an area was Gasoline
' zoned as proposed and later successfully attacked in court, Zone
the most that could be expected would be a reversal to the
original R.1 zone.
Mr. blilne felt that the Board would be in a stronger
position to hold off intrusion if opposing a C.1 zone with its
inherent possibilities for general business than it would a
special zone although he believed good zoning should anticipate
the needs of particular localities.
Mr. Viorthen thought the board should solidify its position
on the basis of past accomplishments rather than embark on an
untried field.
Mr. Roland Greeley suggested allowing filling stations
in R.1 Districts subject to Board of Appeals action and after
general discussion, Mr. Roger Greeley was asked to present
his views on "what should be the appropriate actions of the
Board in respect to further applications for zoning changes on
the Concord Turnpike?"
This led into a very general discussion of ideals and
ways and means for obtaining the support of the Town in plann-
ing matters. The opinions were apparently about equally divided
in whether the Board should support Ivlr. Peterson's probable
petition. Owing to the lateness of the hour, no attempt was
made to discuss the new enabling act (Ch. 211).
1
The joint meeting dissolved at 10:15 P. M. and active
Board reconvened.
A notice of intention to petition for a change from R.1 De
to C.1 zone at the corner of Pleasant Street and the 0oncord Vincent
Turnpike by Mr. Ernest DeVincent was reported and it was voted Petitio
to assign the same area for supporting signatures as in the
ptevious petition.
It was decided tb meet Tuesday, October 27th to discuss
the gasoline zone, providing Mr. Joseph Woodruff (consultant
of New England'Regional'Pl&nning Committee) was able to meet
that date, otherwise at his earliest convenience.
The meting adjourned at 10:35 P. tn.
�
Respectfully submitted
p
Clerk
1
1