HomeMy WebLinkAbout1954-02-01 February 1, 1954 Cont.
Frances NoKee cf Moody Street also objected to Nr~ Brasseur being present at the
hearing. She stated that the general public were not aware that this business had
been conducted as a non-conforming use. She objected to the change 'of zone
for this location as she said that this was only an opening wedge for further
businesses on Osgood Street and Chick, ring Road. She stated that if the present
owners did not do well i~ was 'possible ~hat the place would be aba6%oned and
would be an eye sore.
Mr. Joh~ O'Nei! of Chadwick Street stated that he also objected to re-zoning
at this location. He stated that several homes had been built in this area
and th~.t the people who bought this property were under the impression that
it was a residen$ial srea. Ne also stated that this would only be a wedge
for further re-zonings in the area.
Gaspar D~rio objected to this application, stated that he had imsted
money in property.close by and he feels that residential ~riviledges were
being taken away from the residents in this area.
Mr. Fle. mm~Bg.stated that he had no quarrel with the new owners of the property
in question and he hopes that the business wo~ld be successful but he did
object to the change of zoning to business. He felt that the residents of
the neighborhood should be prctecSed.
Mr. O'Neil then stated that they had been throush something like this before
when the a~ort was first opened~ the residents of the area were not con-
sidered but that the City of L~.wrence Just moved right in and that they haw
had to put up with ma~ disturbances since. He stated that the whole area
h~d been zoned for general resitential purposes.
Mr. Edward Ryan cT 'Lawrence stated that he owns land adjacent to the .Steak
House and that he intended to build a ho'me there but he feels that h~ would
n~t 11We to locate right next to a business zoned area. Ne was opposed to the
chan'ge in zone' at this location.
Mr. Wilbur N~-v-ey~ ~rescott Street stated that there were ~oo mar~ spots in
town which were being re-zoned f~r the personal gain of individuals and he
felt that the welfare of the town as ! whole should be considered rather than
the gain of a few. He objected to re-zoning of this location.
Mr. John Webber stated thathe objected on general principles~ he stated that he
owned land in this vicinity and that he had looked around for a long tlme before
bu~ing and asSUmed that he was buying property in a' residential section.
Mr, Whipple then asked the owners of recently purchased property Lf they had
checked to see if the location in question was zoned for business before
bu~ing their newly acquired property. 'None had checked thoroughly but all
had assumed that it was residential. Mr. Flemming and Mrs. Griffin stated
that they h~d checked as to their property, but both are some distance away
from the ~proper~y in question.
Mr. Oscar Ramey stated that he objected to' the re-zoning. He stated that he
did not see what the new owners had to gain by re-zoning as they could dc
business as usual without it.
Motion was then made by Mr. Whipple, seconded by Mr. Lee and it was voted.
to take the matter under advisement.
o~ aoolication was then received from Daniel O~enio~ recuesting the approval
t~§ Board for a proposed amendment of the Zoning By-Eaws to ~hange ~he
classification of a parcel of land, owned by Daniel s~d Marie ~.A.~10, from
an Agricultural to a Business District. The land is question~ ~ted an
the easterly side o~ Osgood Street~ the boundaries and description of which
were published in the Evening Tribune on January 22 and January 30~ 1954.
The Public Hearing was also advertised on those dates and all abutters were
notified~
Mr. Brasseur, Engineer, who drew the plans submitted to the Board represented
the petitione~ and stated that th~s property was located directly opposite the
land acquired by Western Electric Co. and that it was anticipated that there
would be a big dem~nd for business property in this area. This. particular parcel
of land is located opposite where the proposed entrance to the new plant will be.
Mr. John 2oche~ Osgood Street~ spoke' in favor of g.rantin~ the approval of this
petitio~ He stated that Mr. Olenio was a disabled Veteran~ that he had been
employed at the Wood Mill which is being closed and t~at he had hoped to go into
business and establish a diner at this location in order to ear his living.
Mr. Edward Dudley, a direst abutter to the property in question stated that he
objected to the approval as he felt that his property would ~ose value and he
also stated that he felt that it would not be a desirous to have to live right
next door to a diner and to be a~moyed by the odors amd the noise of the traffic.
He stated that he objected not because he had am~ objections to the owner but he
felt that this location should be kept residential.
Mr. Brasseur stated that it would make 'no difference as to what was placed on the
property in queStion as the location of the new plant across the street would offset
ar~ depreciation and he stated that he felt that it .would not be too many years
before the general area would become, business.
Mr. Olenio ~hen stated that Mr.~ Dudley ha~ resided at the present location or~ for
one year and that when he moved there a rendering plant was located directly across
the street and that ~ dinsr would have ~o worse order, than that. He also stated
that there was much noise in this area due to the fact that the airport was very neare
Motion was made by Mr. Whipple, Seconded by Mr. Lee and it was voted to take the
matter under advisemente
The Board then went into executive session. The minutes of the previous meeting
were read and a motion was me_~e by Mr. Lee, seconded by Mr. Driscoll and it was
un~mfm~usly voted te accept the m~utes as reade
A motion was then made by Mr. Dee~ seconded by Mr. Driscoll and it was unanimously
voted that Mr, ~lmipple continue to sign plans as zequired by the Registry.
A motion was made by Mr. Whipple~ seconded by Mr. G~n and it was un~-tmously
voted to approve the petition of Effie C. Kostandin for a change of zoning in
accordance with plans as submitted to the Board. This approval was given for
the following reasons:
1-This property has been used for business purposes prior to the adoption of the
Zoning By-Laws in 1943.
2- The Board does not agree with the objectors present at the meeting that the
approval of this petition will set an~ precedent fc~ the adoption of further
business uses in this general location. '~
The petition of Daniel Olenio was then considerede
A motion was made by Mr. Whipple~ Seconded byMre Dee and it was voted to den~ the
approval of this application. Members Whipple, Lee and Driscoll voting for
member Qlioetta ~vo.tip~-~vor~off the petition'er ar~ membe~ Gi~l~aan not voting. The
following reasons were given for denial.l-If this petion was approved the Board
would have no reason to den~ ar~ farther applications for business purposes for the
entire frontage on Osgood Street opposite the. land acquired by the Western Electric Co