36 FOREST AVENUE - BUILDING INSPECTION '36 FOREST AVENUE
1
eco CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR - , r
SALEM, MA 01970
�f TEL. (978) 745-9595
FAX (978) 740-9846
STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR.
MAYOR tut JU'_ I n i JfJ
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT-%FORES_T;AVENUE-B4/R2�
A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 2002 with the following Board Members
present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair and Stephen
Harris. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing
were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A.
The petitioner is requesting a Variance from density and height requirements to
construct a five- unit dwelling for the property located at 36 Forest Avenue located in a
B4-R2 zone.
The Variances, which have been requested, may be granted upon a finding by this
Board that:
a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building
or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings and
structure involve.
b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioners.
c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and
without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district of the
purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1.Petitioners own three adjoining properties at the intersection of Canal Street and
Forest Avenue. Petitioner operates a business, Bagel World, on the property with
frontage on Canal Street. An adjacent lot with frontage on Forest Avenue is used as a
parking lot, and a third lot, with frontage on Heresy Street is unused.
2. While the Bagel World property lays within the B-4 zoning district, the other two
properties (the lots) lie partly within the B-4 district and partly within the R-2 district.
Petitioner wishes to improve the lot by constructing a five- unit residential dwelling
thereon, which may be entered from either the Hersey St. or the Forest Ave sides.
Petitioner seeks a variance to allow a multifamily use in the R-2 district, and a
variance to allow a total of 5400 square feet per dwelling unit where the ordinance
required 7500 square feet per unit. Petitioner also seeks a variance to allow a three
story building where the ordinance limits construction to 2 Y2 stories.
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE
pagetwo
3. Previously, petitioners sought variances to allow six dwellings units on the three
lots, and in March 2002 they were denied the variances they sought. Subsequently,
the Planning Board for the City of Salem decided by a vote of 7to 1, that the present
plan constitutes a material and substantial change from the earlier plan. The Salem
Planning Board decision is dated June 6, 2002 and is incorporated by reference
herein. Given the Planning Board's determination, the Zoning Board of Appeal agrees
that the petition may properly be heard by us tonight.
4. Petitioner's representative Henry Lucas, Esq. asserted that all parking requirements of
of the ordinance will be met by the proposed development. There are garages for
each of the two units on Hersey St. and each will also have one off street parking
space in a driveway. Each of the three units facing Forest Ave will have on off street
parking garage, and each of the three units will have a dedicated parking space in a
parking array to be painted on the existing lot. Remaining parking spaces in the
Forest Ave lot will be available for the use of Bagel World customers under the terms
of an easement granted by the Realty Trust. The business owners will retain
responsibility for upkeep of the parking lot and for snow removal
5. Stanley Bornstein, Director of Public Works for the City of Salem spoke in support of
the proposed development. It was his testimony that flooding is unlikely to occur on
the properties where the residential units are to be built. He spoke on behalf of
Stanley Usovicz, Mayor of Salem, who wishes to support the proposed development.
Ronald Dumis who is an abutter, also appeared in support of the petition and Mr.
Lucas submitted a petition signed by about 10 neighbors who supported the
development of the property.
6. There was no opposition to the proposed petition.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on, the evidence presented at the
hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeal concludes as follows
1. Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property but not the
district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and
Without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the
purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 5-0 to grant the Variances requested,
subject to the following conditions;
1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes and
regulations.
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE
page three
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and
approved by the Building Commissioner.
3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall
be strictly adhered to.
4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction.
5. Petitioner is to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy.
6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors
office ad shall display said number so as to be visible from the street.
7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board.
S. Petitioner is to draft easement plan and submit to Board
VARIANCE GRANTED
July 17, 2002 /J /� OA", CSCh
Nina Cohen, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND
THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the
date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 11. The Variance or Special
Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the
certificate of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed,
or that, if such appeal has been filed, that is has been dismissed or denied is
recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the
owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
�L!L D!N5 9 >>7.
JUL 3 8 39 °So
RECEIVED
CITY OF SALE 14, HASS.
34 Forest Avenue
Salem, MA 01970
June 25, 1986
Mr. Paquin, Assistant Building Inspector
City of Salem
1 Salem Green
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Dear Mr. Paquin:
After reading the article in the Salem Evening News on Tuesday,
June 24, 1986, I am prompted to enlighten you about some of the
existing problems that exist in the area of the proposed condos
(18) for the Forest Avenue lot. In this letter 1 use the term "we"
as referring to the neighbors and property owners of the area. I
have taken it upon myself to speak for the neighbors, property
owners and business people of the area.
Presently there is an existing surface flooding and sewerage
back-up problem. The tidal gates are worn out. Flood tides flood
out Canal Street, Hersey Street, Forest Avenue, and also flood out
the present empty lot. McDonald's, Alyce's, Donut Ring, and the new
restaurant Popeye's will flood out with a Northeast flood tide.
Raw sewerage also backs up onto the street so badly that the manhole
covers on Forest Avenue and Canal Street were lifted off of the
manhole. The city has welded them shut because of too much back
pressure on the sewer line. These sewer lines are too small to handle
the present load. This sewer problem has existed since before the
Salem State Sport complex was opened. The City has spent $14,000,000
to repair surface drains along Canal Street, Lafayette Street and
Derby Street, but stopped 200 yards away from the main problem of
surface drain back-up. The tidal gates at the end of South River
have deteriorated in the last 110 years.
This area has been plagued with this surface drain back-up for
years. In the past I have spoken to one of our previous City Engineers,
a previous Mayor, and a City Councilor. The comment made to me by a
former City Engineer was that the area in question was built four feet
below sea level. I told him that I was not an engineer but common sense
would tell you if the tidal gates do not work, the lower lying area at
the end of the pipe line would back-flood.
r'
jut -';
CITY OF Sf�=f .IdA55.
2 -
We feel very strongly that before approval is given for any type
of construction in this area, the outstanding problems in the South
Salem area should be addressed and corrected. When the Salem State
complex and parking lot were constructed, I attended the City Council
meetings and asked them at that time to address the problems before
work was started so that the problem would not be compounded. I
have talked with the former Mayor about flooding in this area on many
occasions. Many times over the years my cellar has had more than
two feet of water in it. I have lost an oil burner to flooding, a
washing machine and many tools. My neighbors have experienced the
same problem, and also the food businesses in the area.
You are now proposing 18 condos in this flooding site. It is
time for the city, State or Federal government to properly address
these existing problems before any other overloading of these systems
takes place,
Sere ,
A+�
Roland J. Dumais
Chi of c�i.�PSli� C1iu5521C�`SIS�ft�
fL
lYu.'C
Ms. Josephine Fusco, City Clerk
City Hall
Salem, MA. 01970
Dear Ms. Fusco:
At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board held on
it was voted to endorse "Approval under Subdivision Control
Law not required" on the following described plan:
1. Applicant: -
Margaret De Francesco
2. Location and Description:
Approximately 33,320 square feet of land with any improvements
thereon located at Forest Avenue and Hersey Street, Salem,
Ma. , commonly--AeSignated as 36 Forest Avenue. Salem.
Deed of property records in Essex South District Registry.
Sincerely yours,
Walter B. Power,
Chairman o
wBP:dey
e
u CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL CIfY OF SALEM,_HA
n° 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR CLERK'S OFFICE
SALEM, MA 01970
TEL. (976) 745-9595
FAX (978) 740-9846
STANLEY J. US VICZ, JR. 2001 APR -2 P 1: 13
MAYODECISION ON THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE B4/R2
A hearing on this petition was held on March 20, 2002, with the following Board
Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Bonnie Belair, Richard Dionne and Stephen
Harris. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and notices of the hearing
were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A.
The petitioner is requesting Variances from Section 5-2(b) and 5-2(f) and density
regulations of Article IV of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction and use of the
premises as a six (6) unit dwelling for the property located at 36 Forest Avenue in a 64-
R2 zone.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board
that:
a. Special conditions and circumstances exit which especially affect the land, building
or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or
structures in the same district.
b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner
c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and
without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the
purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1. Petitioner seeks variances from density and use regulation to allow construction on
this lot of a six unit dwelling, with on site parking for 10 cars. The lot straddles the
district line between the B-4 (wholesale and automotive) and R-2 (two family
residential) districts.
2. Petitioner's proposed plan would comply with all dimensional requirements of the R-3
Multifamily district.
3. Petitioner's proposed plan would comply with parking requirements for multifamily
dwellings. Each attached unit would include a one- car garage. Two additional off
street parking places would be created adjacent to the building, and four dedicated
parking places would be marked in a lot owned by an adjacent business, Bagel
World, and would be held by the proposed development in the form of a perpetual
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF Z & M REALTY TRUST REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36 FOREST AVENUE B-4/R-2
pagetwo
easement for plowing and maintenance of the parking lot by the Bagel World business
and its successors in title.
4. Petitioner, through his Attorney Henry Lucas, argued that the limited business
visibility on Canal Street constituted a financial hardship to the lot owner. The Board
of Appeal did not accept this argument. No other argument was made to show
hardship that would accrue to the property owner.
5. Several neighbors spoke in support to the proposed project, on the grounds that they
preferred a multifamily residential use to the zoned business use. There were Roland
Dumaile, 34 Forest Avenue, Michael Ratigan, 30 Forest Avenue, and Ed Carter, 28
Forest Avenue. One neighbor, Dom Ortins of 24 Forest Ave, spoke in opposition to the
density of the proposed project.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing,
the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not
the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in
unnecessary hardship to the petitioner.
3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public
good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the
district or purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 3 in favor and 1 in opposition to grant the
requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass,
the motion is defeated and the petition is denied.
VARIANCE DENIED
MARCH 20, 2002
,vn�- �d12e��CSc "-
Nina Cohen, Chairman
Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND
THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the MGL
Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the
office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or
Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing
the Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have passed and no appeal has been
filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is
recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the
owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owners Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal