221 LAFAYETTE STREET - BUILDING INSPECTION �d �L��. c�Z ��� l( �' �� Com.. �'�C 1`�2.C'�
3�. Cite of Salem' Aam6arbU500
f Public Vropertp Mepartment
�Uuilbing department
Our f9atem green
(978) 745-9595 ext. 380
Leo E. Tremblay
Director of Public Property
Inspector of Building
Zoning Enforcement Officer
March 25, 1998
Attorney George Atkins
59 Federal Street
Salem, Mass. 01970
RE: 221 Lafayette Street, Salem
Dear Mr. Atkins:
According to the records on file in this office, it has been determined
that 221 Lafayette Street is a lawful, nonconforming, grandfathered three (3)
family dwelling.
This is to determine use only and in no way is meant to confirm or deny
whether said property is in compliance with all building, plumbing, gas,
electric, fire or health codes.
Sincerely,
Leo E. Tremblay
Zoning Enforcement Officer
LET: scm
RONAN, SEGAL & HARRINGTON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FIFTY-NINE FEDERAL STREET
JAMES T.RONAN(19711987) SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 019703470
JACOB S.SEGAL
MARY PIEMONTE HARRINGTON
GEORGE W.ATKINS.III (978) 0
BRIAN P.CASSIDY FAX(978))7 744-744-7493
FILE NO.K3�,^7
OF COUNSEL
HEATHER S RAMSEY
HAND DELIVERED March 20, 1998
Leo E. Tremblay
Building Inspector
City of Salem
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 0
RE: 221 Lafayette ,areet, Salem, Mz
Dear emblay:
As we discussed yesterday, this property is currently used and
occupied as a three-family residence which is an allowed use in the
R-3 zoning district in which it is located (Salem Zoning Ordinance
Sec . 5-2 (c) ) . The structure, however, is nonconforming as to the
dimensional regulations of the zoning ordinance but nonetheless
lawful since it was constructed prior to the zoning ordinance
(Salem Zoning Ordinance Article VIII and Massachusetts General Laws
Chapter 40A Section 6) .
You have pointed out that there appear to have been changes of use
since 1964 from a nonconforming use as a rooming house to allowed
uses as a two-family and three-family residence . Please note,
however, that there is no record of structural changes to the
building constituting an enlargement, extension, or alteration
which would intensify the nonconforming dimensions of the
structure .
Section 8-5 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance provides in subparagraph
(1) that nonconforming structures cannot be changed except "in
changing the use of the stricture to a use permitted In the
district in which it is located" . Subparagraph (4) states that as
long as no structural alterations are made a nonconforming use can
be changed to another nonconforming use by special permit from the
Board of Appeals . The building in question was changed from a
nonconforming use to an allowed use with no structural alteration
and, therefore, is not required to obtain approval of the Board of
Appeals .
I would appreciate your reconsideration of this matter so that we
can provide a written determination to Ortorneys an appraisers as
soon as possible in connection with a endi sale the property.
Ve y rs,
r W. t s, III
kmb
CC : Attorney Jeffrey Stelman
RONAN, SEGAL & HARRINGTON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FIFTY-NINE FEDERAL STREET
JAMES T.RONAN 0971.1987) SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970-3470
JACOB S.SEGAL
MARY PIEMONTE HARRINGTON (978)74 0350
GEORGE W.ATKINS,III
BRIAN P.CASSIDY FAX(978)744-7493
FILE NO.�-^7
OF COUNSEL
HEATHER S.RAMSEY
HAND DELIVERED March 20, 1998
Leo E . Tremblay
Building Inspector
City of Salem
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
RE : 221 Lafayette Street, Salem, M.
Dear Mr. Tremblay:
As we discussed yesterday, this property is currently used and
occupied as a three-family residence which is an allowed use in the
R-3 zoning district in which it is located (Salem Zoning Ordinance
Sec . 5-2 (c) ) . The structure, however, is nonconforming as to the
dimensional regulations of the zoning ordinance but nonetheless
lawful since it was constructed prior to the zoning ordinance
(Salem Zoning Ordinance Article VIII and Massachusetts General Laws
Chapter 40A Section 6) .
You have pointed out that there appear to have been changes of use
since 1964 from a nonconforming use as a rooming house to allowed
uses as a two-family and three-family residence . Please note,
however, that there is no record of structural changes to the
building constituting an enlargement, extension, or alteration
which would intensify the nonconforming dimensions of the
structure .
Section 8-5 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance provides in subparagraph
(1) that nonconforming structures cannot be changed except "in
changing the use of Lhe structure to a use perictitted In the
district in which it is located" . Subparagraph (4) states that as
long as no structural alterations are made a nonconforming use can
be changed to another nonconforming use by special permit from the
Board of Appeals . The building in question was changed from a
nonconforming use to an allowed use with no structural alteration
and, therefore, is not required to obtain approval of the Board of
Appeals .
I would appreciate your reconsideration of this matter so that we
can provide a written determination toor�neys an appraisers as
soon as possible in connection with a endi sale the property.
Ve y rs,
rge W. t s, III
kmb
Cc : Attorney Jeffrey Stelman
• Legal Department
•
0
Assistant Solicitor
" 1 17"-0111
Memo
TO: Leo Tremblay, Bldg. Insp.
From JDK N��
Date: 03/2
221 Lafayette Street
Inspector Tremblay:
Per your request, I have reviewed the materials you provided me regarding the determination of this
property as a three family unit.
There is no question that this structure legally existed before the adaption of the Salem Zoning
Ordinance. As such, it is afforded the "nonconforming structure" protections of Chapter 40A. it is a
nonconforming structure as it does not meet (and did not meet in 1965) the residential density
regulations for an R-3 district.
Additionally, no alterations or enlargements to the structure are necessary or requested to use this
structure as a three family dwelling. There will be no increase in the structural nonconformity of this
property. (If that were the case,they would need a special permit—Sec. 8-4).
However, I agree with Attorney Atkins' interpretation of Sec 8-5 that the this nonconforming structure
can be used as a three family dwelling as it is permitted by right in the R-3 district. (Sec 8-5(1)("except
in changing the use of the structure to a use permitted in the district in which it is located'. There is no
indication that this nonconforming structure was abandoned for a period of two years. It does appear
that the nonconforming use as a rooming house has been abandoned and as such cannot be
resurrected at this time.
This interpretation appears consistent with additional provisions of Sec 8-5 that allow a nonconforming
use to be extended to parts of a building manifestly designed for such use at time of adoption of zoning
ordinance without a special permit or to another nonconforming use by a finding of the Board. Here,
where such use is permitted, no such additional finding should be necessary.
My last remark would only be that I agree that these provisions need to be revised and updated. I have
read these countless times and still struggle to come to my determination.
0 Page 1
t�
I hope this has been some help to you. Do not hesitate to contact me with any additional questions
regarding this matter.
John Keenan
•Page 2
RONAN, SEGAL & HARRINGTON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FIFTY-NINE FEDERAL STREET
JAMES T.RONAN(1972-1987) SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970-3470
JACOB S.SEGAL
MARY PIEMONTE HARRINGTON
GEORGE W.ATKINS.III (978)744MM
BRIAN P.CASSIDY FAX(970)744-7493
FILE NO.-7
OF COUNSEL
HEATHER S.RAMSEY
HAND DELIVERED March 20, 1998
Leo E. Tremblay
Building Inspector
City of Salem
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
RE : 221 Lafayette Street, Salem, H
Dear Mr. Tremblay:
As we discussed yesterday, this property is currently used and
occupied as a three-family residence which is an allowed use in the
R-3 zoning district in which it is located (Salem Zoning Ordinance
Sec . 5-2 (c) ) . The structure, however, is nonconforming as to the
dimensional regulations of the zoning ordinance but nonetheless
lawful since it was constructed prior to the zoning ordinance
(Salem Zoning Ordinance Article VIII and Massachusetts General Laws
Chapter 40A Section 6) .
You have pointed out that there appear to have been changes of use
since 1964 from a nonconforming use as a rooming house to allowed
uses as a two-family and three-family residence . Please note,
however, that there is no record of structural changes to the
building constituting an enlargement, extension, or alteration
which would intensify the nonconforming dimensions of the
structure.
Section 8-5 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance provides in subparagraph
(1) that nonconforming structures cannot be changed except "in
changing tii2 uSc of tile 5truCtur6 to a use perTLiltl.ed In the
district in which it is located" . Subparagraph (4) states that as
long as no structural alterations are made a nonconforming use can
be changed to another nonconforming use by special permit from the
Board of Appeals . The building in question was changed from a
nonconforming use to an allowed use with no structural alteration
and, therefore, is not required to obtain approval of the Board of
Appeals .
I would appreciate your reconsideration of this matter so that we
can provide a written determination to to neys an appraisers as
soon as possible in connection with a endi sale the property.
Ve y rs,
rge W. s, III
kmb
CC : Attorney Jeffrey Stelman
0 SENDER:Complete items 1,2,and 3.
Add your address in the 'RETURN TO" space on
reverse.
1. The following service is requested(check one).
❑ Show to whom and date delivered...... . ...46-:1;
❑ Show to whom,date,and address of delivery. —$
❑ RESTRICTED DELIVERY
Show to whom and date delivered... .... . ..._$
❑ RESTRICTED DELIVERY
M Showtowhom,date,and addressof delivery.$
TO
-i (CONSULT POSTMASTER FOR FEES)
C
Z 2, ARTICLE ADDRESSED TO:
M Arthur & Edna Russell
cn Dunkirk Road
Ipswich, MA 01938
3. ARTICLE DESCRIPTION:
m REGISTEREDNO. CERTIFIEDNO. INSUREDNO.
0
FD 7188786
(Always obtain signature of addressee or agent)
o I have received the article described above.
Z SIGNATURE ❑ ssee C1Authorized agent
M ��tpn 4.
DATE OFD VERY POSTMARK
Z
Z C�
O
(7 5. ADDRES (Complete only it requested)
m
T_
m 6. UNABLE TO DELIVER BECAUSE: CLERK'S
INITIALS
D
P0:1977-0-249-595
UNITED STATES POSTAL S 73'�ICEssf'�. .... iy 4^'" ••�"' '
OFFICIAL BUSINESS AN� "• "a••�'•`• ..•..^
SENDER INSTRUCTI �� PENALrv'FOe PRPvGi'P'^rte••"•
o USE TO AVBIB•PAYMEw' ,,„,,,,, •
Print your name,items 1 and ZIP CODE in the s. a eldrh S[, ;, f OF
Complete items 1,2,and 3 on the reverse.
•Moisten gummed ends antl attach to front of anicle'ii space , —^” •�^1ASMAIL
grants.Otherwise affix to back of article.
•Endorse article "Return Receipt Requested" adjacent to
number.
RETURN
TO
Robert E. Gauthier, Building Inspector
(Name of Sender)
One Salem Green
(Street or P.O. Box)
Salem, MA 01970
(City, State, and ZIP Code) it
4
A izhlir ru ex# s ttr#mer,#
' cMn'F.vas' Pu aing Pepar#r.- nt
Robert E. Gauthier
One Salem Greer
7454L213 September 4, 1980
Arthur K. & Edna M. Russell
Dunkirk Road
Ipswich, MA 01938 RE: 221 Lafayette St., Salem
Rear porch
Visual inspection of your property at 221 Lafayette Street,
Salem, MA shows that you are in direct violation of the
Massachusetts State Building Code, see enclosed Paragraphs
123.1, 616.5.1. and 616.5.2:
1. Railings and guards on front and rear entrance stairs
should be replaced to withstand 200 pounds.
2. Extensive compression of timber at rear porch
indicates signs of rot at pressure points.
You have seven (7) days from receipt of this letter to
correct these violations.
Robert E. Gauthier
Building Inspector
REG:M:c
enc. 2
Certified Mail #7188786
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
OFFICE OF LICENSE INVESTIGATOR
$,v ;EP iii246
� ONE SALEM GREEN
�'GI.tI�T.O�Y mm
Tel. 744-3939 xI:C.T;L4VFD
SGT. LAURENT J. BEDARD CITY Df SAL:EH,BRASS.
SPECIAL OFFICER INVESTIGATOR
LICENSING BOARD AGENT
September 16, 1985
TO: Licensing Board
One Salem Green
ATTN: Chairman Joseph Piemonte
POLICE REPORT
As a result of the City of Salem Inter-Departmental Communications. Dealing
with Applications, Permits, etc. (Electrical, Plumbing, Building Permits etc.) .
On 09/13/85 at 11 :45 A.M. I inspected the premises of Mr. Arthur K. Russell
(owner) 2j_Lafayette Street, Salem, MA. Upon questioning the two occupants
(2nd floor) Miss Laura Vlasak and Miss Coleen McDonald who stated that three
(3) other girl students also shared their roams (Lisa Robbins, Jennifer Caine,
and Sharron Frost.) As I was questioning Miss Vlasak, Mr. Arthur K. Russell
came upon the scene. Mr. Russell admitted renting the first floor to six
students (Lease & Rent) $10,500. Miss Allison Weber, Ellen Burke, Stacy Bennett,
Suellen Breakey, Kimberly Dion, Lori Puopolo. The third floor was also
rented to three other students; making a total of fourteen (14). Lease agree-
ment posted on the first floor for the six students/ $10,500 from 9/1/85 to
8/31/85 or $1,050 per month for ten months.
I informed Mr. Arthur K. Russell that he was in violation of Chapter 140 Sec.24
(Unlicensed Keeper) Whoever conducts a lodging house without a license shall
be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred nor more than five hundred
dollars or by imprisonment for more than three months or both.
Chapter 140 Sec.22 Definition. Lodging House as used in section twenty-two
to thirty-one inclusive shall mean a house where lodgings are let to four or
more persons not within the second degree of kindred to the person conducting it,
and all include fraternity houses and dormitories of charitable of philanthr6pic
institutions or convalesent or nursing hones licensed under section seventy-
one of Chaper one hundred and eleven or rest hones so licensed or regulated by
agencies of the Commonwealth.
Sincerely yours,
Sgt. Laurent J. Bedard
Sepcial Officer Investigator
34 � ? yC ` 1 SALEM FIRE DEPARTMENT
FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU
pp 48 LAFAYETTE STREET
SALEM,
M 0
(617) 745-77777
September 11, 1985
Mr. William Munroe
Inspector of Buildings
One Salem Green
Salem, Me 01970
Dear Mr. Munroe:
On the above date, I inspected the property located at #`221 Lafayette
Street for compliance with M.G.L. Chapter 148, Section 26E;at—the—request
of Donald Cushing Electric, the installer of smoke detectors within this
property . I was accompanied during this inspection by City Electrician
Paul Tuttle, who was also performing an inspection of electrical wiring in
the same building .
While conducting the inspection, I noticed that each apartment contained
sleeping arrangements for four or more persons in each of three
apartments. Residing within these apartments were students, some of whom
were present during the inspection.
Posted on a bulletin board in the kitchen of the first floor apartment,
easily seen by anyone entering the kitchen, was a lease agreement,
apparently placed for the tenants of this unit to sign. The lessee was
listed as follows:
Mr. Arthur K. Russell
P.O. Box 50
Ipswich, Massachusetts
(617) 356-0959
The term of the lease agreement was from September 1, 1985 to August 31,
1985, in the amount of $10,500 per annum, or $1,050 per month for ten
months. Listed as tenants on the agreement were as follows:
Allison Weber Suellen Breakey
Ellen Burke Kimberley Dion
Stacy Bennett Lori Puopolo
Chapter 140, Section 22, Massachusetts General Laws, defines a lodging
house as "a house where lodgings are let to four or more persons not
within the second degree of kindred to the person conducting it, and shall
include fraternity houses and dormitories of educational institutions, but
shall not include dormitories of charitable or philanthropic institutions
or convalescent or nursing homes licensed under section seventy-one of
chapter one hundred and eleven or rest homes so licensed, or group
residences licensed or regulated by agencies of the commonwealth. "
In view of this evidence, I strongly suspect that the owner of such
property, Mr. Arthur Russell, is in violation of Chapter 140, Section 24,
Massachusetts General Laws, which states as follows:
Unlicensed keeper.
Whoever conducts a lodging house without a license shall be
punished by a fine of not less than one hundred nor more than
five hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than three
months, or both.
I will be in contact with you relative to the filing of a complaint with
respect to this violation.
Tally,
Robert W. Turner,
Fire Marshal
µ.CONN{,,
0'
AJG IFP 11 PT
MICHAEL E. O'BRIEN 7� 5 MARY P. HARRINGTON
CITY SOLICITOR ttotlr+P� ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
93 WASHINGTON STREET �g ��� 9 93.WASHINGTON STREET
187 FEDERAL STREET and CIN drt S -LE 59 FEDERAL STREET
SALEM, MA 01970 MASSACHUSETTS SALEM, MA 01970
7454311 t t I V
7 .3383 CITY Of SALNI,MASS, 744.0350
44
Please Reply to 187 Federal Street Please Reply to 59 Federal Street
September 12 , 1985
Robert M. St. Pierre, Chief
Salem Police Department
Central Street
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Re : 221 Lafayette Street, Salem
Dear Chief :
Enclosed please find a letter from Capt. Turner to Mr. Munroe
relative to an alleged violation of MGL Chapter 140 , Sec. 24 . Due
to the seriousness of the alleged violation, both Mr. Munroe and my-
self are requesting that the police prosecutor file a complaint
against the owner without a Clerk ' s hearing. The owner is Arthur
K. Russell, Dunkirk Road, Ipswich. The date of the offense would
be September 11 , 1985 and each day thereafter until the complaint
if filed.
Thanking you for your anticipated cooperation, I remain,
V ,tr ly y
E. /01 /
ity Solicitor
MEO/jp
Enclosure
cc: William Munroe