333 LAFAYETTE STREET - BUILDING INSPECTION (2) LC&Idle
CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS
y . BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
ti In
STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 = Cl?I
MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846
Z rn
O :0Q
1 Cls
W �
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JACKIE CL LEE REQUESTING A SPECIAL D
PERMIT AND A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 321-333
LAFAYETTE STREET B-1 o
A hearing on this petition was held on October 20, 2004 with the following Board
Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Steven Pinto, Bonnie Belair
and Edward Moriarty. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices
of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening New in accordance with
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner is requesting a Variance from front and side setbacks, building height and
parking requirement and a Special Permit to expand a non-conforming structure to
construct 6 dwelling units for the property located at 321-333 Lafayette Street B-1.
The provisions of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to the request for a
Special Permit is Section 5-3 6),which provides as follows:
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of
Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Sections 8-6
and 9-4, grant Special Permit for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming
structures, and for changes,enlargement, extent expansion of nonconforming lots, land,
structures, and uses,provided, however, that such change extension, enlargement or
expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming
use to the neighborhood.
In more general terms,this Board is,when reviewing Special Permit request may be
granted upon a fmding by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the
public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants.
The Variances which have been requested may be granted upon a finding of the 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 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.
N (�I
O
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JACKIE CL LEE REQUESTING A SPECIAL r"
PERMIT AND A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 321-333 c
LAFAYETTE STREET B-1 x
r Gig
page two
D 161
C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public god
and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district8r �
of the Ordinance. — v
The Board of Appeal,after careful consideration of the evidence presented,and after
reviewing the plans makes the following findings of fact:
1. Petitioner through his attorney William Quinn, Esq.,requests dimensional
variances,a parking variance and a special permit to add two stories and 6
residential units to an existing nonconforming one-story building and lot located
at 321-333 Lafayette Street.
2. Petititioner's property is located in a B-1 District in an Entrance Corridor Overlay
District. The B-1 District or Neighborhood Business Districts are defined in the
Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Neighborhood business districts are intended to be those areas containing use
meeting daily shopping needs for the convenience of adjacent residential areas.
Zoning Ordinance Article III Section 3-1 (5)
A multifamily dwelling is a permitted use in the B-1 District. Section 5-2 (d)(1).
3. Petitioner's one-story building currently houses a restaurant, a convenience mart
and a pizza shop. It is bordered on three sided by one-and two-family residences.
Adjacent to petitioner's property is a three-story building with a hair salon on the
first floor and one or more dwelling units above. Across the street lies the campus
of Salem State College.
4. Petitioner seeks to add two additional stories to create a six-unit residential
condominium above the existing building. Because the proposed development
would exceed the district height limitation by 3 feet,petitioner seeds a variance
for height. Front and side setbacks would not change;these are currently
nonconforming due to the grandfathered status of the property, but the expansion
of the existing nonconforming structure is by special permit.
5. There are 34 parking spaces in the lot encompassing the property. Since the total
available spaces still lags the number required by 5 spaces,petitioner seeks a
parking variance for the mixed-use development. Petitioner intends to set aside 9
spaces for the use of the condominium residents and dedicate the remaining
places for the three existing businesses. Two spaces are currently used for
dumpsters; one of these would be removed to make additional parking in the lot.
Petitioner would obtain the approval of the City of Salem Planning Board with
respect to issues arising from parking,traffic and site layout.
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JACKIE CL LEE REQUESTING A SPECIAL
PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 321-333
LAFAYETTE STREET B-1 o c-)
page three ,`—
z
Mc
6. Petitioner would operate the commercial businesses on the first floor,adding, � "
residential uses for the two upper stories. He met with abutting business oars
and homeowners and received input from his Ward Councilor and other D
Councilor's,and sought review from the City of Salem Planning Departmegkon
the scale and appearance of the proposed addition. o
7. To reduce the likelihood that the dwelling units would be occupied by groups of }'
college students,petitioner agreed to limit the size of the units to 2 bedrooms. He
also agreed to insert a private restriction into the condominium documents to
prohibit the use and occupation of the units by more than 2 unrelated adults.
S. Architect Ray Guertin presented plans for the proposed addition, showing a street
scape that follows the design of the surrounding buildings and uses design
elements from the neighborhood. The plan provides for HVAC and exhaust on
the rear of the building,to lessen the impact of noise and cooking smells on the
neighborhood.
9. The proposed development was strongly opposed by neighbors. Parking was a
major issue in the university neighborhood,as were storage of rubbish and
overuse of the property. Neighbors worried that the dense nature of the
development and lack of amenities such as laundry facilities, landscape space
and views would attract transient owners and lower the value of their homes
by creating an unpleasant development. Among the neighbors who spoke in
In opposition were Diane Rafferty, 7 Bristol St,Caroline Berth,26 Wisteria St.
Kathleen Bartlett, 335 Lafayette St,David Goggin, 300 Lafayette St., Katrina
Webster, 6 Plymouth St.,Angie Cruz, 12 Clifton Ave., Polly Wilbert, 7 Cedar St.
Donna Woods,David Buckoff,4 Bristol St. and Rich Ostergerg, 17 West Ave.
10. City Councilors Matt Veno of Ward 5,Arthur Sargent(Councilor at Large), and
Joseph O'Keef of Ward 7 opposed the development. Mr. O'Keefe voiced concern
Not just about overcrowding, but also about fire vehicles' access to the new units.
11. Michael Numerovsky of 327 Lafayette St. supported the proposal for new units
on the grounds that improvements to be building are badly needed,but hard to
justify financially. Saying the status quo is a poor option, he noted the parking
lot at this address is used for drinking parties at night when the businesses have
close.
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 do not exist which especially affect the subject property but not
the district in general.
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JACKIE CL LEE REQUESTING SPECIAL
PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 321-333
LAFAYETTE STREET B-1
page four e)
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would not involve
nw
substantial hardship on the petitioner. -ten
w 6'ac
3. The relief requested cannot granted without substantial detriment to the pe�lic
good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent o e
district or the purpose of the ordinance. a
4. The Special Permit granted cannot be granted in harmony with the neighborhood
and will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's
inhabitants.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted, 0 in favor and 5 in opposition to grant the
relief requested.
SPECIAL PERMIT&VARIANCE
DENIED OCTOBER 20,2004
,V.,O, roem cs�
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
Certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed 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 or the owner of
record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
CONDIT
" CITY OF SALEM
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STANLEY J. USOVICZ,JR.
MAYOR 120 WAS[INCYON STRI IT•S\LLM,INIA�ACIILH T L;01970
LN,NN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICP TEL 978-745-9595 • F\X:978-740-0404
DIRECTOR
June 16, 2005
Niko's Pizza&Roast Beef
333 Lafayette Street
Salem, MA 01970
RE: Illegal Banner Sign at Niko's Pizza & Roast Beef, 333 Lafayette Street
Dear Business Owner,
As was discussed during our phone conversation on May 26, 2005 your establishment is
located within an Entrance Corridor and must adhere to both the Entrance Corridor
Overlay District Ordinance and the Salem Sign Ordinance. Signs consisting of banners ate
not permitted in this district. Temporary signs pertaining to special sales or events can only
be affixed to the inside of your establishment's windows facing out toward the public way,
and no permit is required for such temporary signs.
Therefore the banner sign located on the exterior of your establishment is an illegal sign and
must be removed immediately. Please note that if the sign is not removed immediately, we
will forward this matter to the Building Inspector who will enforce the penalties and fines
under Sec 3.36, Sec 3.29 of the Salem Sign Ordinance and 780 CMR Sec 3102.4 of the
Building State Code.
Should you have any further question regarding this matter I can be reach at (978) 745-9595
ext 311.
Sincerely,
n o �
lanner/C nservation Agent
Cc: Thomas St. Pierre,Building Commissioner