56 ALMEDA STREET - ZBA Lot 56 Almeda St.
I
Ugo & Eliose DiBiase ^
0
3
0
m 0
z � _Q1
Vl
i
i
CARTER & TOWERS ENGINEERING CORP.. /� D / /�
JurueY3e C.ounee[ and Keporb
JOSEPH D. GARTER. Ps[.m[N♦ /^
REmarENm LAND SUAv"ORS AND C,, ENOINgSA, 4. '� /A �� 6 FAIRVIEW AVENUE
I SWAMPSCOTT, MASS. 01907
Tel, 592-8386
12201
f '
`J
- !
�J
ti
L~
ly
,
Plot plan of land in�.,Ic • N' _ T-
Belonging to L,i - 1 ;1 ti �AEPH OF MgO 1C
IUSEPH XG
Scale 1 fet'l; to an inch
/
10 C?.RTER yl
Date A .4u. =7
hU SUR`1`��
CIVIL ENGINEERING SURVEYING COST CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES
.o:• Location, Ownership, and Detail must he Correct, Complete and Legible.
f• 'qi Separate application required for every building.
Plans must be filed with this application
•�,. ��•`� Application for Permit to Build
Salem, Mass.. ........January......................3.0............................ 19.74..
TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR:
w
° The undersigned hereby applies for a permit to build, according to the following specifications:—
5
a 6 Almeda St., Salem
8 Location, No. ........ ...........................:..................................................................................................... Ward No. .....4........
d
a n Name of owner is? ...........DiBias......Bros.'.............................................................Address .9.5...Ap.q.r. }..Sk..q.,XAjden
vw
eo Name of Builder? ............DiBiase...Bros .............................................................
d Name of Architect or Engineer .........Carter & Towers M
.. ...................................................................
w° Material of building? .........Concrete Block y
...................................................................................................................
s$ O ? Stora e of Bld Materiels
Building to be occupied for? ►�
d a If a Dwelling, How many families? ................................................................................... M
m: How near the line of the street? ..��.............................. Width of the street? ......... .................................................. (�
t2i
Will the building be erected on solid or filled land? ............Solid
x Size of building, No. of feet front? .....60... ... No. of feet rest? .......6Q.�. No. of feet deep? 100
m ..... eep. .....................: y
a0 ' .No. of ft. in height from sidewalk to highest Z
ca 9 No. of stories in height; above basement? ......:..... g g point of roof?
. c
L E ........................Material of foundation? ............Cement t7
................................................................................................................
. °
O .• ? Earth
a Will foundation be laidcc 0 >on earth, rock or piles. M
021
p .... Posts? .................................. Girts? .. ...� Size of sills.?....................... .. ...... ..................... Plates? .................................. C
.� Wood framed roof
=;E Building how framed? .................................................................................................................... M
s 9 8" .concrete
3 e External walls, 1st,block.. 2nd,................ 3rd................. 4th,................ 5th ................ Cr7
,+ 1 thickness?
Z Party walls, } ist................. 2nd................. 3rd................. 4th;................ 5th ................
3
z
g.°^. What will be the materials of front? Concrete block
....................................................................... ~"
............ '
° .............. . Concrete block
° ° What will be the materials of rear.? .......................................................................................... :, .....
ay
°x What will be the materials of sides?.................Concrete block & garage door
..........
S flat rolled roofing$
Will the roof be flat, pitch, mansard or hip?......... Material of roofing?... ..................................................... ;pi
yW •
m What will be the material of cornice?..............
.......................................................................................................................
a
How many means of egress are provided?............................Conductors connected to?......................................................
Are there any hoistways or elevators?..................................How protected?........................................................................
CHow is building heated.............. O.........................................Basement ceiling, how protected?........................................
°:e
°= Automatic sprinklers?..............................................................Will chimney have flue lining?
Stairways enclosed in brick walls?..........................................Thickness of such walls?.......
a Estimated Cost,
p< or Valuation
000.00 Signature of owner or authorized n$...5.r..... ........ representative ....... .... ..V..........ie............&21;--�
...............
Address... ... ...... ......... ...........
i ,
No.... ..1l�.................. PLAN OF LOT
t
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO BUILD Showing Location of Proposed Structure
................................................CLASS BUILDING
/gyp LOCATION pn�
No..... .Z lo... .......................
......................................._.............Ward...-e/.............
pOwner. _.....
m
cost........ ...........................................
C
'�. CONDITIONS
serf. ..
R .. .. . lnsJ
f ' r
a.... . ..� ..................
C .. ... .. ....................................................
Permit Granted
�... ........................... ...�4,r............ 19./. .
'. ......... ... : .. :/14 ' :.......... ;...
?
V-
TE OF PERMIT PERMIT No. OWNER LOCATION
1.30.74 I #24 I DiBiase Bros. 56 Almeda Street _
STRUCTURE MATERIAL DIMENSIONS No.OFSTORIES No.OFFAMILIES WARD COST
4 5,000.
Temp/Bldg. Concrete 60'x6O 'x100
Block BUILDER
Owner
Erect temporary building for storagg, in accordance to variance
approved by the Bd.of Appeals (3 years only) 1U7�9/`7 2)
Petition of Salem Realty Trust(Ugo & Elio DiBiase Trustees) requesting an extension on
Special Permit granted in 1973 to construct a temp.bldg.for the use of storage of equip
ment & bldg materials,together with a chain link fence 7 to 8 ft.around boundary lines
denied - , .y _ )
BOARD OF APPEAL ON FEBRUARY 20, 1985 VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO UPHOLD IT's 1977 DECISION
WHICH DENIED A THREE YEAR EXTENSION FOR THE TEMPORARY STORAGE BUILDING
3/3/88 1188-88 DEMOLISH 60'X100' Garage Fee $25.00 (owner DiBiase Corp. )
DATE OF PERMIT PERMIT No. OWNER LOCATION
1.30.74 I W24 I DiBiase Bros. I 56 Almeda Street
STRUCTURE MATERIAL DIMENSIONS No. OF STORIES No.OF FAMILIES WARD COST
4 15,000.
Temp/Bldg. Concrete 60'x60'x10O
Block BUILDER
Owner
Erect temporary building for storagg, in accorda ce to variance I
approved by the Bd.of Appeals (3 years only) /D/�q/7 3
Petition of Salem Realty Trust(Ugo & Elio DiBiase Trustees) requesting an extension on
Special Permit granted in 1973 to construct a temp.bldg.for the use of storage of equip-
ment & bldg materials,together with a chain link fence 7 to 8 ft.around boundary lines
denied �77)
k
i
.\C0:TIL1
r Otu of *Irm, gassachusetts
�nttrD of �kupeal
January 11 , 1985
Michael O'Brien
City Solicitor
City Hall
Salem, Massachusetts
Dear Mr. O'Brien:
Enclosed please find recent correspondence from you
and Councillor O'Leary. The information contained herewith
and following your instructions, the Board of Appeal will
schedule a hearing on this matter of a temporary building
located at Almeda & Hillside Aves. Said hearing to be held
on February 20, 1985.
In order that the Board of Appeal may make a just and
proper decision, would you kindly forward any and all in-
formation or court proceedings that have transpired through
the years. If you have any questions or advice please don't
hesitate to correspond or call.
Cordially,
`�"James B. Hacker
Chairman
J?JhTS
cc: Councillor Leonard O'Leary
Richard McIntosh, Zoning Enforcement Officer
„conicL,ti�
(f i#U of ttiem, � ttsSttcl�u�e##s
!YPm4.tl{
January 11 , 1985
Michael O'Brien
City Solicitor
City Hall
Salem, Massachusetts
Dear Mr. O'Brien:
Enclosed please find recent correspondence from you
and Councillor O'Leary. The information contained herewith
and following your instructions, the Board of Appeal will
schedule a hearing on this matter of a temporary building
located at Almeda & Hillside Aves. Said hearing to be held
on February 20, 1985.
In order that the Board of Appeal may make a just and
property decision, would you kindly forward any and all in-
formation or court proceedings that have transpired through
the years. If you have any questions of advice please don' t
hesitate to correspond or call.
Cordially,
'7
James B. Hacker C'O
Chairman
JBH:bms
cc: Councillor Leonard O'Leary
Richard McIntosh, Zoning Enforcement Officer
'Gifu Elf C1IIr11I, C11c5�IL�11I5E15
Offite of flit Li#U Lmnui1
Gifu '4all
J
WARD COUNCILLORS
JEAN MARIE ROCHNA 1994
COUNCILLORS-AT•LARGE PRESIDENT
1994 GEORGE A. NOWAK
JOSEPHINE R. FUSCO STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR.
JOSEPH M. CENTORINO CITY CLERK STEPHEN P. LOVELY
LEONARD F. O'LEARy
FRANCES J. GRACE
JEAN-GUY J. MARTIN EAU
JEAN MARIE ROCHNA GEORGE P. MCCASE
RICHARD E. SWINIUCH JOHN R. NUTTING
January 10, 1985
games B. Hacker, Chairman
Salem Board of Appeals
one Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
Re: DiBiase
Almeida/Hillside Aves,
Dear Jim:
You might recall that last year I asked the City Solicitor
to look into the status of the "
three- ear temporary"
Permit
. or the cement storage building at the above location. The City
Solicitor reported to me that Por. DiBiase filed two petitions
with your board in 1977 (March 1 , 1977 and R.ay 17, 1977) seeking
an extension of the three-year temporary permit granted in 1973.
Both petitions were denied by your board and Dor. DiBiase appeal-
ed both to Superior Court, The City Solicitor further reported
that on January 31, 1980 , the Superior Court remanded the two
re"tions back to the Board of Appeals for a new hearing and
there has been no action by your board since that time.
I respectfully request that you hold a new hearing and
dispose of this long standing matter. I am enclosing a copy of
the .City Solicitor' s response to me and a copy of the Court Order
for your records,
ry truly yours,
LeonaY�d R. 0'Lea
Councillor, V1ard
Enclosures
y�covo-��
I � `
a
CITY OF SALEM
MICHAEL E.O'BRIEN MASSACHUSETTS MARY R. HAY
CITY SOLICITOR ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
N
OLICI
53 WASHINGTON STREET - - 93 WASHINGTON STREET
and
and
tE7 FEDERAL STREET 59 FEDERAL AL STREET
S
SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM, 019)0
7440033 50
7454311
7443363
please Reply to 59 Federal Street
plux Reply to 187 Federal Street
February 17, 1984
Salem City Council
City Hall
93 Washington Street
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen!
This letter is sent in response to your order adopted on
February 8, 1984 relative to the current status of the " three-
year temporary" permit for the cement storage building at the
corner of Almeida Street and Hillside Avenue . In responding to
the same , I have consulted with Ward 4 Councillor Leonard O ' Leary
and examined the records at the Board of Appeals , the City Soli-
citor ' s Office, the Board of Assessors and the Essex County Super-
ior Court.
After receiving a narrative of the background of the sit-
illor O'Leary, my examinationreveals that on
uation from CouncBoar2 of ASalem
December 30 , 1973, the ecia1 granted permit (the records are
Realty Trust a variance and/or sp P
unclear as to which) to temporary storage building
at lot 56 Almeida Street. Said variance and/or special permit
construct a
was granted for a three-year period. On March 1, 1977 , DiBiase
Salem Realty Trust petitioned the
tedr n f Appeals
73 andtforr"anecoex-
tension of the Special Permit"g
ran
of the Board reds
flect that this petition was denied. On March 29 ,
1977, DiBiase Salem Realty Trust filed a Complaint in Superior
Court (Docket #7985) pursuant to Massachusettse March 1, General Laws ,ision of
Chapter 40A, Section 21 appealing was held by the Board of
the Board of Appeals . A new hearing
Appeals on May 17, 1977 , on a new petition by DiBiase Salem
Realty Trust for a three-year extension of the variance granted
in 1973 and the records of the Board indicate the petition was
denied and the petitioner ordered to remove the building .
- 2
On June 29 , 1977, DiBiase Salem Realty Trust filed another
Complaint in Essex County Superior Court CDocket 28747) pur-
suant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 21
appealing the May 17, . 1977 decision of the Board of Appeals .
The records of the Superior Court indicate that both case
27985 and 28747 were. never tried and that on January 31, 1980
both cases were remanded back to the Board of Appeals for a
new hearing Ccopy enclosed) . The records of the Board of Ap-
peals indicate that no new hearing was ever held and there
has been no action on the matter since January 31 , - 1980.
I further examined the records of the Board of Assess-
ors which indicate the subject property is currently being
assessed by the City of Salem for $130 , 100. 00 ($64 , 000 . 0b, land
and $66 ,100. 00 building).
In summary, it. appears that the matter of the "three-
year temporary permit is awaiting a new hearing by the Board
of Appeals .
I trust the above answers the question posed by your
Council Order. If not, I would be willing to meet with. you
either collectively or individually to answer further.
y t my yours ,
chael E. O 'Brien
City Solicitor
MEO/jp
cc : Board of Appeals
I
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
ESSEX, SS:, SUP P,IOR COURT
N . 7985
8747
I
/ , UGO DIBIASE, ET AL, TRS. )
Plaintiff )
vs. ) MOTION TO REMAND TO BOARD OF
APPEALS
BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY)
V ,OF SALEM ) I
jl Defendant )
Now comes the Plaintiff in the above entitled action and
M �1
loves to remand this case back to the City of Salem Board of
I , Appeals for a new hearing and determination.
,,tea ►� i
iBy Plaintiffs Attorney, '
��I ;•, � Januar 30, 1980 �
Date Peter R. Beatrice, Jr. , quire
�S 6 Beacon St., Suite 800
Boston, Nass . ,02108
\ i Tel : 227-6060
J i
Assented To:
William J. Tin , Esquire
!I Attorney for Defendant /� QL l
C 7
a �
i
I
D OF APPEALS COPY FOR YOUR
WOMMOU
1
�J i
SSO/q
CITY OF SAkE L
�FE
MICHAEL E. O'B RIEN ,tt L.E?�r�SG�SS.
CITY SOLICITOR MASSACHIY MARY P, HARRINGTON
93 WASHINGTON STREET ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
. and 93 WASHINGTON STREET
187 FEDERAL STREET and
SALEM, MA 01970 59 FEDERAL STREET
7454311 SALEM, MA 01970
7443363 7440350
Please Reply to 187 Federal Street Please Reply to 59 Federal Street
February 17, 1984
Josephine R. Fusco, City Clerk
City Hall
93 Washington Street
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Re: Council. Order of February 9 , 1984
(building at Almeida St./Hillside Ave, )
Dear Madam Clerk:
Enclosed please find my response to the above inquiry by
the City Council. Kindly communicate the same by the last coun-
cil meeting in March. (_22nd) as per the Council 's directive.
3erul our
l�
Michael E, OtBrien
MEO/7p
Enclosure
cc: Board of Appeals
COPY FOR TOGS
infonlon
q•
p
�q�NME Tp
MICHAEL E.O'BRIEN - CITY OF SALEM
CITY SOLICITOR MASSACHUSETTS MARY P. HARRINGTON
93 WASHINGTON STREET ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
. and 93 WASHINGTON STREET
187 FEDERAL STREET and
SALEM,MA 01970 59 FEDERAL STREET
745431/ SALEM,MA 01970
7443363 7440350
Please Reply to 187 Federal Street Please Reply to 59 Federal Street
February 17, 1984
Salem City Council
City Hall
93 Washington Street
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen=
This letter is sent in response to your order adopted on
February 8, 1984 relative to the current status of the "three-
year temporary" permit for the cement storage building at the
corner of Almeida Street and Hillside Avenue . In responding to
the same, I have consulted with Ward 4 Councillor Leonard O'Leary
and examined the records at the Board of Appeals, the City Soli-
citor's Office, the Board of Assessors and the Essex County Super-
ior Court.
After receiving a narrative of the background of the sit-
uation from Councillor O'Leary, my examination reveals that on
December 30, 1973, the Board of Appeals granted DiBiase Salem
Realty Trust a variance and/or special permit (the records are
unclear as to which) to construct a temporary storage building
at lot 56 Almeida Street. Said variance and/or special permit
was granted for a three-year period. On March 1, 1977, DiBiase
Salem Realty Trust petitioned the Board of Appeals for "an ex-
tension of the Special Permit"granted in 1973 and the records
of the Board reflect that this petition was denied. On March 29 ,
1977, DiBiase Salem Realty Trust filed a Complaint in Superior
Court (Docket #7985) pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws ,
Chapter 40A, Section 21 appealing the March 1, 1977 decision of
the Board of Appeals . A new hearing was held by the Board of
Appeals on May 17, 1977, on a new petition by DiBiase Salem
Realty Trust for a three-year extension of the variance granted
in 1973 and the records of the Board indicate the petition was
denied and the petitioner ordered to remove the building.
- 2 -
On June 29, 1977, DiBiase Salem Realty Trust filed another
Complaint in Essex County Superior Court (Docket #8747)pur-
suant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 21
appealing the May 17, 1977 decision of the Board of Appeals .
The records of the Superior Court indicate that both case
#7985 and #8747 were. never tried and that on January 31, 1980
both cases were remanded back to the Board of Appeals for a
new hearing (:copy enclosed) . The records of the Board of Ap-
peals indicate that no new hearing was ever held and there
has been no action on thematter att r since January 31 , 1980 .
I further examined the records of the Board of Assess-
ors which indicate the subject property is currently being
assessed by the City of Salem for $130, 100 . 00 ($64, 000 . 00 land
and $66 , 100 .00 building) .
In summary, it appears that the matter of the "three-
year temporary permit" is awaiting a new hearing by the Board
of Appeals .
I trust the above answers the question posed by your
Council Order. If not, I would be willing to meet with you
either collectively or individually to answer further.
y �t1my yours ,
chael E. O'Brien
City Solicitor
MEO/jp
cc: Board of Appeals
CITY OF SALEM
3 ,
7 4 cr p In Cit Council Feb. 9, 1984
LUti t1 _�
Ordered:
That the Board of Anneals, and the City Solicitor, notify in writing by the last
council meeting in March (22nd) the current status of the "three year temporary"
permit for the cement storage building at the corner of AhTeida St/and Hillside
_Arenuc.
In City Council February 9, 1984
Adopted
Approved by the Mayor on February 13, 1984
_V V
ATTEST: JOSEPHINE R. FUSCO
CITY CLERK
i•
�,conv,
of �alem, fflaSr, ht oe %c E V-o
Paurb of �Appzal JUN I 07 F11 '77
CITY LLE: , S UFFJCE
MAY 17, 1977 _ SALEM ASS.
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF UGO & ELIO DiBIASE, TRUSTEES OF DiBIASE
SALEM REALTY TRUST, CONCERNING PROPERTY LOCATED AT LOT 56 ALMEDA ST.
A hearing on this Petition was held Tuesday, May 17, 1977, with members Jane
Lundregan, Arthur Labrecque, William Abbott, and Associate Members James Boulger
and Douglas Hopper as voting members, present. Notices were sent to abutters and
others in accordance with Mass. General Laws, Chapter 808.
Atty. Peter Beatrice represented the Petitioners before the Board.
On December 20, 1973 the Board of Appeal granted the Petitioner a variance to
construct a temporary building 60 x 100 feet for the use of storing equipment and
building materials,together with a chain link fence 7 to 8 feet in height to be
installed around the boundry lines. The Petitioner requests that the variance
granted the Petitioner be extended an additional three year period. The Petitioner
stated that prior to the construction of the building, the Petitioners were constantly
subjected to "theft of building materials and damage to equipment by vandalism.
The Petitioner stated that the surrounding area was under-developed on which there
were no services, sewer, water or utilities, and the Petitioner stated that the present
need for the building is just the same as when the original petition was made, and the
circumstances and conditions which existed in 1973 are still existent at this time.
Several abutters appeared in opposition to the extension of the variance. The
abutters stated in contradiction to the Petitioner that the property surrounding Lot
56 Almeda St, has become more developed and there are several homes abutting the lot
in question.
The neighbors stated that the Petitioner never constructed the fence, which was one
of the conditions of the original variance. Photographs were presented showing the pro-
perty had not been kept in a clean condition but had become a place for junk, papers, etc. ,
and the neighbors also stated that the empty lot had become a gathering place for teenagers
and for roudy parties.
Also, Councillor Grace stated that phase two of the sewer project in Salem includes
Almeda St. and that very soon the land will be receiving sewer connections.
The Board voted unanimously to deny the request for the extension of the variance
for an additional three years.
DECISION - UGO & ELIO DIBIASE, SALEM REALTY TRUST - Page 2
The Board found that the Petitioners have not kept the property in good condition
and the fence that was supposed to be constructed had never been constructed.
The Board found that the use of the property is definitely detrimental to the
surrounding neighborhood and that the dogs and heavy equipment were a nuisance to the
neighborhood.
The Board found that the presence of the building on the lot located in an R-1
District devalued the surrounding properties which consist of single family homes.
The Board found therefore, it could not grant the variance requested, that no hard-
ship had been shown by the Petitioner and that the granting of the variance would be
detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood and would derogate from the intent of the
Salem Zoning By-law which seeks to protect the property rights of the residences in the
single family area.
The Board therefore denies the request for the extension of the variance and orders
. the Petitioner to remove the temporary building which had been used for the storage of
equipment and building materials and to restore the lot to its original state before the
granting of the variance on December 20, 1973.
DENIED ** * **a*****x*****
Appeal from this Decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Mass.
Gen. Laws,_ Chapter 808, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of
this Decision in the office of the City Clerk. _
Pursuant to Mass. General Laws, Chapter 808, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit
granted herein, shall not take effect until a copy of the Decision, bearing the certi-
fication of the City Clerk that 20 days have expired and no appeal has been filed, or
that, if such an 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 owner's Certificate of Title.
Copies of this Decision have been filed with the Planning Board and City Clerk.
BOARD OF APPEAL
tom' til j
r-'
U
� a_ �� ane T. Lun/ _
regan
W CD S Secretary
LLI
.W
W ,s. U4
5 _ �
Y
Y
AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE
I hereby certify that on the 29th day of Marche
197'/ 3 I gave notice to the Clerk of the City of Salem
that I have appealed the decision of the Salem Bcard of
Appeals this 29th day of March, 19`j7 be delivering in
I� hand' a copy of the complaint.
a ' SIGNED under the .penalties of perjury ,
Pe er R. Beatrice , r.
6 Beacon Street
Suite 800.
Boston, !Nass. , 02108
Y
1
4
i
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
C .
HEARING before the Salem Board of Appeals on a
Petition to extend a Variance for three years, held at
4.
One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts, on Tuesday,
May 17 , 1977 , at 8 :15 P .M.
f
} BEFORE:
William Abbott, Chairman
James Bolger
Douglas Hopper
Arthur LaBreque
June Lundrigan
John Powers .
Ethyl Crowell, Clerk
APPEARANCES:
a
Peter Beatrice, Esq. ,
Six Beacon Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 ,
for DiBiase Brothers.
r
r
MELVIN LIPMAN
` 10 TREMONT STREET
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02108
- 227-3985
2
I N D E X
SPEAKER PAGE
Mr . Abbott 3
9-10
17-22
24-25
Mr . Beatrice 3-9
15
25
i
Mr . Scholnick 9
20-21,
Mrs. Grace 10-14
9 Mrs. Lundrigan 10-11
j
21
g _ 24-25
Mrs. Crowell 11
c_= Mr. Theriault 14-15
19
w 22
Mr . Levesque 15-17
18-19
.:" 20-22
25
Mr . Rizzotti 17
Mr . Thomas 18
22
d
Mr . Moroni 19
Mrs . Baldini 19-20
i
Mr . Clark 20
Mr . Stetson 20
,y
Mr . McCarthy 22-24
3
i
i -
PROCEEDINGS
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Do you want to tell us why
you're in favor of this?
MR. BEATRICE: My name is Attorney Peter
Beatrice of Beacon Street, Boston, Massachusetts .
- I am the attorney and representative of DiBiase
Brothers .
FROM THE AUDIENCE: Louder please. We ,can ' t
hear you. We want to know what' s going on. We could
hear you in court, but we can' t hear you here. I
would suggest you move a little closer . Speak up.
Be cooperative, for crying out loud.
MR. BEATRICE: As I was saying , I represent
DiBiase Brothers of the Salem Realty Trust. On
December 20, 1973 , the Board of Appeals of. Salem
granted a variance to the applicant to construct a
building to store equipment and materials and to
construct a chain-link fence. The reasons given
at that time by the petitioner were, No. 1, that
they were constantly subjected to the theft of
building materials and damage to the equipment by
vandalism; No. 2 , that the surrounding area at that
time was relatively undeveloped property and there
was no service for sewer and water or utilities
4
�i
along Almeda Street; that the developer at that time was
a developer in the area, and he needed this building
temporarily, as it was stated at that time, for
security. The Board, after a hearing with the evidence
being presented, made a decision; and I quote from
that decision: "That they" -- referring to the
Board -- "reviewed all the evidence presented and
considered carefully the plan submitted, that a
variance could be granted without substantial
detriment to the public good and without nullifying
or substantially deviating from the intent of the
district or the purposes of the .zoning ordinance and
that special circumstances and conditions exist
which specifically affect the land and the structure
to be erected which do not generally affect other lots
in that area, and that literal enforcement of the
provisions of the zoning ordinance would involve
substantial hardship to the petitioner, " unquote.
The Board of Appeals at that time granted a variance
3
conditional upon a two-year period of time. The
same petitioner is now before this Board to request
an extension of the variance for an additional three
year period . It is the position of the applicant
that if this petition is not granted, that the
a . .
'i
5
Y '
petitioner would be subjected to the exposure of
theft of its materials and equipment and to the
vandalism of its property. In essence, they will
not have the security needed to protect its
property. The petitioner is still a developer in
the area .
The conditions and the circumstances that
were set forth by the petitioner in 1973 are ,
substantially the same conditions and the same
circumstances that existed, including the general
neighborhood. It is also the position of the .
petitioner , as was quoted by the Board of Appeals
in 1973 , that the granting of ' the extension would
not substantially be detrimental to the public
good; but if the extension is not granted , then the
literal enforcement of ,the .provisions of the zoning
ordinance would involve substantial hardship to . the
petitioner .
It has been alleged by some in the past that
this structure has created a blight in the area .
I respectfully request that this Board take a view
of the structure and the area in which it is
located before arriving at a decision. It has also
been alleged and said that the area has become a
6
drinking hangout for teenagers. I certainly hope
that these remarks would not beinferred that the
structure itself was a haven for drinking people.
There are many areas in many cities and towns where
teenagers congregate and drink, but it is not the
fault of the owners in any of these areas.
If I remember it, we questioned whether or
not it is the full responsibility of the owners to
constantly police their properties . I don ' t think
SO. I think that the petitioner, as well as other
owners, take preventive measures to protect their
property and to curb this type of activity. Again,
it was said that the petitioner has stored equipment
in poor repair in his lot. This statement is not
justified and simply is nota fact. This, particular
vehicle is used there for some of the waste materials,
paper and rubbish. It is also said and has been said
that there ' s plenty of rubbish up there, papers and
so on; but the petitioner, as well as other owners
of property, do the best they can to keep up and
clean any areas, as recently as Saturday, and some
will say because of this hearing. But I have some
photographs I would like to show you in a moment
` also and some comments with regard to where the
1
f
7
rubbish really lies. At the end, let me just point
out to you with youur. permission a rough sketch that
I drew for this hearing. I went up to look at this
area, and I refer to this plan. This is Almeda
Street. It ' s the street running along this area .
This is a pond. This is the area that ' s owned by
the applicant.
He does not own this area here. This house
for sale is approximately 300 feet away. The other
homes in my estimate are 450 to 500 feet away on
Colby Street. I notice a truck by the name of
Highway Farms parked behind that house for sale. I
notice beyond the road, there is rubbish, paper,
wood, and so on and so forth. As I understand it,
it ' s owned by the City;.. and there' s also a tank up
above on Almeda Street. I understand it was
inspected and found beer cans and bottles . There
wasn' t any found in this area, which we cleaned up.
We took some photographs as of Saturday to
indicate to the Board where the rubbish really lies
on City property, not DiBiase' s. It was still there
tonight as of about 7 : 15. There' s the area that
' DiBiase owns . Here ' s some photographs of the area,
e made about the
cleaned. There have been some remarks
s ,
8
dogs barking at night. I was up there tonight with
a couple of people. The dogs do not bark. If you
bang on the door, they ' ll bark; but at the same time,
at 7 : 20 this evening, 7 : 15, we heard dogs barking
across the way. I don' t know what the name of that
street is beyond that.
We believe that the dogs are necessary and
are enclosed there to help protect the materials,
anyone breaking in. it' s been used in many retail
stores. They're used in shopping centers . In fact,
people who own homes have them. The last thing I
can leave you with is that the owners of the
property are trying to cooperate as best they can.
We don' t feel that the neighbors who are here, we
do not feel that they wish to hinder a man in
business or to hurt him for personal satisfaction.
We don' t believe that.
We think that they have a genuine interest_
in this building, storing this equipment; but at
the same time, the petitioner or the applicant
feels it should be in' a spirit of cooperation.
' If there is something that they would need to
satisfy them in that area, I 'm sure that the
petitioner or the applicant would be happy to honor
;y.
9
any reasonable request or condition; but too many
of the comments, we feel, related to DiBiase are
not DiBiase at all; and we respectfully request
that this extension for a three-year period be
granted.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Thank you. Anybody else
want to say anything in favor of this?
MR. SCHOLNICK: Why can' t we do it for one
year, instead of three?
MR. BEATRICE: Could we have the names and
addresses of the people who are speaking?
MR. SCHOLNICK: It originally was for one
year. Is that right?
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: It originally was for
three years. Now they want three more. Please
state your name.
MR. SCHOLNICK: Sam Scholnick, S-c-h-o-l-n-i-c-k.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: I 'm looking for some more
people in favor of it.
MR. SCHOLNICK: I didn ' t say I 'm in favor .
I want to find out --
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: I don' t want you to talk.
MR. SCHOLNICK: All right. Okay.
S
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: All right. Now, if there ' s
10
anybody opposed to it, let them talk.
MRS . GRACE: My name is Frances Grace, and I 'm
the Ward Councilor where the building is located.
First, I 'd like to say that you did come in
originally for your original special permit or
variance, whatever it is . I 'm a little confused
right now. I ' ve got so many papers -- special permit,
variance, I don' t know what it was originally. Was
it originally a variance or a special permit?
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Special permit.
MR. GRACE: It was a special permit . Now,
on the March first agenda, this is listed as a
special permit. Tonight' s agenda, May 17 , it is
listed as an extension of a. variance . Was this a
change in the wording? Is that why they 're back
here again this evening? First, could someone
explain this to me?
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: I don' t know.
MRS . LUNDRIGAN: The original hearing was
apparently for a variance.
' MRS. GRACE: Okay. Three years ago it was
for a variance. It was just a typographical error
' sending out a special permit. We were here once
a ,
s
before.
4
11
MRS . LUNDRInAN: He went up to ask for a
variance the first time. I think that' s what he asked
for. This is the original permit.
MRS . GRACE: So in other words, it was a
mistake that it was the first of March as a special
permit. I 'm a little confused. You don' t usually come
out within two months on the same thing .
MRS . CROWE.LL: That 's the original that came
in . The second one that came in for the March
meeting came in as "special permit be granted. "
MRS. LUNDRIGAN: I think what happened is the
original petition three. years ago was for a
variance. They came in March and asked for a
j
special permit, when they should have been asking
fora variance.
MRS . CROWELL: . That ' s right. The third one
r is a variance based on that.
MRS . GRACE : I 'd like to make a few state
ments. The gentleman said they proposed to erect
a seven- to eight-foot fence around the boundary
I lines. ` I would like to say that no fence was ever
constructed. Now , these people came here last
time. They told you this. They told you about
the materials, the building materials laying around,
12
trash and junk. Saturday I witnessed with my husband,
along with one of the neighbors, what happened up
there. They dumped everything off of the truck.
They had a couple of young boys dumping things off
of a truck. We do have pictures with us tonight
and after they dumped all the junk off of the truck,
they brought this loam or dirt, whatever you want to
call it, and they covered over everything .
That' s why there is no more junk. Not only
was I a witness to this , but one of the neighbors;
and my husband was also there. We did go on up to
+ the property to see what was going on. We went up
i to Vale Street and witnessed this from Vale Street.
I don' t throw things out my window and then cover
t
it over with dirt, and I don' t think these people
should have to put up. with this either .
As far as no utilities being in the area, I
have the City map here for Phase 2 of the sewer
program. In November they're going to start
r ..
Phase 2, which does include Colby Street, Almeda
Street, and Hillside Avenue. They mentioned an
undeveloped area, and there' s only one house lot
r
left on Hillside Avenue that has been bought.
i
`n Someone is waiting for the sewers to come in to
13
build this house. There is a new house going up
next door to it now, but you can see it is included
on the Phase 2 sewer program.
The last time we were here, I could not say
this, but tonight I can say this . I can show you
in black and white. There is still an empty truck
that did take all the trash Saturday. The empty
cement mixer is still there. As far as I 'm
concerned, it' s still a blighted area. If you wait
three days before coming in again for a variance,
we 've put up with this for three years. We don' t
j expect to -come back in three years, and then have
them clean it up again in three years .
That' s why we' re here. These people have to
ji
i' .. live there. They pay big taxes for this . This is
1 • . an R-1 zone. As soon as this sewer goes down the
street, they ' re going to be banging on the City
Council door to buy the rest of Almeda Street.
There are some. lots for sale on Almeda Street, which
is City property. We already have a request to buy
one of them by an abutter for Hillside Avenue.
I 'm sure once this sewer goes down the street, it' s
going to double that property in value; but if
4 that building is there, no one is going to want to
14
build there. These people are here tonight, and I
hope you ' ll listen to them.
MR. THERIAULT: My name is Robert Theriault.
I think the attorney that is representing
Mr . DiBiase hit it right on the head when he said
that in ' 73 he applied for this variance because
at that time the apartments were going full blast.
He needed a place to store his equipment. We
granted him a variance. He got the variance, and
that place is all built up now. He' s doing most
a
of his work from what I understand up Loring Avenue.
Why doesn ' t he take all his equipment and
build himself a shantey up there and put his
equipment up there? We've got all kinds of problems
with the dogs. He' s go.t° the dogs running around
the neighborhood. You 've go£ young kids, four and
five and six years old. In the summertime they
might end up attacking these kids . I don' t have any
children this young, but somebody is going to get
hurt.
I He' s got two attack dogs in this building .
j
l Somebody lets them run around at random at times,
i .
not all the time. That' s all it takes is just once.
' They' re German shepherds that probably go about 150
15
pounds. He never put up the fence around that
property line. If he did, he probably wouldn' t be
vandalized.
MR. LEVESQUE: I 'm Laurent G. Levesque,
32 Hillside Avenue. Mr . Beatrice, you 'are 41
Mr . Beatrice?
MR. BEATRICE: Right.
f ,
MR. LEVESQUE: Mr. Beatrice made a statement
about the property up there, no sewerage and
everything like that; and he also showed pictures .
j
# , of the place cleaned up. I have five photos here.
i
jI wish you'd look at them. And I think you have
I. photos in your files also. These were just taken
? last week, these photos. DiBiase was up there
r'
just this past Saturday, cleaning up the property
so the lawyer could take the pictures to impress
you on the Board. Also, I feel that DiBiase
violated his first -- They got the first permit.
i
He put up a building, a temporary building . We
have an all-block building up there, and it ' s a
permanent building . Secondly, he was supposed to
erect an eight-foot-high fence, which he never
'x.
did. That' s another violation of the building
permit. Now, I think Mr . Beatrice showed pictures
16
of the trash all down Almeda Street. I have no
,
proof of this, but I think some of the neighbors
know it. While Mr . DiBiase was building the
apartments at Heritage, on Heritage Place there,
he was using all the City property down there as a' ' ,
City dump, and he was told to stop that; and the
i photos that his lawyer has now are, I think, part ,of
the junk that he himself has thrown down on that
road .
I passed by there one time when he was building.
I followed his truck in, and there was trash, papers,
and everything. It was trash. He wasn ' t allowed to
i
burn any more over there because the incinerator was
I
smoking. He is taking his truck and hauling the trash
down on Almeda Street down the hole, and these are
the pictures he' s showing; and he ' s blaming the City
for not cleaning up the property.
As far as not being built up, I think it was
brought up by Grace we just have one more house lot
available there, except Almeda Street, which has a
lot of vacant lots; but Hillside Avenue has only one
lot left, which was bought; and as Grace said , they 're
waiting for sewerage to come in, and they have no
other spare lots on Hillside Avenue, and I can ' t see
17
t' how he can make a statement that the area -- In other
words, our area warrants his building . And he did
` mention that he did violate the zoning ordinance by
refusing -- not refusing -- by not putting up an -
eight-foot fence. He violated : it right there. I
was over there taking pictures last Sunday. The two
dogs were barking, and I did not knock at that garage
i'
door . I just walked on the property and if you see
1 how I took the pictures, I wasn 't even close to that
x. garage, and the dogs were barking .
So you don ' t have to knock on the door to have
i
those dogs barking . I think that' s all I 've got to
say on that. I 'm very much opposed against that
building being there, plus I said the last time I 'm
a night worker; and those trucks, bulldozers, starting
in the daytime when I 'm trying to sleep, I just can't
sleep.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Do you want to say anything
now?
MR, RIZZOTTI : I 'm Frank Rizzotti . What the
gentleman said is true, so I oppose it also. My land
wouldn ' t be worth a dime. If he puts another fence
there, that property won't be worth a dime anyway,
so I oppose it.
' f
• - 19
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Anybody else want to say
anything in opposition? {,
t
MR. THOMAS: John Thomas . I 'm in opposition
because it affects everything in the R-1 Zone. We
still want that zone to be for single-family homes,
no commercial.
MR. LEVESQUE: I think everybody' s in favor
of that, and I have asked the Board at the last
meeting how come he was allowed to put a building
up there in the first place, and all the abutters
were not notified, but I understand the law has been
changed since, that at the time they put it up he
�. didn' t have to notify many of the abutters . Maybe
the next-door neighbor, which was Mrs . LeBlanc at
the time, and that' s how. he got the permit to put
that building up. I don ' t think we would have been
in favor of even allowing the building there at the
time .
MR. THOMAS: That' s right. It ' s an R-1 Zone.
That should remain an R-1 Zone.
MR. LF.VESQUF: I built my house up there
when it was a cow path. Now it' s all built up with
single-family homes . There' s one more to go up, and
I don' t like a garage in my backyard., which it is in
,.
19
my backyard.
L°•
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Anything else?
MR. MORONI: My name is Phil Moroni, and I 'm
an abutter at 28 Cherry Hill Avenue; and I 'd like
to go on record as opposed to it.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Anybody else?
MRS. . BALDINI: Yes. My name is Beth Baldini,
and I live at 100 Colby Street; and I have small
children of school age, and I feel that the area
is hazardous for my children, and there still is an
old empty cement mixer directly across the street
from my house. There are boys of high-school or so
age going up there. They go inside of this piece of
! equipment, and they are drinking beer; and this is
his equipment that they , are using, not just the
i
area; and also if he' s going to be using these trucks
for construction of another area, they 're going to be
going right up and down the street in front of my
house, and there are no sidewalks on Colby Street.
A ,
I My children, when they have to go out to go
to school, have to walk in the street; and they will .
1'
be endangered by this equipment going up and down the
ystreet.
c
e
MR. THERIAULT: How far away is your house?
20
.A
It' s not four or 500 feet. It' s right across the
{ street.
MRS. BALDINI: Right, directly across the
street, so I 'm definitely opposed to the building.
MR. CLARK: My name is Jeff Clark, and I 'm
building a house less than a hundred yards away,
right next door to here, across the street from
this warehouse there; and it ' s just terrible. I
hate to look out the window, when I 'm in there to
look what I got across the street. It ' s bad. It ' s
a lousy setup.
MR.. LEVESQUE: I think it knocks the valuation
of our property all down by having that building back
there.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Anybody else?
MR. STETSON: Edward and Carol Stetson. We're
also opposed to this building because we see .what
happened on the other side of Highland Avenue. We
don' t want the same thing over on our side. Take that.
garage down and leave it the way it was .
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Anybody else?
MR. SCHOLNICK: Sam Scholnick. I have an
empty lot near to the barn, near to that garage; and
of course there ' s nobody living there, but at the same
21 '
time, if he doesn't get a permit, does that place have •
to go down? Does that have to be taken down if you
don' t extend it?
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Well, we're not talking about
�. demolishing the building or anything. We're talking
about a permit.
MR. SCHOLNICK: Well, if he doesn' t get a
permit, that means the building has got to come
1 down? He has no permit, right?
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: I can' t answer it.
MR. SCHOLNICK: I 'm asking a question.
MR. LEVESQUE: Who can answer it, sir?
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Well, you ' ll have to go
to court for that, I suppose.
MRS . LUNDRIGAN: My view is we have to. If
h it was granted for only a three-year period, if the
three-year period isn ' t extended, I would think that
would mean he'd have to take the building down. You'd
have to view the original variance and see what it
says ..
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: That' s an opinion of law.
MR. LEVESQUE: ` How about the decision of the
Board at the last meeting we had? This coming in,
these are almost all the same things. How does this
22
alter the decision of the Board after two months of
i,
making a decision of denial? He' s coming back, and
all the grievances are the same. There have been
no changes.
r
The only thing that Mr. DiBiase did for a
change was go up there three days before the meeting
and clean up the property .
MR. THOMAS : And bury the evidence.
r, MR. LEVESQUE : That' s all . This is a repeat
case actually, and I can't see how come it can alter
the decision of the first one.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: I guess we 've heard all the
u opposition.
i
MR. THERIAULT: I think you 've got to take
into consideration this. is a Residential 1 zone.
This is very important.
' MR. McCARTHY: John McCarthy, 2; Holly- Street
t
j
in Salem. I ' s just an interested observer. I 'd
like to speak in opposition. It seems to me the
kinds of things these people have brought up and the
i lawyer has brought up make a number of points to me.
No. 1, it is an R-1 zone, and it is still an R-1 zone.
A variance was granted for a specific period of time
for a specific purpose, and there's no mention that I
23
could hear as to why there wouldn' t be another
extension three years from now. So it seems to me
that we' re just going to maintain this type of thing;
and it doesn' t sound like good planning for a business
outfit. It seems to me that they have violated the
intent of your permission in the first place by not
erecting a fence, which seemed to make some sense at
that time.
But I don ' t think that that ' s the kind of
correction that anybody is asking for now. They' re
saying "Look, you had someone who didn ' t show good
intent. " They built what seems to be a permanent
or semi-permanent building, as opposed to a temporary
building . They didn' t fulfill the requirement of a
fence, and it would appear to me that they didn' t
clean it up and that they have made a face-saving type
of thing to begin with.
It seems to me if there was good faith on
their part, that they would have cleaned it up once
a week, once a month, or something like that, to
appease the people; but there ' s been no mention of
that, it seems to me, and it seems to me it' s gone
beyond that, in any event. You 're asked to act on
;'. 9 an R-1 zone, and I 'm generally speaking for keeping
i 24 .
our zoning laws intact':. There are exceptions, and I
think you people used excellent judgment in the case
+ before, but this one here, I think is a clear case
that it should be denied. Thank you.
MRS. LUNDRIGAN: There is a letter from the
Planning Board that I can read. I think we 've heard
1
all the opposition.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: All right.
MRS . LUNDRIGAN: It reads as follows :
1' "The Planning Board has care-
i
fully reviewed this request and
A
rwould urge the Appeal Board to
consider the following point in
making its decision.
"The construction of even a
a temporary industrial type building
i
in a residential area violates all
b
planning practices and seriously
undermines the character of the
area. We strongly urge that this
extension be denied. There are
other suitable areas for this kind
of activity within the City. "
And it' s signed by Walter Power III, Chairman of the
25
Planning Board.
MR. LEVESQUE: Thank you for bringing that out.
I was trying to remember that statement. That was
made at the last meeting .
MRS . LUNDRIGAN: Right.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Well, is everybody in
opposition exhausted? Do you want to continue for
a couple of more hours? We've got plenty of time,
you know.
MR . THOMAS: We enjoy your company too.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: So if you want to get your
second breath, all right. If not, we' ll go right back
�- to the beginning and have the man in charge of the
request speak.
MR . BEATRICE: I, believe I made the request.
I don' t have anything to add to it. I do not wish
at this time to answer all the statements. Some of
them are inaccurate, ,but I would thank you at this
time for the time you 've given me, for your considera
tion, and your courtesy. That' s all, Mr . Chairman.
CHAIRMAN ABBOTT: Thank you. I declare the
hearing closed .
'r (Whereupon, at 8 : 45 P.M. , the hearing was"
terminated'. )
I
a .
4
�nw (�f f Lees
�f
Beatzice, TeCouzcy, cNa&ny and Outlau7
'Suite goo
6 Beacon cSf2eef
Boston, dY..c4uszffs 02108
SFd. 227-6060
Jn-efe2 cR.�taftice, aR. 00%don'9, ^41n
�Liomas e�susfinn Lie eauuy June 30, 1977 Jf eounaeL
(c(�RuueLL 1/'1. d�aLsony
1JA22�L L. c7utLAa,
William Abbott, Chairman
Salem Board of Appeals
Salem, Massachusetts , 01970
RE: Hearing
Salem Board of Appeals
May 17 , 1977
Dear Mr. Abbott:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Stenographic notes
that were taken on May 17 , 1977 with regard to the above
entitled matter.
I just received these notes yesterday, so I am forwarding
a. copy to you for your records.
Very truly yours,
peter R. Beatrice, Jr.
General Counsel for
DiBia.se Brothers
PRB/cros
Enclosure