96 BRIDGE STREET - ZBA (2) 96 Bridge St. R_2
Liani Realty Trust
j Cis- SOL__
y
� a
f
flIitg of Salem, � Hussttr e##s. K
�gottra of �Avfreul
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LIANI REALTY TRUST FOR A SPECIAL
PERMIT AND VARIANCES AT 96 BRIDGE ST. (R-2)
A hearing on this petition was held June 27, 1990 with the following Board
Members present: Richard Bencal , Chairman; Edward Luzinski , Vice Chairman;
Joseph Correnti , Secretary; Richard Febonio and Mary Jane Stirgwolt. Notice
of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were
published in the 1
properly p e Sa em EveningNews in accordance with Massachusetts
sachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner, owner of the property, represented by Attorney Richard Stafford, is
requesting Special Permit and Variances to allow construction of two additions
to an existing nonconforming structure and to expand nonconforming use in this
R-2 district.
The Variance which has 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 and 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 provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request
for a Special Permit is Section V B 10, 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
Section VIII F and IX D, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction
of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion
of nonconforming, lots, land, structures, and use, 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 requests,
guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding
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 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 . The parcel and building in question are existing nonconformities.
2. The site has served as a coffee,doughnut and coffee retail outlet for
over twenty five (25) years.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LIANI REALTY TRUST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT AND
VARIANCES AT 96 BRIDGE ST. , SALEM
page two
3. The proposed additions to the structure will allow the business to compete
in an increasingly competitive market.
4. The proposed additions wil enable the petitioner to comply with regulations
concerning handicapped accessibility and to provide two restrooms that
are accessible to the handicapped.
5. The present hours of operation and parking availability will remain unchanged.
6. The parcel in question is a corner lot and there is no adjacent land
available for possible acquisition by the petitioner.
7. No opposition to the petition was expressed.
8. Direct abutters spoke in favor of the petition as conditioned, citing the
fact that the petitioner is an excellent neighbor.
9. An inability to expand this building would prevent handicapped accessibilty
and create substantial hardship to the petitioner.
10. The proposed increase in this nonconformity would not be detrimental to the
neighborhood and would not conflict with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
11 . Because of the existing nonconformity and because of the particular
requirements of the existing business, this parcel has unique characteristics
which do not generally affect other parcels in the R-2 district.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the
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 Ordinance would involve a
substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3. The relief requested 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.
4. The granting of the relief requested will promote the public health, safety,
convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants and will be in harmony
with the district.
:;therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the
_Special Permit and Variances requested, subject to the following conditions:
,-l1 . All construction comply with all local and state building codes.
2. All construction be in strict accordance with plans and dimensions submitted.
J
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LIANI REALTY TRUST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT
AND VARIANCE AT 96 BRIDGE ST. , SALEM
page three
3. Exterior finishes of the proposed additions be in harmony with the
existing structure.
4. A building permit be obtained from the City of Salem Building Inspector
prior to any construction being started.
5. A Certificate of Occupancy be obtained.
6. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire
safety are to be strictly adhered to.
7. Signage remain as per the plans.
8. Exterior light be as per plans and facing away from away from adjacent
residential properties.
9. An eight (8) foot wood fence be erected by the petitioner along the common
boundary with lot 118, said fence is to be maintained in perpetuity.
10. The dumpster is to be screened with a six foot fence to be maintained in
perpetuity.
SPECIAL PERMIT & VARIANCES GRANTED
Mary Stirgwolt ' ember, Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
ADpeal from this decision, If any,shall be made pursuant to Section 17 to
the Mass. General Laws, Chapter BOB, and shall be filed within 20 days
.� after the date of filing of this decision;n th�eCBOtfS_-tion
a tionh1lC the ity CVar ante
r - Pursuant to Mass.General Lacs,
Ch effect�t tcMe effrct until a copy of the
or °pecial Permit granted he-em s. -"I
decision, bearing the ceras be'°? of:a t i0 tiiatrif that 20
.-4 elapsed and no appeal has been fi:ec or
'~ filed,that it has been dismisscki or ^aced is retarded in the South ord 0
Registry of Deeds and indexed ounder
n e's h2 name Certificate rthe of Title.ner of record or
is recorded and noted 1n BOARD OF APPFJ1t7
J
�� W i
NOTE:
LOT 118 LOT NUMBERS REFER TO CITY OF SALEM ASSESSOR'S MAP 36.
ERIC WILLIAMS
��' 19.59 4 PEARL ;STREETIO 10 10 1O
REFERENCE:
�•
7 '.59' ',
DEED. REC. BK. 7477 PG. 533
I CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDINGS EON IS LOCATED
ON THE GROUND AS SHOWN. s'\�tH or
LOT 4
-a aJ/2l�� � o
° T
WILLIAM P. ATTRIDGE Q
13 CROSS STREET N �_0 j ` PACE 5 LI�N� H
3 S51ANDgJLD �� y o�„+�
I LA10
31 .4 - — 51 —
ND'Cs = Hsw (/_oNS-TnwG-rtof,4
551 rA2l(1N4 LAYOUT ADDED 7�
7.55' SUIeVEY r7 C- 50 OY=
12 D !Z 0 LOT 117
pUMPStER i AREA 10. 077 +/- S.F. b MES Fi. 13-NL.LO0, A - J-A- PN CCHYTEG7
z3' 4 ----- —� I f �`ERED'IR(•hq
'N
N�W �0 NSTftUCrlOf4 R No. 1397
///'fit I s euc
x 3 s R T PWt l LA nPEO Pt�2K1 Nq LAYOUT F
Zo 0, 47N Of Miss
RAMP
_74—
-�__-- -_-- 370 - - - -- Lo
23 4 (
o
LOT 116
RAYMOND L . YOUNG
98-100 BRIDGE STREET
j i l2 N
7—
--- - ��I
cr 196 ,I
f1^
O 5 4
1 I INCH = 10 FEET I 14
10 0 10 20 I I 14 -- — —
8 15
Z234 57
--_ ---�------ - ---- _ . _ --
---�-- - - i
AD
tP��O1 S E D 11 r M
co 2 O ADDI ION J
19 7
PLOT PLAN OF LAND
IN
SALEM
W) L ' 85. 0'
PROPERTY 0v
BRIDGE STREET LIANT REALTY TRUST
sca_ - 1 1=
10 ' - �o
NORTH SHORE SURVEY CORP.
r I �
L TE T
i
Ll
{ T
P4t-
i
FAvE. J AreEA
1
Elmo 0
p I. W
GTllMY�'f4.2,
co
rFV'
y \ ' Z4. t _— -- -- — — _
00
Q
co
{y11
_ O
L A r.! 5EE flaw4. Net� W
P -rr
j s -
+ (o061 � c
4 - 10 077 5- ' f (� Z
Lrrt tzE.4 - v
APAPF BUILID N4 W/Af7DN. + 1 9:^ 5_r. Orz 15.8,, of tiE*A • (C1 N
y_1 0.1 .:T' Md
T
REVISIONS.
X �T � N4 CDNDlT1o �1 - -__-'=--- � --
--- - -
1.
-
DATE
i
1
i , EXIS'f1rJ �,� � A+7�c-f'ro�1
F2 0 >:::;'O S 9 !-:;:' N C- tnJ -�- L F VN-r o '
�VjEAY_XUA._
-TY-1 SANK I M1xFr- {y hlNfr ' s NK i r1f& f oqLl
-
n 0011. r— 4,Torz:AGi5f t �eVj 0 ici4��1
LAS ( I f
• it — � � ' -- ` f 1 _ _' I
I � _
' \ TA 'n
L+; I
I i I
" -
--
n --- - _ _ . - - _ ._ -T''T__� rn
V N
i l4 L L
I �� ca
�Xt �,'(i +�..� i� fvtV-.t AG'_•t rt �r., `} . 4 Q �
I
t` L o o r� E- i Q -
r � Ji
C)
co
`1Lo x
co
„ o
0
�1nI' CD
P _ _ _ _ -- ._.__ — ...._ ._ _ - _• _ -1_
1 I I
1
Z
� c'a
I
. REVISONS:
DATE
y
CEA Zi L E
z1CAt6 '14"
D'wg. No.
I
I
f
r� .
F � �
'WALE
� L
i N
' Q
i
--
OD
Ne"qV>—Z U (10 o
m m
vs�
7OUrNa
a; cc
r W 3
co
70m
CAI
cu
-- IL
Q
_ _ . .__- _. . __._ n cv cc
a
t- REVISIONS:
R✓ _ -- -- — _— __ — DATE -
t��'.� q F��Stiyy
r
: ,4
D'wg. No.
I �
i
L r-- V
i
t+ o
IF
LL
it
-
Ir
cc
L
p b 1 i N
pop, -��� Ear;.�:�,; �, ,-�ta�i A ` N •
i z —
o
co
cc o
lJi 4: m
ZD , 0.1 l+, c
� Y
�usT- tvrrkl l'�'!i HeA-T Off. �i'11CA 4 l+� ?`! `� - ' Ef CV u E U
i.
Ll
cc
a I:
a —J t REVISIONS:
_.
11.1lf
i
DATE' tiln r '
TT-
A STUN ATS- -FL09 E PL A �'l
NEvJ WCaP (JNS . UCTrs ,
New rar�c, +E �� D'wg. N o. 4
' r'!•-��• ccy_ _C-ti- Lock: