7 CARPENTER STREET - ZBA 7 CARPENTER STREET
INo
CC: CITY SOLICITOR 5 BD. OF APPEAL
July 16, 1998
3a 16 136 PN '9B
g1tY Of SALCM. MASS
By Hand CLERK'S OffICE
City Clerk
City of Salem
93 Washington Street
Salem, MA 01970
Re: Kimberley A. Russell et al vs. James Nicholson, Albert Bussink and the
Salem, Massachusetts Board of Appeal, Essex Superior Court Civil
Action No. qq- 13Lf(o C
Dear Ms. Burkinshaw:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Complaint we have filed today with
the Essex Superior Court, appealing a June 17, 1998 decision of the Salem
Board of Appeal with respect to-7 Carpenter Stre`et-Salem, Massachusetts.
Also enclosed is a copy of our cover letter to the Court of today's date.
Would you kindly acknowledge receipt of the above notice and complaint
by date-stamping the enclosed (additional) copy of said complaint, and
returning same.
Thank you. t
Very truly yours,
Kathleen A. Karydis (pro se) Aim M P. Rus /1�tpro se)
8 Carpenter Street 5 Carpenter Street
Salem, MA 01970 Salem, MA 01970
8) 745-5442 (978) 744-1822
4C10arpenter
. Smith, Jr.
Barbara M. Smit
Street 10 Carpenter Street
Salem, MA 01970 Salem, MA .01970
(978) 744-3877 (978) 744-3877
At5c, e. JocQ2 - s c-- �Clo� oF T�� Sope�+br �ourT
Enc.
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
ESSEX DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT _3 "" C
CIVIL ACTION NO. q �—
KIMBERLEY A. RUSSELL, )
KATHLEEN A. KARYDIS, )
LYTLE C. SMITH, JR., and )
BARBARA M. SMITH, ) n<
Plaintiffs ) ��
o^
ow+
V.
JAMES NICHOLSON, ) N m
ALBERT BUSSINK, and )
the SALEM MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL, )
consisting of )
NINA V. COHEN, Chairman, )
RONALD HARRISON, Vice-Chairman, )
MICHAEL WARD, )
RICHARD E. DIONNE, and )
PAUL VALASKATGIS, )
Defendants )
COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO M.G.L.a.C. 40A, Sec. 17 APPEALING
DECISION OF THE SALEM
BOARD OF APPEAL
This is an appeal pursuant to Chapter 40A, Section 17 of the
Massachusetts General Laws by the Plaintiffs from a variance granted by the
Salem, Massachusetts Board of Appeal (hereinafter "Salem Board of Appeal")
to the Defendants, James Nicholson and Albert Bussink, on June 17, 1998,
which decision was filed in the office of the Salem City Clerk on June 30, 1998.
Said decision granted a variance to construct five dwelling units in the former
Newhall Nursing Home at 7 Carpenter Street, Salem, Massachusetts
(hereinafter "the 7 Carpenter Street property"), which property is located in an
R-2 zoning district.
PARTIES
1. The Plaintiff, Kimberley A. Russell, is the owner of a single-family property
at 5 Carpenter Street, Salem, Massachusetts (hereinafter "5 Carpenter
Street'), which property abuts the 7 Carpenter Street property immediately
to the south thereof.
2. The Plaintiff, Kathleen A. Karydis, is the owner of a single-family residence
at 8 Carpenter Street, Salem, Massachusetts (hereinafter "8 Carpenter
Street"), which property is directly across the street from (i.e. to the east of)
the 7 Carpenter Street property.
3. The Plaintiffs, Lytle C. Smith, Jr. and Barbara M. Smith, husband and wife,
are the equitable owners of a single-family residence at 10 Carpenter
Street, Salem, Massachusetts (hereinafter "10 Carpenter Street"), which
property is likewise directly across the street from the 7 Carpenter Street
property.
4. The Defendants James Nicholson and Albert Bussink are the owners as
tenants in common of the 7 Carpenter Street property. According to their
application for a variance dated and filed with the Salem Board of Appeal
on May 27, 1998, which resulted in the Board's June 17, 1998 decision,
they list their address as 2 Carpenter Street, unit 1, Salem, Massachusetts.
5. The Defendant, Nina V. Cohen, is the Chairman of the Salem Board of
Appeal. She resides at 22 Chestnut Street, Salem, Massachusetts.
6. The Defendant, Ronald Harrison, is the Vice-Chairman of the Salem Board
of Appeal. He resides at 450 Lafayette Street, Salem, Massachusetts.
7. The Defendant, Michael Ward, is a member of the Salem Board of Appeal.
He resides at 4 Hilton Street, Salem, Massachusetts.
8. The Defendant, Richard E. Dionne, is a member of the Salem Board of
Appeal. He resides at 23 Gardner Street, Salem, Massachusetts.
9. The Defendant, Paul Valaskatgis, is an associate member of the Salem
Board of Appeal. He resides at 24 Gables Circle, Salem, Massachusetts.
AVERMENTS
10. The 7 Carpenter Street property is located in an R-2 zoning district.
11. The 7 Carpenter Street property is also located in a local historic district
established pursuant to Chapter 40C of the Massachusetts General Laws,
and is also located.in a National Register Historic District.
12. According to records at the Salem City Assessors' office, Carpenter Street
consists of 3 properties on the westerly side of the street, numbered 3, 5,
and 7 respectively, and 5 addresses on the easterly side, numbered 4, 6,
8, 10, and 12 respectively.
13. All of the above properties are single-family residences, with the exception
of 12 Carpenter Street, which consists of two residential condominiums,
and the subject property at 7 Carpenter Street.
2
14. The Defendants, James Nicholson and Albert Bussink, acquired title to the
7 Carpenter Street property by deed dated April 13, 1998, filed as
Document No. 341100 in the Southern Essex Registry District of the Land
Court.
15. On May 27, 1998, approximately 6 weeks after they acquired title, the
Defendant's, James Nicholson and Albert Bussink, filed an application for
a variance with the Salem Board of Appeal seeking permission to convert
the 7 Carpenter Street property to five dwelling units, three in excess of the
maximum allowed under the Salem zoning ordinance for that zoning
district.
16. At a meeting of the Salem Board of Appeal on June 17, 1998, attended by
the Defendants Nina V. Cohen, Ronald Harrison, Michael Ward, Richard E.
Dionne, and Paul Valaskatgis, the Salem Board of Appeal granted the
above application for a variance permitting 5 dwelling units at said
property.
17. Said decision was filed in the office of the Salem City Clerk on June 30,
1998. A certified copy of said decision, bearing a date and time stamp of
the Salem City Clerk's office, is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
18. By so doing the Board in effect increased the number of previously-existing
dwelling units on Carpenter Street, a street approximately 300 feet long, by
62.5%.
19. At the June 17, 1998 hearing before the Salem Board of Appeal absolutely
no evidence meeting the requirements for a variance was introduced in
support of said application.
20. As above-noted, Carpenter Street is located in the so-called McIntire local
historic district, a multi-block rectangular area roughly bordered by North
Street on the east, Broad Street on the south, Boston Street on the west,
and Bridge Street on the North, virtually all of which is likewise located in
an R-2 zoning district.
21. The distance between North and Boston Streets is .557 of a mile and the
distance between Bridge and Broad Streets is approximately .329 of a
mile.
22. The McIntire Historic district consists of a mix of large, medium, and small
period structures, many of which are approximately the same size as the
structure at the 7 Carpenter Street property, including within a 1000 foot
radius.
23. According to records at the Salem Assessor's Office, the dwelling and lot
sizes of the six existing single-family residences on Carpenter Street
(measured in square feet) consist of the following:
3
a. Easterly Side
No. No. of Units Dwelling Size Lot Size
4 1 2,356 3,560
6 1 2,982 6,060
8 1 3,043 3,960
10 1 3,519 6,000
b. Westerly Side
No. No. of Units Dwelling Size Lot Size
3 1 3,020 3,789
5 1 3,699 9,600
24. With the exception of the 7 Carpenter Street property, the only other
property on the street is 12 Carpenter Street, which consists of two
residential condominium units. The total square footage of the building is
3,341 square feet, of which 1,359 square feet is attributable to unit 1 and
1,982 square feet is attributable to unit 2. The total lot size of the property
is 6,164 square feet.
25. On information and belief, the owners of the 7 Carpenter Street property
are developers who intend to market the five units following their proposed
conversion of the structure.
26. On information and belief, the owners of the 7 Carpenter Street property
now claim that they need 5 units in order to make a reasonable profit on
the building, taking the conversion costs into account, and the $180,000.00
they spent on the property.
27. The Plaintiffs aver that any such alleged hardship is self-created, and not
the proper basis for the granted variance.
28. The Plaintiffs further aver:
a. that there are no unique conditions of either the land (due to soil
condition, shape, topography or otherwise) or of the structure at the 7
Carpenter Street property justifying the granting of the above variance;
b. that there is no hardship justifying the above variance;
c. that the granting of the above variance results in substantial detriment
to the public good and derogation from the intent and purpose of the
Salem zoning ordinance.
29. In particular, the plaintiffs aver that the Salem Board of Appeal exceeded
its authority in granting the above variance permitting five dwelling units at
the 7 Carpenter Street property.
4
30. Although needing renovation, the building is in solid structural shape—
indeed, in superior shape to many of the buildings within the same R-2
zoning district that have undergone renovation in recent years in
conforming with said zoning.
31. The Plaintiffs are most immediately effected by the decision to grant a
variance for 5 units at the 7 Carpenter Street property, and are most
aggrieved thereby.
32. The Plaintiffs have each spent considerable time, effort, and money in
maintaining their properties. Indeed, one of the Plaintiffs, Kimberley A.
Russell, the owner of 5 Carpenter Street, which is directly adjacent to-the 7
Carpenter Street property to the south, has recently converted her 3,699
square foot two-unit dwelling to a single family home.
33. The Plaintiffs have relied, and continue to rely, on the Salem zoning
ordinance to protect their investments in their respective properties, and
the integrity of their fragile neighborhood.
WHEREFORE the Plaintiffs hereby request that this Court:
�
a. annul the June 17, 1998 decision of the Salem Board of Appeal
granting a variance to construct 5 dwelling units at the 7 Carpenter
Street property;
b. award them attorneys fees and costs in connection with prosecuting
this action.
c. grant them such additional relief as is just and expedient.
Respectfully submitted,
Kathleen A. Karydis (pro ) KiVnberley A. Russell (Oro se)
8 Carpenter Street 5 Carpenter Street
Salem, MA 01970 Salem, MA 01970
(978) 745-5442 (978) 744-1822
LyIWC. Smith, Jr. Barbara M. Smith
10 Carpenter Street 10 Carpenter Street
Salem, MA 01970 Salem, MA 01970
(978) 744-3877 (978) 744-3877
�u
Dated: 1 15, 1998
5
f
Ctu of S� ttlem, 'Mttssadjusetts
Poarb of JOx 30 3 0l PH '
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES NICHOLSON & ALBERT BUSSINK REQ1a1;TbyGS,ILCH MA:
A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET R2 CtfRK'S OFFICE
A hearing on this petition was held June 17, 1998 with the following Board
members present: Nina Cohen, Paul Valaskagis, Michael Ward, Ronald Harrison
and Richard Dionne. 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 4OA.
Petitioner requests a Variance to construct 5 dwelling units in the former
Newhall Nursing Home located in an R2 zone for the property located at
7 Carpenter Street.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of this
board that:
1. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the
land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting
other land, buildings, or structures in the same district.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good and without nullifying or substantially derogation from the
intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after careful considerations the evidence presented at
the hearing, makes the following findings of fact:
1. Petitioner seeks a use variance to convert the property at 7 Carpenter
Street into five units of condominium housing. The former use for the
property was nonconforming: it had operated for many years as a nursing
home. Petitioner also seeks relief from dimensional requirements
regulating minimum lot area and number of dwelling units on one lot.
2. Conversion of the property, which is located within the McIntyre
Historic District, would require no change to the existing footprint
of the building, and existing parking arrangements are adequate for the
proposed units.
3. Speaking in support of the proposed plan were Betsy Burns of 22
Beckford St. , Carol Dearborn of 12 Carpenter St. , Cynthia Duda of 4
Carpenter St. , Gay Goudreau of 4 Gifford Ct. , Dr. Peter Janney and Carol
Janney of 12 Carpenter St, Dr. Chris Munkholm of 12 Gifford Ct. , Dick
Pabich of 31 Essex St. and Meg Twohey of 122 Federal St. and Meg
Twohey of 122 Federal Street. They stated their belief that the
proposed use was an improvement over the previous, grandfathered use as
a nursing home because it would entail less traffic and would introduce
homeownership where there was previously none.
Additional arguments made by the petitioner's supporters were that the
change from the allowed use would likely increase the value of their
properties, and that the vacant building is detrimental to the
neighborhood.
DECIS ON OF THE PETITION OF JAMES NICHOLSON S ALBERT BUSSINKRn—ARDING
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET R2
page two
4. Among those speaking in opposition to the petition was Kimberly Russell
of 5 Carpenter St. , who stated that the proposed condominium project
would introduce non-owner occupancy to a street which is predominantly
owner occupied. She also- stated her belief that the presence of the
condominium project would decrease the value of her property by
increasing the density of residential development on the street.
5. Other neighbors in opposition were John Carr, 7 River St. , Kathleen
Karydis of 8 Carpenter St. , Ann LeBlanche, a Trustee of 3 Carpenter
St. , Lytle and Barbara Smith, Trustees of 10 Carpenter St. , and Thomas
Turner of 5 Carpenter Street.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented
at the hearings, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1 . Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property
and not the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substation hardship to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief can be granted without substantial detriment to
public good and without nullifying and substantially derogating from
the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented
at the hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0 to grant
the variance requested, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures, ordinances,
codes and regulations.
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions
submitted.
3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and
safety shall be strictly adhered to.
4 . A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
5. Petitioner shall obtain building permit prior to beginning any
construction.
6. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission
having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Historic
Commission.
7. Exterior finishes of the new construction- shall be in harmony with
the existing structure.
Variance Granted `l '—
June 17, 1998 / ,� L',,,
Nina Cohen, Chairman W
Board of Appeal '=`y' co
N
2
n Y �
�r1 D
N C=
N aC
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES NICHOLSON &
A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET
page three
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD ANT 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 of the owner of record
or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
n c
O=
�p
sJ+�
—n
i
so
G�
ACOPY ATTEST
CITY CLEA�"''�""G'J
SAW MASS,
r ourt of Massamusetts
SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT n �!•
CIVIL ACTION COVER SHEET VJ
Division
PLAINTIFF(S) -DEFENDANT(&)' �sc
MaQf I Gha Sa Y, I •. ( USSr.I
Vn r
I'A" II p•fe.A„
tOff,,,,
ATTORNEY(S)FIRM NAME,ADDRESS AND TEL.) . .. .ATTORNEY(SI(d known;., a„
AJA - U b)OIJ'A
Board of Bar Overseers N (Required)
ORIGIN CODE AND TRACK.DESIGNATION
Place an ® in one box only: .
(� 1. F01 Original Complaint ❑ 4. F04 District Ct. Appeal c231, s. 97 (X)`
❑ 2. F02 Removal to Sup. Ct. c231, s. 104 (F) ❑ 5. F05Reactivated after Rescript Relief from '
❑ 3. F03 Retransfer to Sup. Ct. c 231, s. 102C (X) judgment/order (Mass. R Civ. P. 60 (X)'"
❑ 6. E10 Summary process appeal (X)
TYPE OF ACTION AND TRACK DESIGNATION (See°Reverse Stde)
CODE NO., TYPE OF ACTION (specii ) ` ' TRACK „VIS THIS A JURY CASE?,,,,
mac.... .. n (P i O .Yes
1. PLEASE GIVE A CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE FACTS: (Required In ALL Types of Actions) ",Ir
'. •-��: r r 1( ` qc
-DG(. 0. /. VGN t;.,-Ia /t
^
r .o .:r, u nE. �� rS9i✓ ) ��'/v�r t�r�e ar/y:(on / �! ,.
S11d'WQ. 1n..- /�V.�/n 1 S. 11 '' �� f IY//.-.�'r )/Tl' 1 1 f �O�a�C1�1/ I✓� /M� ��' '�" ZDA//_./J�// ,.
see Ch tl'rs �/-El„-.� ,4, � •,�� 1 s�`Ir� �Pe�;c�u�, ,
2. IN A CONTACT ANION (CODE A) OR A TORT ACTION (CODE B) STATE, WITH PARTICULARITY-
MONEY DAMAGES WHICH WOULD WARRANT A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD THAT RECOVER
_,WOULD.EXCEED $25,000:
r+�
Ai
O= T
' Sy��
U+ CD
3 ' PLEASE IDENTIFY, BY CASE NUMBER, NAME AND DIVISION, ANY RELATED ACTION'PENDING'
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT. n� !
p 'Q--
SIGNATU E OF �ORNEY OF RE OR OR PLAINTI /� ^
C. �01� - aiutJ -a at4i � /`'
OFFICE USE ONLY - . . NOT WRITE SELOW THIS LINE
DISPOSITION RECEIVED
A. Judgment Entered B.' No Judgment'Entered l r -' 1,Y”
❑ 1. Before jury trial or non-jury hearing El6. Transferred to District DATE
❑ 2. During jury trial or non-jury hearing Court under G.L. c.231,
. :DISPOSITION ENTERED
El 3. After jury verdict S.102C. `' =
114. After court finding " Disposition Date " BY:
0 5. After post trial motion DATE.
J
01itV of "SttlPm, � H 165a jusPffs
e Pnztrb rrf cArprzd SEP Z3 3 02 W98
CITY Cj- ;ALCM. PASS
CLCRK'S OF FILE
AMENDED DECISION WITH RESPECT TO THE PETITION OF JAMES
NICHOLSON&ALBERT BUSSINK REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET R2
A hearing on this petition was held June 17, 1998 with the following Board members
present: Nina Cohen,Paul Valaskagis, Michael Ward, Ronald Harrison, and Richard
Dionne. 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.
Petitioner requested a Variance to construct 5 dwelling units in the former Newhall
Nursing Home located in an R2 zone for the property located at 7 Capenter Street.
The requested Variance could be granted upon a finding of this board that:
1. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land,
building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other land, buildings,
or structures in the same district.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
3. 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,
made the following findings of fact:
I. Petitioner seeks a use variance to convert the property at 7 Carpenter Street into
five units of condominium housing. The former use for the property was
nonconforming: it had operated for many years as a nursing home. Petitioner also
seeks relief from dimensional requirements regulating minimum lot area and
number of dwelling units on one lot.
2. Conversion of the property, which is located within the McIntyre Historic District
District,would require no change to the existing footprint of the building, and
existing parking arrangements are adequate for the proposed units.
NDED DECISION WITH
TO THE
SPECT
IAQICHOLSON &ALBERT BUSSEINK REQUESTING A V 1OARIANCEFOIR4
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET R 2 CI ry OF SAL[H. MASS
Ct 1 "'S OFFICE
Page two
3. Speaking in support of the proposed plan were Betsy Bums of 22 Beckford Street,
Carol Dearborn of 12 Carpenter Street, Cynthia Duda of 4 Carpenter Street, Gay
Goudreau of 4 Gifford Court, Dr.Peter Janney and Carol Janney of 12 Carpenter
Street,Dr. Chris Munkholm of 12 Gifford Court, Dick Pabich of 31 Essex Street,
and Meg Twohey of 122 Federal Street. They stated their belief that the proposed
use was an improvement over the previous grandfathered use as a nursing home
because it would entail less traffic and would introduce homeownership where
there was previously none. Additional arguments made by the petitioners'
supporters were that the change from the allowed use would likely increase the
value of their properties, and that the vacant building is detrimental to the
neighborhood.
4. Among those speaking in opposition to the petition was Kimberly Russell of 5
Carpenter Street,who stated that the proposed condominium project would
introduce non-owner occupancy to a street which is predominantly owner
occupied. She also stated her belief that the presence of the condominium project
would decrease the value of her property by increasing the density of residential
development on the street.
5. Other neighbors in opposition were John Carr, 7 River Street, Kathleen Karydis of
8 Carpenter Street, Ann LeBlanche, a Trustee of 3 Carpenter Street, Lytle and
Barbara Smith, Trustees of 10 Carpenter Street, and Thomas Turner of 5
Carpenter Street.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing,
the Board of Appeal concluded as follows:
1. Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property and 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 public good and
without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the
Ordinance.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing,
the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0 to grant the variance requested,
subject to the following conditions:
SEP B 3 os
AMENDED DECISION WITH RESPECT TO THE PETITION OF �!� S 1HA�+�SS
NICHOLSON&ALBERT BUSSINK REQUESTING A VARIAN t
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET R 2
Page three
1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes and
regulations.
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted.
3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and safety shall
be strictly adhered to.
4. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
5. Petitioner shall obtain building permit prior to beginning any construction.
6. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Historic Commission.
7. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing
structure.
On July 16, 1998, the decision of the Board of Appeals was appealed pursuant to
M.Q.L. c. 40A, Section 17, by Kathleen A. Karydis, Kimberley A. Russell, Lytle C.
Smith, Jr., and Barbara M. Smith, plaintiffs in Superior Court Civil Action No. 98-1346C
(the "Appeal') as to which James Nicholson, Albert Bussink, and the Salem
Massachusetts Board of Appeal consisting of Nina V. Cohen, Chairman, Ronald
Harrison, Vice Chairman, Michael Ward, Richard Dionne, and Paul Valaskatgis were
named as defendants.
The Appeal has been terminated by Agreement for Judgment executed by all
parties to the Appeal and duly filed with the Superior Court, by which Agreement for
Judgment, all parties have agreed and acknowledged that the number of dwelling units to
be permitted at the premises known as 7 Carpenter Street shall be limited to four rather
than the originally requested five.
In accordance with the terms of the Agreement for Judgment, the original
variance decision is hereby amended as follows:
a. the permitted number of dwelling units is hereby reduced from 5 to 4; and
b. the second condition to the granting of the variance with respect to
construction being done "as per the plans and dimensions submitted"shall be
r
AMENDED DECISION WITH RESPECT TO THE PETITION OF JAW23 3 03 Ni '38
NICHOLSON&ALBERT BUSSINK REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOP THES
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET R-2 Ct E r SA
;�[H. MASS
OFFICE
deleted and the following substituted in place thereof. "All construction shall
be done in accordance with plans submitted as said plans shall be revised to
reduce the number of dwelling units from 5 to 4."
Variance Granted A�7iGl/ C� CSCE)
June 17, 1998 Nina Cohen, Chairman
Board of Appeal
J
fllity of J-5- ttlpm, ttssttrllusrtts
3
`•,� �nttrD of �u�en! '�� 3
nl
CITY
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES NICHOLSON & ALBERT BUSSINK REgf r ,y. 1
A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET R2 fl�FIC
A hearing on this petition was held June 17, 1998 with the following Board
members present: Nina Cohen, Paul Valaskagis, Michael Ward, Ronald Harrisor
and Richard Dionne. 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.
Petitioner requests a Variance to construct 5 dwelling units in the former
Newhall Nursing Home located in an R2 zone for the property located at
7 Carpenter Street.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of this
board that:
1 . Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the
land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting
other land, buildings, or structures in the same district.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
3 . Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the
publicgood and without nullifying or substantially derogation from the
intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after careful considerations the evidence presented at
the hearing, makes the following findings of fact:
1 . Petitioner seeks a use variance to convert the property at 7 Carpenter
Street into five units of condominium housing. The former use for the
property was nonconforming: it had operated for many years as a nursing
home. Petitioner also seeks relief from dimensional requirements
regulating minimum lot area and number of dwelling units on one lot.
2. Conversion of the property, which is located within the McIntyre
Historic District, would require no change to the existing footprint
of the building, and existing parking arrangements are adequate for the
proposed units .
3. Speaking in support of the proposed plan were Betsy Burns of 22
Beckford St. , Carol Dearborn of 12 Carpenter St. , Cynthia Duda of 4
Carpenter St. , Gay Goudreau of 4 Gifford Ct. , Dr. Peter Janney and Carol
Janney of 12 Carpenter St, Dr. Chris Munkholm of 12 Gifford Ct. , Dick
Pabich of 31 Essex St. and Meg Twohey of 122 Federal St. and Meg
Twohey of 122 Federal Street. They stated their belief that the
proposed use was an improvement over the previous, grandfathered use as
a nursing home because it would entail less traffic and would introduce
homeownership where there was previously none.
Additional arguments made by the petitioner's supporters were that the
change from the allowed use would likely increase the value of their
properties, and that the vacant building is detrimental to the
neighborhood.
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES NICHOLSON & ALBERT BUSSINK REGARDING
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET R2
page two
4 . Among those speaking in opposition to the petition was Kimberly Russell
of 5 Carpenter St. , who stated that the proposed condominium project
would introduce non-owner occupancy to a street which is predominantly
owner occupied. She also stated her belief that the presence of the
condominium project would decrease the value of her property by
increasing the density of residential development on the street.
5. Other neighbors in opposition were John Carr, 7 River St. , Kathleen
Karydis of 8 Carpenter St. , Ann LeBlanche, a Trustee of 3 Carpenter
St. , Lytle and Barbara Smith, Trustees of 10 Carpenter St. , and Thomas
Turner of 5 Carpenter Street.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented
at the hearings, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1 . Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property
and not the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substation hardship to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief can be granted without substantial detriment to
public good and without nullifying and substantially derogating from
the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented
at the hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0 to grant
the variance requested, subject to the following conditions:
1 . Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statures , ordinances,
codes and regulations.
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions
submitted.
3 . All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and
safety shall be strictly adhered to.
A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
5 . Petitioner shall obtain building permit prior to beginning any
construction.
o . Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission
having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Historic
Commission.
7 . Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmonv with
the existing structure.
Variance Granted
June 17, 1998
� J
Nina Cohen, Chairman
Board of Appeal 4�-
�� z
c.a
0 0
C>= o
U
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES NICHOLSON & ALBERT BUSSINK REQUESTING
A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 CARPENTER STREET
page three
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 of the owner of record
or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
C,
C, 0
IP
o^
1 Z �
n
TN
/qqq
i o C�A�PE�rr�� (4r
(YPLEm . nze. 0770
-ro w)74E>n 00,920 OF f3PPEf?L
�E ; Aleu+'l9LL n(lly/A/9 flon7E
l U)A91-1 r0 110tAF 7-4e �)VU o 9E0 L,5,7r�,p
Flom /nY klIA-M-W& LYrcE e. (9m/rh. lrj )
I9YPD I TO rflE' /77/1j(/rErg or rs& mE.ErllVg
64 Tri{&' &)eA1l V9 09- �rzJAIE /7. /199 .
1 nfn 09/Uo 'oPPo Sea ro P #ttl ' dAllr
�r "dA1DOm1r/r clm Rr 'J Qy�a�trE� l3r/�Ee�'
June 5, 1998
10 Carpenter Street
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
To: Salem Board of Appeals;
Re: Newhall Nursing Home.
A precedent had been established in our neighborhood when the Oates Rest Home closed
at 12 Carpenter Street and reverted back to a two family occupancy. Two attempts by two
owners, previous to the current owners, went before the Board of Appeals and were denied three
(3) family status.
I believe value and size to be the best inducement to owner occupancy in condominiums.
To put more than four units at this location would defeat this theory. After the current owners
finish this project they will be gone, leaving the neighbors with the possibility of constant change
in rental units.
Thank you,
Lytle C. Smith, Jr.
Kathleen A.Karydis
Eight Carpenter Street
Salem,Massachusetts 01970
978 745 5442(home)
617 338 1200(work)
June 17, 1998
Board of Appeals
City of Salem
Salem Massachusetts 01970
Dear Board of Appeals Member:
RR:Requestfor zoning variance- 7 Carpenter Street
I am an abutter to the property at 7 Carpenter Street, Salem Massachusetts and wish to register my
opposition to the zoning variance that is currently under consideration for that property.
Sincerely,
4
Kathleen A.Karydis
i CITY OF�.SALEM
BOARD OF,APPEAL'---:--
�.�
, WiWhold a public he"g*f2L-all
person§interested in-the peetition sub`-
mittM by`JAMES?NICHOLSON'&
"ALBERT---'BU$SI14k-"rBgnd§tirng a
Varlax"to con9tiuct 5'dwelling units -
-,,,, , merthe formNewhall Nucsing:Home-
q-Iu'/`'` i locateWin an R 2 ione for the property
Y located,:af 7,CARPENTER.STREET .
(R-2):",y Said' heating to ,be_:'l�elil
',WEDNESDAY; JUNE'17 1998PAT
6 30 P,1VI ONE SALEM GREENj' nil
,floor.; "Y=a req;
, NinaColien,'Chahttian
"v
Ioticeig
--yon
�9
�7 /*
Kimberley A. Russell
5 Carpenter Street
Salem, MA 01970
978/744-1822
Board of Appeals
The City of Salem
Salem, MA 01970
1 live next door to the property at 7 Carpenter Street (formerly the Newhall Nursing Home and Seaman's
Orphanage). I do not want 7 Carpenter Street to be converted into a 5-unit condominium complex.
I have owned 5 Carpenter Street (which is on the National Registry of Historical Properties) for almost
five years now and have found my neighborhood to be an ideal and quiet little section of Salem's
McIntire Historic District. I consider my purchase of a home on this street to be a sound decision in
terms of a good neighborhood in which to raise my children, a good investment in property, and a
complete pleasure as it is steep in the rich history of Salem.
The only time my family experienced "neighborhood problems' was from a renter at the then non-owner
occupied, multi-unit dwelling on the corner of Carpenter and Federal Street, #134 Federal Street.
Several of my other neighbors also experienced problems with this renter. The problems included
excessive speed of tow trucks (legal though because the limit on Carpenter Street is 35mph),
unauthorized parking of tow trucks, the operation of a body shop in the garage, the use of blow torches
in the driveway, property damage, harassment, threats of bodily harm, etc. At the time of his
occupancy, no real action was ever taken —the police couldn't/wouldn't do anything nor would the
property owner. We, the other residents in the neighborhood, just had to live with it. This person even
had an extensive record at the Salem Police Department — at times it was frightening. Fortunately, he
moved out and that multi-unit dwelling was recently sold to one of the new owners of 7 Carpenter Street,
Jim Nicholson, and is currently owner occupied. All of us who experienced problems with that renter are
very pleased with the current situation at 134 Federal Street.
I believe that turning 7 Carpenter Street into a 5-unit condominium complex would encourage non-owner
occupancy, diminish the ideal and quiet "neighborhood" atmosphere of the Carpenter Street area,
discourage new occupants from establishing long-term roots in the Carpenter Street area, reduce the
value of the investments that the rest of us have already made in our properties, and exacerbate an
existing parking problem. Some of us live in two-family dwellings but do not rent to anyone at present.
Should we all need to rent for financial or other reasons, the parking would be a complete nightmare if
there were also a 5-unit condominium complex.
I have met Jim Nicholson and his family; they seem very pleasant. I think it is quite extraordinary that
someone so new to this neighborhood suddenly owns so much of it. I believe Annie Webb or her father,
John Bertrand, were the last to own so much of this little neighborhood, but then they were generous
Salem philanthropists. I hope that the Nicholson's new and current owner-occupancy status at 134
Federal Street will add to the "neighborhood" atmosphere of our area. If they intend to establish long-
term, family roots in our neighborhood, I believe that they would also be better off as a family and as
owners of their 134 Federal Street property if the property at 7 Carpenter Street is not turned into a 5-
unit condominium complex.
Sincerely,
Kimberleey A Russell/
5 Carpenter Street, Salem, MA