5 FRIEND STREET - ZBA (2) 5 FRIEND STREET
I
C
c
�y
G"
i
Legal Notice
crit OF SALEM
BOARD OF APPEAL
7459595 Ext 381
Will hold a public hearing for all
persons interested in the petition sub-
mitted by RENE AUBERTIN requesting
' a Special Permit&Variance from lot i
area per dwelling unit to allow a see-
I
and unit for the property located at 5 m
ii Friend STREET R-2.Said hearing will
be held on WEDNESDAY,JANUARY u
J 19,2005,6:30 P.M., 120 WASHING- a
1 TON STREET,3RD FLOOR, ROOM
313. F,
Nina Cohen ,
Chairman r
(1/5,12) 1
i
1
i
no
CITY OF SALEMO MASSACHUSETTS CIiY �e cALEM, tMA
BOARD OF APPEAL CLERKS OFFICE
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FI OOR
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 q pC A 3u
MAYOR FAR: 979-740-9948 '.�OM! MAR -3
AMENDED DECISION
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RENE AUBERTIN REQUESTING A SPECIAL
PERMITNARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 FRIEND STREET R-2
A hearing on this petition was held on February 16, 2005 with the following Board
Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Edward Moriarty, Bonnie
Belair and Nicholas Helides. 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 is requesting a Special Permit and Variance from lot are per dwelling to allow
a second unit for the property located at 5 Friend Street located in an R-2 zone.
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 8-6
and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming
structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots,
land structures, and used, 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 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 the lands, buildings or
structures in the same district.
b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
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.
PETITION OF RENE AUBERTIN REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 5-3(j) TO EXPAND USE OF THE NON-
CONFORMING STRUCTURE TO TWO-FAMILY USE WHICH IS A
PERMITTED USE UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE BUT THE LOT DOES
NOT CONFORM WITH TABLE I REQUIREMENT FOR MINIMUM LOT
AREA PER DWELLING UNIT
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Petitioner, Rene Aubertin, seeks a Special Permit from the Salem Board of
Appeals, in accordance with Section 5-30), to expand use of the existing non-
conforming structure on said premises to a two-family use, which is a permitted
use under the Zoning Ordinance except that said lot does not conform with Table
I requirements for Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit.
2. Petitioner was represented by Attorney George W. Atkins, 59 Federal Street,
Salem, MA 01970.
3. According to Attorney Atkins, the requested relief was otherwise in harmony and
consistent with al provisions of the Salem Zoning Ordinance for use of the
premises as constructed, as a two-family premises, with three designated parking
spaces.
4. Attorney Atkins suggested that any other zoning violations associated with said
two-family premises were otherwise in compliance with the Board of Appeals
Decision issued for said premises to the prior owner of said premises, Paul Caisse,
on or about December 18, 2002, which Decision expressly authorized a Variance
from side setback, rear setback and lot coverage
to construct struct a 24' x 2
addition
for the property located at 5 Friend Street, located in an R-2 Zoning District.
5. Attorney Atkins noted that the original Variance for said premises did not require
that said 24' x 24' addition be utilized solely for purposes of a single-family
residence, as expanded and permitted use of said premises as a two-family home.
6. Attorney Atkins also noted that adequate parking for a two-family home by the
three proposed parking spaces, noted on the plans filed with the Petition, met the
Salem Zoning Ordinance for Parking Spaces Per Dwelling Unit.
7. Petitioner further contended that a Special Permit would not be required if the
Board were to agree that use of the Premises as a two-family home was lawful
under the statute and/or the Variance previously granted without reference to the
Table I requirement for Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit in an R-2 Zoning
District.
8. The Petitioner's request for relief by Special Permit was opposed by two city
councillors and many abutting neighbors.
9. City Councillor Tom Furey, in his correspondence to the Board of January 18,
2005, noted that the Special Permit would allow a two-family home in a otherwise
very congested neighborhood, which includes Friend,Flint and Oak Streets.
Councillor Furey noted that the limited parking on Friend Street, as well as the
narrow width of the street, made parking even more daunting and that the width
was even narrower during snow emergencies like that experienced by this
neighborhood this winter.
10. Councillor Furey also noted that the addition of a two-family home to this
otherwise close-knit neighborhood of predominant 14.single-family-structures -
would impermissibly and imprudently alter the signature statement of this close-
knit neighborhood.
11. Ward 6 Councillor Mike Bencal appeared and expressed inalterable opposition to
the Petition to create a two-family home by Special Permit at 5 Friend Street.
12. Councillor Bencal noted the extreme congestion in this neighborhood, significant
problems of parking, on-street and off-street, and the very narrow width of Friend
Street.
13. Councillor Bencal was also of the opinion that a Special Permit to authorize a
two-family premises in this neighborhood, especially at this street and this locus,
would not be in keeping with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance to
zone for adequate light, air, space and parking.
14. Also in opposition were several neighbors, who chose not to speak but not only
attended the public hearing, but also signed a Petition in opposition to the request
for a Special Permit, citing issues of adverse impact on the quality of life in this
densely populated, closely-knit neighborhood and the extant, extraordinary,
existing parking problems which would only be compounded by a new two-
family home.
15. In particular, the neighborhood Petition noted that addition of additional motor
vehicles in the neighborhood, whether on-street or off-street, would cause
immediate hardship to this neighborhood, where parking is already extremely
limited and, by City Ordinance, is already restricted to resident-only parking.
16. Members of the Board, including Edward M. Moriarty, Jr., questioned the
practicality of daily use and, in particular, winter use of the three spaces proposed
on the plans for the proposed two-family premises. The distance between Friend
Street and the three designated parking areas in the rear of the structure, side by
side, make said parking spaces impractical to use.
2
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Based on the evidence presented,including, but not limited to, the Petition, plans
attached hereto, testimony of the Petitioner and abutters, and exhibits contained
within the Board file, including a Neighborhood Petition in Opposition, signed by
13 residents of Friend Street, the Board determines that Petitioner's request for a
Special Permit is hereby denied pursuant to Sections 5-30), 8-6 and 9-4 of the
Salem Zoning Ordinance.
2. The Board concludes that the relief requested may not be granted without
substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially
_ derogating from the intent or purpose-of this Ordinance,based on considerations
of congestion, parking and overcrowding, all as noted heretofore.
WHEREFORE
. r-....-...
On the basis of the above fktdgtgs of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board
Of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and
not the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not involve
substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3. The Special Permit requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good or without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the
district or the purpose of the ordinance.
4. The granting of the Special Permit requested will not be in harmony with the
neighborhood and will not promote the public health, safety, convenience and
welfare of the City's inhabitants.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 2 in favor and 3 in opposition to the motion
to grant the relief requested. Having failed to gamer the four affirmative votes required
to pass, the motion to grant fails and the petition for a Special Permit and Variance is
denied.
Variance Special Pernik Denied
1
February 16, 2005 Edward Moriarty
Board of Appeal
3
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND
THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this decision, is any shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of MGL 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 MGL 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 have been filed, that is 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.
I
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA
• f BOARD OF APPEAL CLEW'S OFFICE
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 C
STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 .2005 MAR -Z P 2: A
MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RENE AUBERTIN REQUESTING A SPECIAL
PERMITNARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 FRIEND STREET R-2
A hearing on this petition was held on February 16, 2005 with the following Board
Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Edward Moriarty, Bonnie
Belair and Nicholas Helides. 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 GenerafLaws Chapter 40A: -- ----- ---
Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit and Variance from lot are per dwelling to allow
a second unit for the property located at 5 Friend Street located in an R-2 zone.
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 8-6
and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming
structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots,
land structures, and used, 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 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 the lands, buildings or
structures in the same district.
b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
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.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RENE AUBERTIN REQUESTING A SPECIAL
PERMITNARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 FRIEND STREET R-2
page two
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
hearing and after reviewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1. Attorney George Atkins of 59 Federal Street in Salem represented the petitioner.
2. Attorney Atkins believes he does not need to go before the Board because the
property is located in an R-2 zone, which allows 2 family dwellings and has the
parking spaces.
3. A letter was submitted from Counciillor__Tom_Furey who opposed this petition with-
----_concerns relating to the congestion of the neighborhood and the increase in parking.
4. Councillor Michael Bencal appeared and opposed this petition noting the density of
the neighborhood.
5. A petition was submitted with 13 names from the neighboring abutters opposed to
this pettion.
6. Ann Bouchard of 1 Friend Street also appeared and opposed this petition.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board
Of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and
not the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not involve
substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3. The Special Permit requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good or without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the
district or the purpose of the ordinance.
4. The granting of the Special Permit requested will not be in harmony with the
neighborhood and will not promote the public health, safety, convenience and
welfare of the City's inhabitants.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 2 in favor and 3 in opposition to the motion
to grant the relief requested. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required
to pass, the motion to grant fails and the petition for a Special Permit and Variance is
denied.
Variance & Special Permit Denied
L���l�`�-�
February 16, 2005 Edward Moriarty s
Board of Appeal
I
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND
THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this decision, is any shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of MGL 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 MGL 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 have been filed, that is 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.
1 CITY OF SALEM
2 BOARD OF APPEALS
3
RENE AUBERTIN, MICHAEL OUELLETTE, ) Case No. :
4 )
Applicants, ) SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE APPEAL
5 )
Vs. )
6 )
Friend Street Neighbors and Abutters )
7 )
8 )
)
9 )
10
WE THE UNDERSIGNED ABUTTERS AND NEIGHBORS TO 5 FRIEND STREET SALEM, MA
11
PARCEL ID # 16-0353-0
12
DUE HERBY STATE OUR OPPOSITION TO THE REQUESTED SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE
13
SOUGHT BY THE APPLCANTS FOR THE CONVERSION OF THE EXSISTING SINGLE FAMILY
14
HOME TO A TWO FAMILY OR CONDOMINIUM CONTAINING TWO UNITS. OUR OBJECTIONS ARE
15
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
16
PARKING - CURRENTLY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PARKING IS EXTREMLY LIMITED AND
17
RESTRICTED TO RESIDENCE ONLY FOR MOST OF THE STREET. WE FEEL THAT ANY
18
ADDITIONAL VEHICLES INTRODUCED INTO THIS AREA WILL CAUSE AN IMMEDIATE
19
HARDSHIP, AND THUS A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON THE CURRENT HOMEOWNERS AND
20
RESIDENTS.
21
QUALITY OF LIFE - CURRENTLY THE RESIDENTS OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE
22
DISPLAYED RESPECT AND CONSIDERATION TO EACH OTHER. EACH HOMEOWNER AND
23
TENANT LIVING ON OUR STREET ATTEMPTS TO MAINTAIN THEIR PROPERTY AND KEEP
24
IT IN A NEAT AND ORDERLY FASHION. THE PROPERTY AT 5 FRIEND STREET HAS BEEN
25
IGNORED AND ABANDONDED SINCE THE PURCHASE BY THE APPLICANT ON 09/09/2004.
CONVERSION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO TWO FAMILY OR CONDOMINIUM - 1
1 THE PREVIOUS OWNER WAS ISSUED A BUILDING PERMIT ON 02/19/2003 FOR THE
2 STATED PURPOSE OF BUILDING AN ADDITON TO THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. THIS WORK
3 WAS NEVER COMPLETED. ON 12/25/2004 IT WAS NECESSARY TO CONTACT THE SALEM
4 FIRE DEPARTMENT TO NOTIFY THEM THAT RUNNING WATER COULD BE HEARD COMING
5 FROM THE PROPERTY. WHEN THEY WERE UNABLE TO CONTACT THE OWNER THEY FORCED
6 ENTRY INTO THE BUILDING AND DISCOVERED THAT A WATER PIPE HAD BURST DUE TO
7 THE COLD ANY HAD FLOODED A LARGE PORTION OF THE INTERIOR.
6 WE FEEL THAT THESE TWO EXAMPLES OF NEGLECT AND DISINTEREST DISPLAYED BY
9 THE APPLICANTS DEMONSTRATES THEIR TOTAL DISREGARD TOWARD THE SAFETY AND
10 QUALITY OF LIFE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ITS PRESENT RESIDENTS.
11 Dated this 16`x' day of January, 2005
12
NAME ADDRESS OWNER/TENANT
13
14
15
FdO, 4- SG �.QuN flu.nQ
�� v1
16 A AL
17
18 K G%
19 !
i a 3tT
1 41el
20
21 W v
u a r� ryd s (w/ow
22
23 60 P
2425
G rr:ai..nr
CONVERSION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO TWO FAMILY OR CONDOMINIUM - 2
�Yf r of roil rt, Anssar4usieffs
j Offirr, of flje @Iifg (tlouucil
�r Cfg Pull
COUNCILLORS-AT-LARGE MICHAEL BENCAL WARD COUNCILLORS
PRESIDENT
2005 2005
THOMAS H. FUREY CHERYLA. LAPOINTE LUCY CORCHADO
KEVIN R. HARVEY CITY CLERK MICHAEL SOSNOWSKI
JOAN B. LOVELY JEAN M. PELLETIER
ARTHUR C. SARGENT III - LEONARD F. O'LEARY
MATTHEW A.VENO
MICHAEL BENCAL
JOSEPH A.O'KEEFE, SR.
} zee �6 a
N` 5 �� �a W
At
\ a s^
u
S'U�UU � • 7 I I V'2S
v-e
r� �rA- V-
lijU � �.DU �
� ��� Vv
CA � C0n- rov�S N
VV (y�
P(rl Com' [if C ✓` G W /
v I I
tAJ
V\ 1C �' V acl
A
C.C -e G � ! YLcl Gv G
CA q'A
�e +
Z+V
G Gc
5e,
GID�L N c� b JC� � USPi - bV
( , �Op
lS " A dCITY HALL • 93 WASHINGTON STREET • SALEM, MA 01970-3592 • WWW.SALEMCOUN C L C\O