Loading...
602 LORING AVENUE - ZBA (n� _Z Lo'r �v�� �V �. � � a' C� _ J s � `�O ��1. �� �� � � � � �� q '� � � � �� � .� 0 �( FEE: $25.00(includes 1 certilled copy) ype: �\New Renewal,no change I Renewal,with change FSALEM m CrnrCLERK ERTIFICATE f the Massachusetts General Laws,as amended,the undersigned to in the City of Salem. Furthermore the undersigned fully constitute a license or permit to conduct said business within the e. If you cease conducting business before that time,the law f the City Clerk. Phone No.: • a 2r ANDERSON AUSTIN P.ANDERSON KREIGER Nov 2920t7 aanderson(2andersonkrei eg rcom DEPT. OF PLANN;NG & 617-621-6576 CUIv1MUNITY D'EVELGPMENT 617-621-6676 November 21, 2017 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL VIA CERTIFIED MAIL VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RRR#7015 0640 0002 5706 8597 RRR#7015 0640 0002 5706 8580 RRR#7015 0640 0002 5706 8573 City of Salem Zoning Board Rebecca Curran Peter A. Copelas of Appeals 14 Clifton Ave. 40 Warren Street Salem City Hall Annex Salem, MA 01970 Salem, MA 01970 120 Washington St, RID 313 Salem, MA 01970 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL VIA CERTIFIED MAIL VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RRR#7015 0640 0002 5706 8566 RRR 0 7015 0640 0002 5706 8559 RRR#7015 0640 0002 5706 8542 Mike Duffy Thomas Watkins James Tsitsinos 1 Warren Court 13 Crescent Drive 12 Brown Street,Apt. l Salem, MA 01970 Salem, MA 01970 Salem, MA 01970 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL VIA CERTIFIED MAIL VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RRR 4 7015 0640 0002 5706 8528 RRR# 7015 0640 0002 5706 8535 RRR#7015 0640 0002 5706 8511 James Hacker Paul Viccica Vavel LLC 4 Mayflower Lane,#4 35 Broad Street do Tomasz Wabno Salem,MA 01970 Salem, MA 01970 18 Jane Road Marblehead,MA 01945 Re: Vinnin Square Apartments LLC v. City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals, et al.,Land Court Case No. 17 MISC 000664 (RBF) All: We represent Vinnin Square Apartments LLC. Pursuant to G.L. c. 40A, § 17 and Land Court Standing Order 142, this letter serves to notify you that, on November 17, 2017, Vinnin Square Apartments filed a Complaint in the Land Court Department of the Trial Court in which you were named as a defendant. I have enclosed for service the following items: 1. the Amended Complaint; 2. the Civil Action Cover Sheet; and 3. a copy of the Land Court's Limited Assistance Representation Information Sheet. Very truly yours, Austin P. Anderson Enclosures cc: Arthur P. Kreiger; Client ANDERSON & KREIGER LLP 50 MILK STREET, 21sT FLOOR, BOSTON, MA 02109 1617.621.6500 ANDERSON KREIGER 'HOVz® ' AUSTIN P.ANDERSON SAL&51'AS aanderson@andersonkreiger.com T:617-621-6576 F:617-621-6676 November 17, 2017 RECEIVED VIA FEDEX NOV 2 9 2017 DEPT. OF PLANNING & City Clerk COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Salem City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Notice of Appeal— Vinnin Square Apartments LLC v City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals, et al. Dear.Sir or Madam: Pursuant to the notice requirement of G.L. c. 40A, § 17, this letter notifies you of the above appeal. A copy of the complaint is attached. It challenges the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals' decision granting a special permit and variances regarding 602 Loring Avenue, filed you're your office on November 1, 2017. We have filed the Complaint in Land Court in Boston this afternoon. Very truly yours, Austin P. Anderson Enclosure cc: Arthur P. Kreiger Client nav20892 _ ANDERSON& KREIGER LLP 1 50 MILK STREET, 21ST FLOOR, BOSTON, MA 021091 617.621.6500 t LANHOUR FIftD COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS AM.10t 41! 1 11 NOV 17 PM 4` 11 and Court Department CITY CLERK Case No. SALEM. MASS VINNIN SQUARE APARTMENTS LLC, ) Plaintiff, ) V. ) SALEM ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, ) REBECCA CURRAN, PETER A. ) COPELAS, MIKE DUFFY, THOMAS ) WATKINS,JAMES TSITSINOS, JAMES ) HACKER and PAUL VICCICA as they are ) members of the SALEM ZONING BOARD ) OF APPEALS, and VAVEL LLC, ) Defendants. ) COMPLAINT Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40A, § 17,plaintiff Vinnin Square Apartments LLC appeals from a decision by the defendant Salem Zoning Board of Appeals granting a special permit and variances to the defendant Vavel LLC to build a five-story, 20-unit multi-family development at 602 Loring Avenue in Salem. On November 1, 2017,the Board filed its written decision(the "Decision")with the Town Clerk. A copy of the Decision is attached as Exhibit A. The variances and special permit are invalid and should be annulled. The Parties 1. The plaintiff Vinnin Square Apartments LLC ("Vinnin") is a limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1101 Worcester Road, Framingham, MA 0 170 1. Vinnin owns the property at 1 Carol Way in Salem("the Vinnin Property"). The Vinnin Property contains a residential housing development. 2. The defendant Salem Zoning Board of Appeals (the`Board")is the duly constituted board of appeals of the City of Salem, Massachusetts,with offices at Salem City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA 01970. 3. The defendant Rebecca Curran is the Chair of the Board, residing at 14 Clifton Ave, Salem, MA 01970. 4. The defendant Peter A. Copelas is the Vice-Chair of the Board,residing at 40 Warren Street, Salem, MA 01970. 5. The defendant Mike Dufffy is a member of the Board,residing at I Warren Court, Salem, MA 01970. 6. The defendant Thomas Watkins is a member of the Board, residing at 13 Crescent Drive, Salem, MA 01970. 7. The defendant James Tsitsinos is a member of the Board, residing at 12 Brown Street, Apt. 1, Salem, MA 01970. 8. The defendant James Hacker is an alternate member of the Board, residing at 4 Mayflower Lane,#4, Salem, MA 01970. 9. The defendant Paul Viccica is an alternate member of the Board,residing at 35 Broad Street, Salem, MA 01970. 10. The defendant Vavel LLC ("Vavel") is a limited liability company with its principal place of business at 16 C Alden Ave, Enfield, CT 06082. Vavel owns the property at 602 Loring Ave, Salem, Massachusetts (the "Site"). 2 The Facts The Site,the Project, and the Zoning Ordinance 11. The Site contains approximately 0.6 acres. It is located in the R3 Zoning District under the Salem Zoning Ordinance (the "Ordinance"). 12. Vavel proposes to demolish the existing building on the Site,re-grade the property, and construct a five-story, 20-unit, multi-family residential apartment building("the Project"). The Project would be 49.6 feet high. It would be located 53.8 feet from Vinnin's existing apartment building at 1 Carol Way. 13. A multi-family residence in the R3 district requires a special permit under Section 7.1.1. of the Ordinance. 14. Section 7.1.2.2 of the Ordinance states that no multi-family development "shall exceed three (3) stories." 15. Section 7.1.2.2 of the Ordinance states that no multi-family development "shall exceed . . . thirty-five (35) feet in height." 16. Section 7.1.2.5 of the Ordinance states that"[t]here shall be a buffer zone of seventy-five (75)feet from any building or structure on an adjacent lot where said lot is not under the same ownership." 17. The Project would violate the stories,height and buffer provisions of the Ordinance quoted above. Vavel's Application and the Board's Decision 18. On or about August 28, 2017, Vavel applied to the Board for a special permit and variances for the Project. 19. On or about October 18, the Board held a public hearing on Vavel's application. It decided as follows: 3 a. It granted a special permit for the Project(the "Special Permit"); b. It granted a variance from the three-story limit to allow five stories(the "Story Variance"); C. It granted a variance from the 35-foot height limit requirement to allow a height of 49.6 feet(the "Height Variance"); d. It granted a variance from the 75-foot buffer requirement to allow a buffer of 53.8 feet between the Project and the Plaintiffs apartment building at 1 Carol Way (the"Buffer Variance"). The Plaintiff's Property and Aggrievement 20. Vinnin has owned the Vinnin Property since November 2015. 21. The Vinnin Property is a parcel of approximately 3.5 acres. It abuts the western boundary of the Site. 22. The Vinnin Property contains a 60-unit residential apartment building. The apartment building is located near the eastern boundary of that property. 23. Vinnin is aggrieved by the Board's decision. The Project would contain two more stories, be approximately 15 feet taller, and be approximately 22 feet closer to its apartment building than is allowed under the Ordinance. It would obstruct tenants' views, block their light, and impair their other values protected by the buffer zone requirement in the Ordinance. It would reduce the value of the Vinnin Property because of these impacts. 24. The Project also would involve extensive blasting close to Vinnin's apartment building, creating a risk of damage to the Vinnin Property. COUNT G.L. c. 40A. & 17—Special Permit 25. The Plaintiff incorporates into this paragraph the allegations set forth above. 4 26. The Special Permit fails to satisfy the criteria in Section 7.1 and Section 9.4 of the Ordinance. 27. The Special Permit is arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion, exceeds the Board's authority, and is not in accordance with law. COUNT II G.L. c. 40A. & 17—Variances 28. The Plaintiff incorporates into this paragraph the allegations set forth above. 29. The Project fails to satisfy any of the standards under G.L. c. 40A, § 10 or Section 9.3.2.3 of the Ordinance for any of the variances granted by the Board. 30. No circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape, or topography of the Site, and especially affecting the Site but not generally the R3 Zoning District, support the Story Variance,the Height Variance, or the Buffer Variance. 31. Literal enforcement of the stories, height, and buffer provisions of the Ordinance would not cause Vavel substantial hardship. 32. The variances are detrimental to the public good and nullify and substantially derogate from the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. 33. For all the variances,the Decision is arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion, exceeds the Board's authority, and is not in accordance with law. 5 VnMREFORE, the Plaintiff requests that this Court: 1. Annul the Special Permit for the Project; 2. Annul the three variances for the Project; and 3. Grant it such other relief as is just and proper. VINNIN SQUARE APARTMENTS LLC By its attorneys, Arthur P. Kreiger (BBO #279870) Austin P.Anderson(BBO#696414) ANDERSON&KREIGER LLP 50 Milk Street, 21 st Floor Boston, MA 02109 617-621-6500 akreiger@andersonkreiger.com aanderson@andersonkreiger.com Dated: November 21,2017 6 Exhibit A t CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS � BOARD OF APPF A� INOV-�� px 2:is 120 WASHINGTON S7REEr♦SALEM,t, ASSACHUSEtrs@ty(0 Y CHER KtMBERLEYDRISCOLL TELE:978-745-9595♦FAX:978-740-9846 l MASS MAYOR November 1,2017 Decision City of Salem Board of Appeals Petition of VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per See. 7.1 Mxgamib Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.1 Mjv&family Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure at 602 LORING AVE (Map 20,Lot 11)(R-3 Zoning District). A public heating on the above Petition was opened on October 18, 2017 pursuant to M.G.L Ch. 40A, § 11 was closed on October 18, 2017 with the following Salem Board of Appeals members present: Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair),Tom Watkins,Jimmy Tsitsinos,and Paul Viccica(alternate). The petitioner VAVEL LLC is seeking a special permit per See. 7.1 Mm&faon# Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Mxhifmnily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development,consisting of twenty (20)units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure. Statements of fact: 1. In the petition date-stamped August 28, 2017, the Petitioner requested a VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Mxltijomib Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.1 Mxltijamiy Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20)units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure. 2. The following present the petition:Attorney Scott Grover of Tints, Quinn,Grover and Frey;Peter Pitmman, Principal Architect of Pitman&Wardley Associates LLC;Scott Cameron,Civil Engineer, of Morin-Cameron Group,Inc. 3. The petitioner,Vavel, Inc.,is the owner of the property,which had formerly been used as a child care center. 4. The property is located in an R-3 Zoning District The Salem Zoning Ordinance allows a multi-family development in an R-3 Zoning District, by special permit, for twenty (20) or more dwelling units as allowed by section 7.1 Multifamily Development regulations of the ordinance. 5. The petitioner is proposing to demolish the existing building on the property and to construct a five (5) story building consisting of twenty (20)apartment units. 6. The petitioner is proposing thirty-one (31) parking spaces arranged under the building and within a surface parking area. The petitioner meets the parking requirements by providing slightly more than 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 7. As shown in the site plans submitted dated, September 20, 2017, some of the existing and proposed surface parking spaces are located off of the privately owned property in an area that is part of the layout of Loring Avenue.The land reserved for the layout of Loring Avenue exceeds the land that was actually used for the road. The petitioner is working with the City to secure a permanent easement to allow the private use of this portion of land for the benefit of providing parking for the proposed development City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 2 of 6 8. As defined in section 7.1 Multifamily Development of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, there are dimensional requirements, parking requirements, and use requirements of this section. In addition to the special permit request to construct a twenty(20)unit building. 9. As defined in section 7.1 Multifamily Development, the allowable lot area per dwelling unit is 1,000 square feet for each dwelling unit The petitioner is proposing a density of 1,250 square feet per unit, which complies with the density requirements of the zoning ordinance. 10. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow a five (5) story structure where the requirements allow a three (3) story structure. 11. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow the building height to be 49.6'feet where the 35'feet are required. This height requirement is less than what is allowed in the underlying R-3 Zoning District. The petitioner is proposing a building height of 49.6' feet to allow for the petitioner to locate the required parking under the building. If the Board literally enforced the height requirement for number of stories and number of feet required, there is no feasible alternative location of the parking due to the unique shape and topography of the site. 12. The existing multi-family building on Carol Way has a height of 59.5'feet The petitioner is proposing to construct a multi-family building that is shorter in height than the existing adjacent building. Further, the petitioner is proposing to regrade the site, such that the proposed structure will also not appear to be taller than the existing adjacent structure. 13. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow the buffer from the building on the adjacent lot and the proposed building to be less than 75' feet from the existing adjacent structure. The petitioner isP �Po ' g ro a buffer of 53.8' feet from the adjacent structure. 14. The petitioner states that the adjacent apartment building received man dimensional variances to be 1 P 8 Y constructed and the building is located within the 75' foot buffer requirement from the proposed building footprint. The combination of the unique lot shape and topographical challenges of 602 Loring Avenue, and the location of the already existing adjacent apartment building hinder the ability for the petitioner to construct a density that the zoning ordinance would otherwise allow the petitioner to achieve. Further, if the petitioner constructed the allowable density and maintain the required 75' foot buffer, the building height would be increased. 15. In an R-3 Zoning District,the setback requirements are ten (10) feet from the lot line.There would be twenty (20) feet from structure to structure. In this proposal, the petitioner is proposing fifty-three (53) feet of space. 16. The petitioner states that the proposal fits with the existing character of the neighborhood. The petitioner is proposing to restore the use of the property to fit the intent of the underlying zoning district to provide housing rather than the previous commercial use. Further, the petitioner is proposing twenty (20) dwelling units,where the adjacent residential structure has over sixty (60)units. The proposed height of the building is also shorter than the existing adjacent residential structure. 17. Scott Cameron, Civil Engineer, of Morin- Cameron Group, Inc. presents the existing and proposed site conditions. The parcel is situated back up off of Loring Avenue with a twelve (12) foot grade change from Loring Ave to the site. The site also slopes another additional ten (10) feet.The parking existing parking area has a steep grade change as well, 18. The existing topography, grade changes and shape of the lot all affect the design and height of the proposed building and parking layout City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 3 of 6 19. The petitioner is proposing to utilize the same location of the entrance and exit drive, but plans to propose substantial improvements by creating a more conventional curbcut and narrowing the driveway such that cars cannot utilize the adjacent emergency egress as a way to cut across the driveway. The petitioner would like to separate their proposed driveway and the adjacent emergency egress to improve traffic circulation and safety. 20. The petitioner is proposing to significantly change the slope of the driveway by reducing the glade from a 10-15% slope to a 2.4%slope.The proposed 2% slope on the parking area will go all the way back. 21. The proposed building will be placed five (5) feet lower than the existing structure on the property by re-grading the site and the orientation of the building is not square to the frontage of the property due to the unusual shape of the lot 22. Peter Pitman, architect,Pitman & Wardley Associates LLC-presents elevation plans of the proposaL The petitioner is proposing twenty (20) parking spaces under the proposed building and an outdoor parking area with eleven (11) spaces. The petitioner is proposing 1,200 to 1,500 square feet per unit All of the apartments are two (2)bedroom and two (2)bathroom units. 23. The trash disposal is proposed to be located in the back comer such that a truck can circulate in an out Currently,the dumpster for the existing structure is located along the front of the property. 24. The project proposal is subject to review of the Planning Board and will undergo more rigorous examination as to traffic flow and safety, grading, stormwater management, and civil review. The petitioner is confident in meeting the technical standards of the Planning Board. 25. The mechanical systems will be centrally located on the roof and not be visible from the street 26. The Board expressed major concern about the safety and circulation of the existing wide expanse of asphalt that serves as an egress for 602 Loring and also serves as a fire egress for the adjacent property. 27. The project team plans to continue to design and engineer the driveway to control and facilitate and direct slower traffic. The petitioner is initially proposing a landscaped island to divide this paved expanse to narrow the driveway to twenty-four (24) feet wide. Other mitigations measures are proposed. The petitioner proposed to work with the Salem Fire Department to ensure that the redesigned driveway and fire lane continue to provide adequate fire truck access.Further,the visibility from Loring Avenue will be improved because the petitioner is proposing to reduce some of the ledge along the front of the property. The Board continues to be concerned about the width of the existing driveway and emergency lane and sightlines for a safe intersection between Loring Avenue and the Property 28. Scott Cameron states that proposed apartment trip generation is one of the lowest traffic generators. The anticipated trip generation from these apartment units is five (5) trips per dwelling unit per hour and peak hours are between 6am-1 Oam and 5pm-8pm during the week. It is anticipated that there may be more trips per hour on the weekends,but spread out over the day and peak demand is anticipated around 12pm.The location of this building is in close proximity to shopping and connected walkways that allow people to walk to amenities. Compared to the previous commercial day care use, this residential use generates fewer trips. 29. The Board discusses that there are crosswalks on Loring Avenue located to the right and the left of the proposed residential property. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 4 of 6 30. The petitioner proposes that the stotmwater will be managed by connecting to the City's sewer. If there are additional requirements the petitioner will meet them. The petitioner also plans to conduct soil boring to better understand the stormwater management for mitigation. 31. The petitioner is proposing an easement with the City that is approximately forty (40) feet deep and along the entire length of the property frontage.The petitioner plans to utilize this space for seven (7) parking spaces and also improve this land by cleaning up the overgrowth of the site and some grading adjustments. 32. Tom St. Pierre- Building Inspector, states that the adjacent property needed a second means of providing emergency access to the site. The fire department will have an opportunity to comment on this project through a site plan review. 33. The Board requested that the petitioner also provide ADA compliant sidewalks and crosswalks through the proposed driveway to continue pedestrian amenities across the redesigned driveway and fire lane. 34. The petitioner states that there will be anticipated blasting on this site. Any blasting activities are regulated by the state and local fire department The neighbors will be notified by the blasting company and inspect properties with a pre-blast survey. Abutters within 300' feet will be notified of this activity. 35. At the public hearing, two members of the public spoke. One member of the public asked questions with no expression of support or objection. A second member of the public spoke in support of the petition. The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition, including the application narrative and plans, makes the following findings: Special Permit Findings: The Board finds that the adverse effects of the proposed use will not outweigh its beneficial impacts to the City or the neighborhood. 1. There are social, economic and community needs served by the proposal as the building is providing new housing units in the City. 2. The existing negative conditions of traffic flow and safety in and out of the site will be improved and the proposed parking and loading are adequate. 3. There will be no impact to the adequacy of utilities and other public services. 4. There will be no impacts on the natural environment,including drainage as the petitioner is proposing to locate parking under the building and reduce the amount of impervious surface on the property. 5. The proposal fits with the character of the neighborhood compared to the adjacent larger buildings and adjacent apartment building. 6. The potential fiscal impact,including impact on City and tax base and employment is positive. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 5 of 6 Variance Findings: 1. Special conditions and circumstances that especially affect the land, building, or structure involved, generally not affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district is the unusual shape of the property. The property is shaped like a baseball field with the wider part along the frontage of Loring Ave. with a severe taper to the rear of the parcel. The land also has significant grade changes that make the redevelopment of the parcel limited. These physical and unique conditions of this parcel restrict the location of the building envelope. 2. The combination of the unique lot shape and topographical challenges of 602 Loring Avenue,and the location of the already existing adjacent apartment building hinder the ability for the petitioner to construct a density that the zoning ordinance would otherwise allow the petitioner to achieve. 3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, and without nullify or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. On the basis of the above statements of facts and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted four (4) in favor (Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair), Tom Watkins,Jimmy Tsitsinos, and Paul Viccica (alternate) and none (o) opposed, to grant a special permit per See. 7.1 Mmkifamily Development and variances per Sec 7.1.2 Mrrkifamily Development Staadan* of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure subject to the following terms, conditions and safeguards: Standard Conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues,ordinances,codes and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. Exterior finished of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including,but not limited to the Planning Board. Special Conditions: 1. The petitioner shall secure an easement with the City of Salem to allow the private use of this portion of land for the benefit of providing parking for the proposed development 2. All HVAC units shall be located on the roof of the property and shall be screened. 3. The petitioner shall provide recycling at the property and shall provide adequate space for a recycling dumpster. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project 602 Loring Ave. Page 6 of 6 Peter A. Copelas (Vile-Chair) Ir Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Apped fmm thin deasion,if any,shall be made pwrmant to Section 17 of I&Mw=hnseto Gonna!Isar Chapin 40A,and shall k ftkd ndthin 20 days offthng of this dedslon in the offia of the City Ckrk Pnosrant to the Massashnntts GeneralL"i Chapkr 4M,SaWms 11, the Variame or Speaal Permit granted he shall not tahe effort Heti!a mpy of the dmaen he=ag the mtifwate of the Gty Ckrk has been fikd aeth the Es Sotdh Registry ofDeeds. ANDERSON KREIGER 1011'NOV20 AND- 41 CITY CLERK SALEM, MASS AUSTIN P.ANDERSON aanderson@a andersonkrei ee r.com T:617-621-6576 F:617-621-6676 November 17, 2017 VIA FEDEX City Clerk Salem City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Notice of Appeal— Vinnin Square Apartments LLC v. City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals, et al. Dear.Sir or Madam: Pursuant to the notice requirement of G.L. c. 40A, § 17, this letter notifies you of the above appeal. A copy of the complaint is attached. It challenges the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals' decision granting a special permit and variances regarding 602 Loring Avenue, filed you're your office on November 1, 2017. We have filed the Complaint in Land Court in Boston this afternoon. Very truly yours, Austin P. Anderson Enclosure cc: Arthur P. Kreiger Client ANDERSON & KREIGER LLP 1 50 MILK STREET, 21sT FLOOR, BOSTON, MA 021091 617.621.6500 L ANHOURI COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS FILED ESWR�RY 20 .AM 10: b C TI NOV I l PM 4: I 1 and Court Department CITY CLERK Case No. SALEM. MASS VINNIN SQUARE APARTMENTS LLC, ) Plaintiff, ) V. ) SALEM ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, ) REBECCA CURRAN, PETER A. ) COPELAS, MIKE DUFFY, THOMAS ) WATKINS, JAMES TSITSINOS, JAMES ) HACKER and PAUL VICCICA as they are ) members of the SALEM ZONING BOARD ) OF APPEALS, and VAVEL LLC,' ) Defendants. ) COMPLAINT Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40A, § 17,plaintiff Vinnin Square Apartments LLC appeals from a decision by the defendant Salem Zoning Board of Appeals granting a special permit and variances to the defendant Vavel LLC to build a five-story, 20-unit multi-family development at 602 Loring Avenue in Salem. On November 1, 2017, the Board filed its written decision(the "Decision") with the Town Clerk. A copy of the Decision is attached as Exhibit A. The variances and special permit are invalid and should be annulled. The Parties 1. The plaintiff Vinnin Square Apartments LLC ("Virinin") is a limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1101 Worcester Road, Framingham, MA 0 170 1. Vinnin owns the property at I Carol Way in Salem("the Vinnin Property"). The Vinnin Property contains a residential housing development. 2. The defendant Salem Zoning Board of Appeals (the `Board") is the duly constituted board of appeals of the City of Salem, Massachusetts, with offices at Salem City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA 01970. 3. The defendant Rebecca Curran is the Chair of the Board, residing at 14 Clifton Ave, Salem, MA 01970. 4. The defendant Peter A. Copelas is the Vice-Chair of the Board, residing at 40 Warren Street, Salem, MA 01970. 5. The defendant Mike Dufffy is a member of the Board, residing at 1 Warren Court, Salem, MA 01970. 6. The defendant Thomas Watkins is a member of the Board, residing at 13 Crescent Drive, Salem, MA 01970. 7. The defendant James Tsitsinos is a member of the Board, residing at 12 Brown Street, Apt. 1, Salem, MA 01970. 8. The defendant James Hacker is an alternate member of the Board, residing at 4 Mayflower Lane, #4, Salem, MA 01970. 9. The defendant Paul Viccica is an alternate member of the Board, residing at 35 Broad Street, Salem, MA 01970. 10. The defendant Vavel LLC ("Vavel") is a limited liability company with its principal place of business at 16 C Alden Ave, Enfield, CT 06082. Vavel owns the property at 602 Loring Ave, Salem, Massachusetts (the "Site"). 2 The Facts The Site, the Project, and the Zoning Ordinance 11. The Site contains approximately 0.6 acres. It is located in the R3 Zoning District under the Salem Zoning Ordinance (the "Ordinance"). 12. Vavel proposes to demolish the existing building on the Site, re-grade the property, and construct a five-story, 20-unit,multi-family residential apartment building ("the Project"). The Project would be 49.6 feet high. It would be located 53.8 feet from Vinnin's existing apartment building at 1 Carol Way. 13. A multi-family residence in the R3 district requires a special permit under Section 7.1.1. of the Ordinance. 14. Section 7.1.2.2 of the Ordinance states that no multi-family development"shall exceed three (3) stories." 15. Section 7.1.2.2 of the Ordinance states that no multi-family development "shall exceed . . . thirty-five (35) feet in height." 16. Section 7.1.2.5 of the Ordinance states that"[tjhere shall be a buffer zone of seventy-five (75)feet from any building or structure on an adjacent lot where said lot is not under the same ownership." 17. The Project would violate the stories,height and buffer provisions of the Ordinance quoted above. Vavel's Application and the Board's Decision 18. On or about August 28, 2017, Vavel applied to the Board for a special permit and variances for the Project. 19. On or about October 18, the Board held a public hearing on Vavel's application. It decided as follows: 3 a. It granted a special permit for the Project(the "Special Permit"); b. It granted a variance from the three-story limit to allow five stories (the "Story Variance"); C. It granted a variance from the 35-foot height limit requirement to allow a height of 49.6 feet(the "Height Variance"); d. It granted a variance from the 75-foot buffer requirement to allow a buffer of 53.8 feet between the Project and the Plaintiff s apartment building at 1 Carol Way(the "Buffer Variance"). The Plaintiff's Property and Aggrievement 20. Vinnin has owned the Vinnin Property since November 2015. 21. The Vinnin Property is a parcel of approximately 3.5 acres. It abuts the western boundary of the Site. 22. The Vinnin Property contains a 60-unit residential apartment building. The apartment building is located near the eastern boundary of that property. 23. Vinnin is aggrieved by the Board's decision. The Project would contain two more stories, be approximately 15 feet taller, and be approximately 22 feet closer to its apartment building than is allowed under the Ordinance. It would obstruct tenants' views, block their light, and impair their other values protected by the buffer zone requirement in the Ordinance. It would reduce the value of the Vinnin Property because of these impacts. 24. The Project also would involve extensive blasting close to Vinnin's apartment building, creating a risk of damage to the Vinnin Property. COUNT G.L. c. 40A. & 17—Special Permit 25. The Plaintiff incorporates into this paragraph the allegations set forth above. 4 26. The Special Permit fails to satisfy the criteria in Section 7.1 and Section 9.4 of the Ordinance. 27. The Special Permit is arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion, exceeds the Board's authority, and is not in accordance with law. COUNT II G.L. c. 40A. & 17—Variances 28. The Plaintiff incorporates into this paragraph the allegations set forth above. 29. The Project fails to satisfy any of the standards under G.L. c. 40A, § 10 or Section 9.3.2.3 of the Ordinance for any of the variances granted by the Board. 30. No circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape, or topography of the Site, and especially affecting the Site but not generally the R3 Zoning District, support the Story Variance, the Height Variance, or the Buffer Variance. 31. Literal enforcement of the stories, height, and buffer provisions of the Ordinance would not cause Vavel substantial hardship. 32. The variances are detrimental to the public good and nullify and substantially derogate from the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. 33. For all the variances,the Decision is arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion, exceeds the Board's authority, and is not in accordance with law. 5 WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff requests that this Court: 1. Annul the Special Permit for the Project; 2. Annul the three variances for the Project; and 3. Grant it such other relief as is just and proper. VINNIN SQUARE APARTMENTS LLC By its attorneys, Arthur P. Kreiger(BBO #279870) Austin P. Anderson(BBO# 696414) ANDERSON&KREIGER LLP 50 Milk Street, 21st Floor Boston, MA 02109 617-621-6500 akreiger@andersonkreiger.com aanderson@andersonkreiger.com Dated: November 21 2017 6 Exhibit A �C<1NDIT4 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS n BOARD OF APPE41Nov-/ pN X88 120 WASHINGTON STREET♦SALEM,MASSACHUSETTMEilSrjb Y CLERK MMBERLEY DRISCOLL TELE:978-745-9595# FAx:978-740-9846 §RYM,PASS MAYOR November 1, 2017 Decision City of Salem Board of Appeals Petition of VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure at 602 LORING AVE (Map 20,Lot 11)(R-3 Zoning District). A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on October 18, 2017 pursuant to M.G.L Ch. 40A, § 11 was closed on October 18, 2017 with the following Salem Board of Appeals members present: Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair),Tom Watkins,Jimmy Tsitsinos,and Paul Viccica (altemate). The petitioner VAVEL LLC is seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Detr1opment and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Stan Developof the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20)units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure. Statements of fact: 1. In the petition date-stamped August 28, 2017, the Petitioner requested a VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per See. 7.1 Multi ami! Dem went and variances per Sec. 7 f y lop c .1.2 Multi ami! Dene p f y lopment Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty2 ( 0) units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure. 2. The following present the petition:Attorney Scott Grover of TindQin. Y Grover and Frey;Peter Pitmman, Principal Architect of Pitman&Wardley Associates LLC;Scott Cameron,Civil Engineer, of Morin-Cameron Group,Inc. 3. The petitioner,Vavel, Inc., is the owner of the property,which had formerly been used as a child care center. 4. The property is located in an R-3 Zoning District. The Salem Zoning Ordinance allows a multi-family development in an R-3 Zoning District, by special permit, for twenty (20) or more dwelling units as allowed by section 7.1 Multifamily Development regulations of the ordinance. 5. The petitioner is proposing to demolish the existing building on the property and to construct a five (5) story building consisting of twenty (20)apartment units. 6. The petitioner is proposing thirty-one (31) parking spaces arranged under the building and within a surface parking area. The petitioner meets the parking requirements by providing slightly more than 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 7. As shown in the site plans submitted dated, September 20, 2017, some of the existing and proposed surface parking spaces are located off of the privately owned property in an area that is part of the layout of Loring Avenue.The land reserved for the layout of Loring Avenue exceeds the land that was actually used for the road. The petitioner is working with the City to secure a permanent easement to allow the private use of this portion of land for the benefit of providing parking for the proposed development. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 2 of 6 8. As defined in section 7.1 Multifamily Development of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, there are dimensional requirements, parking requirements, and use requirements of this section. In addition to the special permit request to construct a twenty(20)unit building. 9. As defined in section 7.1 Multifamily Development, the allowable lot area per dwelling unit is 1,000 square feet for each dwelling unit The petitioner is proposing a density of 1,250 square feet per unit, which complies with the density requirements of the zoning ordinance. 10. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow a five (5) story structure where the requirements allow a three (3) story structure. 11. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow the building height to be 49.6' feet where the 35' feet are required. This height requirement is less than what is allowed in the underlying R-3 Zoning District. The petitioner is proposing a building height of 49.6' feet to allow for the petitioner to locate the required parking under the building. If the Board literally enforced the height requirement for number of stories and number of feet required, there is no feasible alternative location of the parking due to the unique shape and topography of the site. 12. The existing multi-family building on Carol Way has a height of 59.5' feet. The petitioner is proposing to construct a multi-family building that is shorter in height than the existing adjacent building. Further, the petitioner is proposing to regrade the site, such that the proposed structure will also not appear to be taller than the existing adjacent structure. 13. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow the buffer from the building on the adjacent lot and the proposed building to be less than 75' feet from the existing adjacent structure. The petitioner is proposing a buffer of 53.8' feet from the adjacent structure. 14. The petitioner states that the adjacent apartment building received many dimensional variances to be constructed and the building is located within the 75' foot buffer requirement from the proposed building footprint. The combination of the unique lot shape and topographical challenges of 602 Loring Avenue, and the location of the already existing adjacent apartment building hinder the ability for the petitioner to construct a density that the zoning ordinance would otherwise allow the petitioner to achieve. Further, if the petitioner constructed the allowable density and maintain the required 75' foot buffer, the building height would be increased. 15. In an R-3 Zoning District,the setback requirements are ten (10) feet from the lot line.There would be twenty (20) feet from structure to structure. In this proposal, the petitioner is proposing fifty-three (53) feet of space. 16. The petitioner states that the proposal fits with the existing character of the neighborhood. The petitioner is proposing to restore the use of the property to fit the intent of the underlying zoning district to provide housing rather than the previous commercial use. Further, the petitioner is proposing twenty (20) dwelling units,where the adjacent residential structure has over sixty (60) units. The proposed height of the building is also shorter than the existing adjacent residential structure. 17. Scott Cameron, Civil Engineer, of Morin- Cameron Group, Inc. presents the existing and proposed site conditions. The parcel is situated back up off of Loring Avenue with a twelve (12) foot grade change from Loring Ave to the site. The site also slopes another additional ten (10) feet.The parking existing parking area has a steep grade change as well. 18. The existing topography, grade changes and shape of the lot all affect the design and height of the proposed building and parking layout. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 3 of 6 19. The petitioner is proposing to utilize the same location of the entrance and exit drive, but plans to propose substantial improvements by creating a more conventional curbcut and narrowing the driveway such that can cannot utilize the adjacent emergency egress as a way to cut across the driveway. The petitioner would like to separate their proposed driveway and the adjacent emergency egress to improve traffic circulation and safety. 20. The petitioner is proposing to significantly change the slope of the driveway by reducing the grade from a 10-15% slope to a 24% slope. The proposed 2% slope on the parking area will go all the way back. 21. The proposed building will be placed five (5) feet lower than the existing structure on the property by re-grading the site and the orientation of the building is not square to the frontage of the property due to the unusual shape of the lot 22. Peter Pitman, architect,Pitman &Wardley Associates LLC-presents elevation plans of the proposal. The petitioner is proposing twenty (20) parking spaces under the proposed building and an outdoor parking area with eleven (11) spaces. The petitioner is proposing 1,200 to 1,500 square feet per unit. All of the apartments are two(2)bedroom and two (2)bathroom units. 23. The trash disposal is proposed to be located in the back comer such that a truck can circulate in an out.Currently,the dumpster for the existing structure is located along the front of the property. 24. The project proposal is subject to review of the Planning Board and will undergo more rigorous examination as to traffic flow and safety, grading, stortnwater management, and civil review. The petitioner is confident in meeting the technical standards of the Planning Board. 25. The mechanical systems will be centrally located on the roof and not be visible from the street 26. The Board expressed major concern about the safety and circulation of the existing wide expanse of asphalt that serves as an egress for 602 Loring and also serves as a fire egress for the adjacent property. 27. The project team plans to continue to design and engineer the driveway to control and facilitate and direct slower traffic. The petitioner is initially proposing a landscaped island to divide this paved expanse to narrow the driveway to twenty-four (24) feet wide. Other mitigations measures are proposed. The petitioner proposed to work with the Salem Fire Department to ensure that the redesigned driveway and fire lanc continue to provide adequate fire track access. Further, the visibility from Loring Avenue will be improved because the petitioner is proposing to reduce some of the ledge along the front of the property. The Board continues to be concerned about the width of the existing driveway and emergency lane and sightlines for a safe intersection between Loring Avenue and the property. 28. Scott Cameron states that proposed apartment trip generation is one of the lowest traffic generators. The anticipated trip generation from these apartment units is five (5) trips per dwelling unit per hour and peak hours are between 6am-10am and Spm-bpm during the week. It is anticipated that there may be more trips per hour on the weekends,but spread out over the day and peak demand is anticipated around 12pm The location of this building is in dose proximity to shopping and connected walkways that allow people to walk to amenities. Compared to the previous commercial day care use, this residential use generates fewer trips. 29. The Board discusses that there are crosswalks on Loring Avenue located to the right and the left of the proposed residential property. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 4 of 6 30. The petitioner proposes that the stomtwater will be managed by connecting to the City's sewer. If there are additional requirements the petitioner will meet them. The petitioner also plans to conduct soil boring to better understand the stor mwater management for mitigation. 31. The petitioner is proposing an easement with the City that is approximately forty (40) feet deep and along the entire length of the property frontage. The petitioner plans to utilize this space for seven (7) parking spaces and also improve this land by cleaning up the overgrowth of the site and some grading adjustments. 32. Tom St. Pierre- Building Inspector, states that the adjacent property needed a second means of providing emergency access to the site. The fire department will have an opportunity to comment on this project through a site plan review. 33. The Board requested that the petitioner also provide ADA compliant sidewalks and crosswalks through the proposed driveway to continue pedestrian amenities across the redesigned driveway and fire lane. 34. The petitioner states that there will be anticipated blasting on this site. Any blasting activities ate regulated by the state and local fire department The neighbors will be notified by the blasting company and inspect properties with a pre-blast survey. Abutters within 300' feet will be notified of this activity. 35. At the public hearing, two members of the public spoke. One member of the public asked questions with no expression of support or objection. A second member of the public spoke in support of the petition. The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition, including the application narrative and plans, makes the following findings: Special Permit Findings: The Board finds that the adverse effects of the proposed use will not outweigh its beneficial impacts to the City or the neighborhood. 1. There are social, economic and community needs served by the proposal as the building is providing new housing units in the City. 2. The existing negative conditions of traffic flow and safety in and out of the site will be improved and the proposed parking and loading are adequate. 3. There will be no impact to the adequacy of utilities and other public services. 4. There will be no impacts on the natural environment,including drainage as the petitioner is proposing to locate parking under the building and reduce the amount of impervious surface on the property. 5. The proposal fits with the character of the neighborhood compared to the adjacent larger buildings and adjacent apartment building. 6. The potential fiscal impact,including impact on City and tax base and employment is positive. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 5 of 6 Variance Findings: 1. Special conditions and circumstances that especially affect the land, building, or structure involved, generally not affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district is the unusual shape of the property. The property is shaped like a baseball field with the wider part along the frontage of Loring Ave. with a severe taper to the rear of the parcel. The land also has significant grade changes that make the redevelopment of the parcel limited. These physical and unique conditions of this parcel restrict the location of the building envelope. 2. The combination of the unique lot shape and topographical challenges of 602 Loring Avenue, and the location of the already existing adjacent apartment building hinder the ability for the petitioner to construct a density that the zoning ordinance would otherwise allow the petitioner to achieve. 3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, and without nullify or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. On the basis of the above statements of facts and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted four (4) in favor (Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair), Tom Watkins,Jimmy Tsitsinos, and Paul Vicdca (alternate) and none (o) opposed, to grant a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Mukifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.1 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure subject to the following terms, conditions and safeguards: Standard Conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues,ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. Exterior finished of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including,but not limited to the Planning Board. Special Conditions: 1. The petitioner shall secure an easement with the City of Salem to allow the private use of this portion of land for the benefit of providing parking for the proposed development 2. All HVAC units shall be located on the roof of the property and shall be screened. 3. The petitioner shall provide recycling at the property and shall provide adequate space for a recycling dumpster. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project:602 Loring Ave. Page 6 of 6 Peter A. Copelas (Vile-Chair) Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this dedrion,rf mry,.shall be made purtnant to Secdon 17 of the Maeraebatew Genera!Ln ,Chapter 40A,and shall be filed ivithi,20 days of feh'ng of this derision in the On of the G'y Clerk Pnrsaant 10 the Mmrachwew Genres/low Chapter 40A,Seth,, 11, the Vanann ar Speaal Permitgranted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the dedvon bearing the certifuate of the City Clerk has been filed with the Essex Saath Regu*of Deeds. CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS , J BOARD OF APPEAMIN'DY-, pH 2:28 �(7 V t 120 WASHINGTON STREET♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS81y(o EYCLERK KIMBERLEYDRIscoLL - TELE:978-745-9595 ♦ FAX:978-740-9846 EM. MA�g, MAYOR November 1, 2017 Decision City of Salem Board of Appeals Petition of VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure at 602 LORING AVE (Map 20,Lot 11)(R-3 Zoning District). A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on October 18, 2017 pursuant to M.G.L Ch. 40A, § 11 was closed on October 18, 2017 with the following Salem Board of Appeals members present: Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair),Tom Watkins,Jimmy Tsitsinos, and Paul Viccica (alternate). The petitioner VAVEL LLC is seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure. Statements of fact: 1. In the petition date-stamped August 28, 2017, the Petitioner requested a VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure. 2. The following present the petition: Attorney Scott Grover of Tinti, Quinn, Grover and Frey;Peter Pitmman,Principal Architect of Pitman&Wardley Associates LLC;Scott Cameron,Civil Engineer, of Morin- Cameron Group, Inc. 3. The petitioner,Vavel, Inc.,is the owner of the property,which had formerly been used as a child care center. 4. The property is located in an R-3 Zoning District. The Salem Zoning Ordinance allows a multi-family development in an R-3 Zoning District, by special permit, for twenty (20) or more dwelling units as allowed by section 7.1 Multifamily Development regulations of the ordinance. 5. The petitioner is proposing to demolish the existing building on the property and to construct a five (5) story building consisting of twenty (20) apartment units. 6. The petitioner is proposing thirty-one (31) parking spaces arranged under the building and within a surface parking area. The petitioner meets the parking requirements by providing slightly more than 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 7. As shown in the site plans submitted dated, September 20, 2017, some of the existing and proposed surface parking spaces are located off of the privately owned property in an area that is part of the layout of Loring Avenue.The land reserved for the layout of Loring Avenue exceeds the land that was actually used for the road. The petitioner is working with the City to secure a permanent easement to allow the private use of this portion of land for the benefit of providing parking for the proposed development. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 2 of 6 8. As defined in section 7.1 Multifamily Development of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, there are dimensional requirements, parking requirements, and use requirements of this section. In addition to the special permit request to construct a twenty (20) unit building. 9. As defined in section 7.1 Multifamily Development, the allowable lot area per dwelling unit is 1,000 square feet for each dwelling unit. The petitioner is proposing a density of 1,250 square feet per unit, which complies with the density requirements of the zoning ordinance. 10. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow a five (5) story structure where the requirements allow a three (3) story structure. 11. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow the building height to be 49.6' feet where the 35' feet are required. This height requirement is less than what is allowed in the underlying R-3 Zoning District. The petitioner is proposing a building height of 49.6' feet to allow for the petitioner to locate the required parking under the building. If the Board literally enforced the height requirement for number of stories and number of feet required, there is no feasible alternative location of the parking due to the unique shape and topography of the site. 12. The existing multi-family building on Carol Way has a height of 59.5' feet. The petitioner is proposing to construct a multi-family building that is shorter in height than the existing adjacent building. Further, the petitioner is proposing to regrade the site, such that the proposed structure will also not appear to be taller than the existing adjacent structure. 13. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow the buffer from the building on the adjacent lot and the proposed building to be less than 75' feet from the existing adjacent structure. The petitioner is proposing a buffer of 53.8' feet from the adjacent structure. 14. The petitioner states that the adjacent apartment building received many dimensional variances to be constructed and the building is located within the 75' foot buffer requirement from the proposed building footprint. The combination of the unique lot shape and topographical challenges of 602 Loring Avenue, and the location of the already existing adjacent apartment building hinder the ability for the petitioner to construct a density that the zoning ordinance would otherwise allow the petitioner to achieve. Further, if the petitioner constructed the allowable density and maintain the required 75' foot buffer, the building height would be increased. 15. In an R-3 Zoning District, the setback requirements are ten (10) feet from the lot line. There would be twenty (20) feet from structure to structure. In this proposal, the petitioner is proposing fifty-three (53� feet of space. 16. The petitioner states that the proposal fits with the existing character of the neighborhood. The petitioner is proposing to restore the use of the property to fit the intent of the underlying zoning district to provide housing rather than the previous commercial use. Further, the petitioner is proposing twenty (20) dwelling units,where the adjacent residential structure has over sixty (60) units. The proposed height of the building is also shorter than the existing adjacent residential structure. 17. Scott Cameron, Civil Engineer, of Morin- Cameron Group, Inc. presents the existing and proposed site conditions. The parcel is situated back up off of Loring Avenue with a twelve (12) foot grade change from Loring Ave to the site. The site also slopes another additional ten (10) feet. The parking existing parking area has a steep grade change as well. 18. The existing topography, grade changes and shape of the lot all affect the design and height of the proposed building and parking layout. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 3 of 6 19. The petitioner is proposing to utilize the same location of the entrance and exit drive, but plans to propose substantial improvements by creating a more conventional curbcut and narrowing the driveway such that cars cannot utilize the adjacent emergency egress as a way to cut across the driveway. The petitioner would like to separate their proposed driveway and the adjacent emergency egress to improve traffic circulation and safety. 20. The petitioner is proposing to significantly change the slope of the driveway by reducing the grade from a 10-15% slope to a 24% slope. The proposed 2% slope on the parking area will go all the way back. 21. The proposed building will be placed five (5) feet lower than the existing structure on the property by re-grading the site and the orientation of the building is not square to the frontage of the property due to the unusual shape of the lot. 22. Peter Pitman, architect, Pitman & Wardley Associates LLC- presents elevation plans of the proposal. The petitioner is proposing twenty (20) parking spaces under the proposed building and an outdoor parking area with eleven (11) spaces. The petitioner is proposing 1,200 to 1,500 square feet per unit. All of the apartments are two (2) bedroom and two (2) bathroom units. 23. The trash disposal is proposed to be located in the back comer such that a truck can circulate in an out. Currently, the dumpster for the existing structure is located along the front of the property. 24. The project proposal is subject to review of the Planning Board and will undergo more rigorous examination as to traffic flow and safety, grading, stormwater management, and civil review. The petitioner is confident in meeting the technical standards of the Planning Board. 25. The mechanical systems will be centrally located on the roof and not be visible from the street. 26. The Board expressed major concern about the safety and circulation of the existing wide expanse of asphalt that serves as an egress for 602 Loring and also serves as a fire egress for the adjacent property. 27. The project team plans to continue to design and engineer the driveway to control and facilitate and direct slower traffic. The petitioner is initially proposing a landscaped island to divide this paved expanse to narrow the driveway to twenty-four (24) feet wide. Other mitigations measures are proposed. The petitioner*proposed to work with the Salem Fire Department to ensure that the redesigned driveway and fire lane continue to provide adequate fire truck access. Further, the visibility from Loring Avenue will be improved because the petitioner is proposing to reduce some of the ledge along the front of the property. The Board continues to be concerned about the width of the existing driveway and emergency lane and sightlines for a safe intersection between Loring Avenue and the property. 28. Scott Cameron states that proposed apartment trip generation is one of the lowest traffic generators. The anticipated trip generation from these apartment units is five (5) trips per dwelling unit per hour and peak hours are between 6am-1 Oam and Spm-bpm during the week. It is anticipated that there may be more trips per hour on the weekends, but spread out over the day and peak demand is anticipated around 12pm. The location of this building is in close proximity to shopping and connected walkways that allow people to walk to amenities. Compared to the previous commercial day care use, this residential use generates fewer trips. 29. The Board discusses that there are crosswalks on Loring Avenue located to the right and the left of the proposed residential property. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 4 of 6 30. The petitioner proposes that the stormwater will be managed by connecting to the City's sewer. If there are additional requirements the petitioner will meet them. The petitioner also plans to conduct soil boring to better understand the stormwater management for mitigation. 31. The petitioner is proposing an easement with the City that is approximately forty (40) feet deep and along the entire length of the property frontage. The petitioner plans to utilize this space for seven (7) parking spaces and also improve this land by cleaning up the overgrowth of the site and some grading adjustments. 32. Tom St. Pierre- Building Inspector, states that the adjacent property needed a second means of providing emergency access to the site. The fire department will have an opportunity to comment on this project through a site plan review. 33. The Board requested that the petitioner also provide ADA compliant sidewalks and crosswalks through the proposed driveway to continue pedestrian amenities across the redesigned driveway and fire lane. 34. The petitioner states that there will be anticipated blasting on this site. Any blasting activities are regulated by the state and local fire department. The neighbors will be notified by the blasting company and inspect properties with a pre-blast survey. Abutters within 300' feet will be notified of this activity. 35. At the public hearing, two members of the public spoke. One member of the public asked questions with no expression of support or objection. A second member of the public spoke in support of the petition. The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition, including the application narrative and plans, makes the following findings: Special Permit Findings: The Board finds that the adverse effects of the proposed use will not outweigh its beneficial impacts to the City or the neighborhood. 1. There are social, economic and community needs served by the proposal as the building is providing new housing units in the City. 2. The existing negative conditions of traffic flow and safety in and out of the site will be improved and the proposed parking and loading are adequate. 3. There will be no impact to the adequacy of utilities and other public services. 4. There will be no impacts on the natural environment,including drainage as the petitioner is proposing to locate parking under the building and reduce the amount of impervious surface on the property. 5. The proposal fits with the character of the neighborhood compared to the adjacent larger buildings and adjacent apartment building. 6. The potential fiscal impact,including impact on City and tax base and employment is positive. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 5 of 6 Variance Findings: 1. Special conditions and circumstances that especially affect the land, building, or structure involved, generally not affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district is the unusual shape of the property. The property is shaped like a baseball field with the wider part along the frontage of Loring Ave. with a severe taper to the rear of the parcel. The land also has significant grade changes that make the redevelopment of the parcel limited. These physical and unique conditions of this parcel restrict the location of the building envelope. 2. The combination of the unique lot shape and topographical challenges of 602 Loring Avenue, and the location of the already existing adjacent apartment building hinder the ability for the petitioner to construct a density that the zoning ordinance would otherwise allow the petitioner to achieve. 3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, and without nullify or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. On the basis of the above statements of facts and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted four (4) in favor (Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair), Tom Watkins,Jimmy Tsitsinos, and Paul Viccica (alternate) and none (o) opposed, to grant a special pemrit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure subject to the following terms, conditions and safeguards: Standard Conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues,ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building pemnit prior to beginning any construction. 5. Exterior finished of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board. Special Conditions: 1. The petitioner shall secure an easement with the City of Salem to allow the private use of this portion of land for the benefit of providing parking for the proposed development. 2. All HVAC units shall be located on the roof of the property and shall be screened. 3. The petitioner shall provide recycling at the property and shall provide adequate space for a recycling dumpster. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 6 of 6 Peter A. Copelas (V e-Chair) Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal fmnr this demion,if any, shall be made purruant to Section 17 of the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be fled within 20 days of fbnB of this deation in the ofice of the City Clerk. Pursuant to the 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 certificate of the Crty Ckrk has been filed with the Essex South Registry of Deeds. _ v 2 8_2011 _ 6 hd:xa�►�+ ria"urtiq�,c racy: �t°;.mss .3r;:,:- the dMo ii lt, NO AP{'' ,@Z A Trm Cc:<i>-(lo R f p r ��eONUITq�� CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET# SALEM,MASSACHUSETPS 01970 KIMBERLEY DRiscoLL TELE:978-745-9595 ♦ FAX:978-740-9846 MAYOR November 1, 2017 Decision City of Salem Board of Appeals Petition of VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure at 602 LORING AVE (Map 20,Lot 11)(R-3 Zoning District). A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on October 18, 2017 pursuant to M.G.L Ch. 40A, 5 11 was closed on October 18, 2017 with the following Salem Board of Appeals members present: Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair),Tom Watkins,Jimmy Tsitsinos, and Paul Viccica (alternate). The petitioner VAVEL LLC is seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure. Statements of fact: 1. In the petition date-stamped August 28, 2017, the Petitioner requested a VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units,within 53 feet of an adjacent structure. 2. The following present the petition: Attorney Scott Grover of Tinti, Quinn, Grover and Frey;Peter Pitmman, Principal Architect of Pitman&Wardley Associates LLC; Scott Cameron, Civil Engineer, of Morin- Cameron Group, Inc. 3. The petitioner,Vavel, Inc., is the owner of the property,which had formerly been used as a child care center. 4. The property is located in an R-3 Zoning District. The Salem Zoning Ordinance allows a multi-family development in an R-3 Zoning District, by special permit, for twenty (20) or more dwelling units as allowed by section 7.1 Multifamily Development regulations of the ordinance. 5. The petitioner is proposing to demolish the existing building on the property and to construct a five (5) story building consisting of twenty (20) apartment units. 6. The petitioner is proposing thirty-one (31) parking spaces arranged under the building and within a surface parking area. The petitioner meets the parking requirements by providing slightly more than 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 7. As shown in the site plans submitted dated, September 20, 2017, some of the existing and proposed surface parking spaces are located off of the privately owned property in an area that is part of the layout of Loring Avenue.The land reserved for the layout of Loring Avenue exceeds the land that was actually used for the road. The petitioner is working with the City to secure a permanent easement to allow the private use of this portion of land for the benefit of providing parking for the proposed development. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 2 of 6 8. As defined in section 7.1 Multifamily Development of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, there are dimensional requirements, parking requirements, and use requirements of this section. In addition to the special permit request to construct a twenty (20) unit building. 9. As defined in section 7.1 Multifamily Development, the allowable lot area per dwelling unit is 1,000 square feet for each dwelling unit. The petitioner is proposing a density of 1,250 square feet per unit, which complies with the density requirements of the zoning ordinance. 10. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow a five (5) story structure where the requirements allow a three (3) story structure. 11. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow the building height to be 49.6' feet where the 35' feet are required. This height requirement is less than what is allowed in the underlying R-3 Zoning District. The petitioner is proposing a building height of 49.6' feet to allow for the petitioner to locate the required parking under the building. If the Board literally enforced the height requirement for number of stories and number of feet required, there is no feasible alternative location of the parking due to the unique shape and topography of the site. 12. The existing multi-family building on Carol Way has a height of 59.5' feet. The petitioner is proposing to construct a multi-family building that is shorter in height than the existing adjacent building. Further, the petitioner is proposing to regrade the site, such that the proposed structure will also not appear to be taller than the existing adjacent structure. 13. The petitioner is requesting a variance from the provisions of section 7.1 Multifamily Development, to allow the buffer from the building on the adjacent lot and the proposed building to be less than 75' feet from the existing adjacent structure. The petitioner is proposing a buffer of 53.8' feet from the adjacent structure. 14. The petitioner states that the adjacent apartment building received many dimensional variances to be constructed and the building is located within the 75' foot buffer requirement from the proposed building footprint. The combination of the unique lot shape and topographical challenges of 602 Loring Avenue, and the location of the already existing adjacent apartment building hinder the ability for the petitioner to construct a density that the zoning ordinance would otherwise allow the petitioner to achieve. Further, if the petitioner constructed the allowable density and maintain the required 75' foot buffer, the building height would be increased. 15. In an R-3 Zoning District, the setback requirements are ten (10) feet from the lot line. There would be twenty (20) feet from structure to structure. In this proposal, the petitioner is proposing fifty-three (53') feet of space. 16. The petitioner states that the proposal fits with the existing character of the neighborhood. The petitioner is proposing to restore the use of the property to fit the intent of the underlying zoning district to provide housing rather than the previous commercial use. Further, the petitioner is proposing twenty (20) dwelling units, where the adjacent residential structure has over sixty (60) units. The proposed height of the building is also shorter than the existing adjacent residential structure. 17. Scott Cameron, Civil Engineer, of Morin- Cameron Group, Inc. presents the existing and proposed site conditions. The parcel is situated back up off of Loring Avenue with a twelve (12) foot grade change from Loring Ave to the site. The site also slopes another additional ten (10) feet. The parking existing parking area has a steep grade change as well. 18. The existing topography, grade changes and shape of the lot all affect the design and height of the proposed building and parking layout. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 3 of 6 19. The petitioner is proposing to utilize the same location of the entrance and exit drive, but plans to propose substantial improvements by creating a more conventional curbcut and narrowing the driveway such that cars cannot utilize the adjacent emergency egress as a way to cut across the driveway. The petitioner would like to separate their proposed driveway and the adjacent emergency egress to improve traffic circulation and safety. 20. The petitioner is proposing to significantly change the slope of the driveway by reducing the grade from a 10-15% slope to a 2-4% slope. The proposed 2% slope on the parking area will go all the way back. 21. The proposed building will be placed five (5) feet lower than the existing structure on the property by re-grading the site and the orientation of the building is not square to the frontage of the property due to the unusual shape of the lot. 22. Peter Pitman, architect, Pitman & Wardley Associates LLC- presents elevation plans of the proposal. The petitioner is proposing twenty (20) parking spaces under the proposed building and an outdoor parking area with eleven (11) spaces. The petitioner is proposing 1,200 to 1,500 square feet per unit. All of the apartments are two (2) bedroom and two (2) bathroom units. 23. The trash disposal is proposed to be located in the back corner such that a truck can circulate in an out. Currently, the dutnpster for the existing structure is located along the front of the property. 24. The project proposal is subject to review of the Planning Board and will undergo more rigorous examination as to traffic flow and safety, grading, stormwater management, and civil review. The petitioner is confident in meeting the technical standards of the Planning Board. 25. The mechanical systems will be centrally located on the roof and not be visible from the street. 26. The Board expressed major concern about the safety and circulation of the existing wide expanse of asphalt that serves as an egress for 602 Loring and also serves as a fire egress for the adjacent property. 27. The project team plans to continue to design and engineer the driveway to control and facilitate and direct slower traffic. The petitioner is initially proposing a landscaped island to divide this paved expanse to narrow the driveway to twenty-four (24) feet wide. Other mitigations measures are proposed. The petitioner proposed to work with the Salem Fire Department to ensure that the redesigned driveway and fire lane continue to provide adequate fire truck access. Further, the visibility from Loring Avenue will be improved because the petitioner is proposing to reduce some of the ledge along the front of the property. The Board continues to be concerned about the width of the existing driveway and emergency lane and sightlines for a safe intersection between Loring Avenue and the property. 28. Scott Cameron states that proposed apartment trip generation is one of the lowest traffic generators. The anticipated trip generation from these apartment units is five (5) trips per dwelling unit per hour and peak hours are between 6am-10am and 5pm-8pm during the week. It is anticipated that there may be more trips per hour on the weekends, but spread out over the day and peak demand is anticipated around 12pm. The location of this building is in close proximity to shopping and connected walkways that allow people to walk to amenities. Compared to the previous commercial day care use, this residential use generates fewer trips. 29. The Board discusses that there are crosswalks on Loring Avenue located to the right and the left of the proposed residential property. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 4 of 6 30. The petitioner proposes that the stormwater will be managed by connecting to the City's sewer. If there are additional requirements the petitioner will meet them. The petitioner also plans to conduct soil boring to better understand the stormwater management for mitigation. 31. The petitioner is proposing an easement with the City that is approximately forty (40) feet deep and along the entire length of the property frontage. The petitioner plans to utilize this space for seven (7) parking spaces and also improve this land by cleaning up the overgrowth of the site and some grading adjustments. 32. Tom St. Pierre- Building Inspector, states that the adjacent property needed a second means of providing emergency access to the site. The fire department will have an opportunity to comment on this project through a site plan review. 33. The Board requested that the petitioner also provide ADA compliant sidewalks and crosswalks through the proposed driveway to continue pedestrian amenities across the redesigned driveway and fire lane. 34. The petitioner states that there will be anticipated blasting on this site. Any blasting activities are regulated by the state and local fire department. The neighbors will be notified by the blasting company and inspect properties with a pre-blast survey. Abutters within 300' feet will be notified of this activity. 35. At the public hearing, two members of the public spoke. One member of the public asked questions with no expression of support or objection. A second member of the public spoke in support of the petition. The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition, including the application narrative and plans, makes the following findings: Special Permit Findings: The Board finds that the adverse effects of the proposed use will not outweigh its beneficial impacts to the City or the neighborhood. 1. There are social, economic and community needs served by the proposal as the building is providing new housing units in the City. 2. The existing negative conditions of traffic flow and safety in and out of the site will be improved and the proposed parking and loading are adequate. 3. There will be no impact to the adequacy of utilities and other public services. 4. There will be no impacts on the natural environment, including drainage as the petitioner is proposing to locate parking under the building and reduce the amount of impervious surface on the property. 5. The proposal fits with the character of the neighborhood compared to the adjacent larger buildings and adjacent apartment building. 6. The potential fiscal impact,including impact on City and tax base and employment is positive. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 5 of 6 Variance Findings: 1. Special conditions and circumstances that especially affect the land, building, or structure involved, generally not affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district is the unusual shape of the property. The property is shaped like a baseball field with the wider part along the frontage of Loring Ave. with a severe taper to the rear of the parcel. The land also has significant grade changes that make the redevelopment of the parcel limited. These physical and unique conditions of this parcel restrict the location of the building envelope. 2. The combination of the unique lot shape and topographical challenges of 602 Loring Avenue, and the location of the already existing adjacent apartment building hinder the ability for the petitioner to construct a density that the zoning ordinance would otherwise allow the petitioner to achieve. 3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, and without nullify or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. On the basis of the above statements of facts and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted four 4 in g PP ( ) favor (Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair), Tom Watkins,Jimmy Tsitsinos, and Paul Viccica (alternate) and none (o) opposed, to grant a special permit per See. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure subject to the following terms, conditions and safeguards: Standard Conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. Exterior finished of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including,but not limited to the Planning Board. Special Conditions: 1. The petitioner shall secure an easement with the City of Salem to allow the private use of this portion of land for the benefit of providing parking for the proposed development. 2. All HVAC units shall be located on the roof of the property and shall be screened. 3. The petitioner shall provide recycling at the property and shall provide adequate space for a recycling dumpster. City of Salem Board of Appeals November 1,2017 Project: 602 Loring Ave. Page 6 of 6 Peter A. Copelas (Vice-Chair) Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, sball be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Masracbusettr General Laws Chapter 40A, and sball be filed within 20 days of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to the Massacbusela General Laws Cbapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein sball not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk bas been filed witb the Essex South Registry of Deeds. �COIm1T~:• MASSACH I; CITY OF BOARD OF APPEALUSETTS t 3i' 120 WASHINGTON S7REEl'# $AI.F.M,MASSACHUSE7IS 01970 Tis:978-619-5685 FAx:978-740-0404 KI%sERLeY DRiscoLL MAYOR p r Dn 3� w �rn City of Salem -_ "':K r r+a Zoning Board of Appealer Will hold a-public hearing for all persons interested in a petition of VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per Sec.-7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Mnitifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure at 602 LORING AVE (Map 20,Lot 11)(R-3 Zoning District). Said hearing will be held on WED, Oct. 18, 2017 at 6:30 p.m., 3'd floor, 120 WASHINGTON ST, ROOM i 313. Rebecca Curran, Chair Board of Appeals Salem News: October 4, 2017 and October 11, 2017 This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on OCT U 3 Ml30 A. at 2- Z6 aM in accordance with MG Sections 18-25. FILE COPY CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS ter, I BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET 1 SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 KIMBEIu.rY DRISCOLL TELE:978-745-9595 ♦ FAX:978-740-9846 MAYOR Notice of Decision At a meeting of the City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals held on Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. at 120 Washington St., Salem,MA, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted on the following item: Petition of VAVEL LLC seeking a special permit per Sec. 7.1 Multifamily Development and variances per Sec. 7.1.2 Multifamily Development Standards of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow a five-story multi-family development, consisting of twenty (20) units, within 53 feet of an adjacent structure at 602 LORING AVE (Map 20,Lot 11)(R-3 Zoning District). Decision:APPROVED Filed with the City Clerk on November 1,2017 This notice is being sent in compliance with the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Sections 9&15 and does not require action by the recipient.Appeals,if any,shall be made pursuant to Chapter 40A, Section 17, and shall be fled within 20 days from the date which the decision was fled with the City Clerk. CITY OF SALEM ASSESSOR'S CERTIFICATION OF ABUTTERS AND "PARTIES IN INTEREST" BOARD/COMMISSION: Board of Appeals PROJECT SITE: (9 Q —z— DATE:DATE: DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENT: — Parties in Interest: ❑ The applicant ❑ Abutters _ ❑ Qwners of land opposite any street or way Abutters to abutters within 300 feet ❑ Planning boards of abutting cities and towns This is to certify that the time of the last assessment for taxation made by the City of Salem, the names and addresses of those listed on the attached sheets are "parties in interest" (as defined by Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, Section 11) to the parcel(s) of land listed above as theprojectsite. Assessor's Signature: U lX Date: � 7 Number of initialed pages attached: _7 Once Certified,Return to: Erin Schaeffer Department of Planning and Community Development ' 1A H4 Plc.• I�FIr•Smtlen. IT T.Ha VF NWI•LNrmy mffis �BM•N Brtnamy 0CRy rd P". Lp Px.M T.Botox� 9� � l �, � 'ill / \J� ®Im.�• ip. ®Nurno.,od AbWEn9 Tw.n leE.�. O, y MubV Twmv-N•WM O \ � BeuRm•ry 'Pp OQ' OStBft y. C eW ft =M30 ft kp QR' N ' E :3ooR O• 9 C�'F.S-T—AV�E� u �Ro)ftR �)OfR A sN if! C� O A � .e`er: O .� V4.NNAN Nl 17 b ift 1A Prewmry lmmmvu•mnne .. ro$ n Rvc•murtemn•m n•I mvrommm mnm mn•ve or - mnmp•vemmm�mm••na. ' 0 1000 2000 It Printed on 09272017 at 12:52 PM Parcel ID:21-0235-944 Parcel ID: 21-0235-945 Parcel ID:21-0235-946 JOAN G SILVERLIEB REV HERRING BRUCE T 20-2 AMERICA WAY SALEM SILVERLIEB JOAN G TR HERRING PATRICIA R - CUDIHY JANICE/WACHLIN 99 STANLEY ROAD 86 PHILLIPS BEACH AVENUE 20 AMERICA WAY U20-2AW SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907 SWAMPSCOTT,MA 01907 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-947 Parcel ID: 21-0235-948 Parcel ID:21-0235-949 PEARLMAN JEFFREY CALICHMAN HARVEY L DESROCHERS JACQUELYN PEARLMAN MARLENE 20 AMERICA WAY U4AW 20 AMERICA WAY U20-5AW 20 AMERICA WAY U20-3AW SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-950 Nf Parcel ID:21-0235-951 Parcel ID:21-0235-952 - MEHLMAN ANITA C RATCLIFFE ROBERT J BLOOM STEPHEN W 20 AMERICA WAY U20-6AW QUEEN DIANE A 24 AMERICA WAY U24AW SALEM, MA 01970 22 AMERICA WAY U22AW SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 - Parcel ID: 21-0235-953 Parcel ID: 21-0235-954 Parcel ID:21=0235-955 JOLY WALTER K v SPILLANE JOHN F LYNN ELEANOR M BALDRIDGE OLIVE JUNE - SPILLANE JOAN K 18 AMERICA-WAY U182AW 26 AMERICA WAY U26AW 18 AMERICA WAY U18-AW SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 - - Parcel ID:21-0235-956 Parcel ID:21-0235-957 Parcel ID:21-0235-958 MCGOVERN FREDERICK W BLOOM DORIS L HOFFMAN ROBERT MCGOVERN PATRICIA A 18 AMERICA WAY U184AW HOFFMAN EVELYN 18 AMERICA WAY U18-3AW SALEM, MA 01970 18 AMERICA WAY U18-5AW SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-959 Parcel ID: 21-0235-960 Parcel ID:21-0235-961 PATRICIAA DION 2017 REV ../ KORN LAURA C MCCARTHY KAREN M DION PATRICIA A TR - 17 AMERICA WAY U17AW ZACCARDO CATHERINE V 18 AMERICA WAY U18-6AW SALEM, MA 01970 19 AMERICA WAY U19AW SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-962 Parcel ID:21-0235-963 Parcel ID:21-0235-964 MALIONEK JOANNE M GOMPERTS BARBARA I BAKER GARRETT D 16 AMERICA WAY U16-1AW 16 AMERICA WAY U16-2AW BOUCHARD JACQUELINE D SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 16 AMERICA WAY U16-3AW SALEM, MA 01970 S Parcel ID: 21-0235-965 Parcel ID: 21-0235-966 Parcel ID:21-0235-967 SAYAN FARAHODOKHT LISA CARANGELO REVOCABLE YAKUBIAN ELAINE ELISA 16 AMERICA WAY U4AW CARANGELO LISA TR 16 AMERICA WAY U16-6AW SALEM, MA 01970 11 BAY VIEW AVENUE SALEM, MA 01970 SWAMPSCOTT,MA 01907 Parcel ID:21-0235-968 Parcel ID: 21-0235-969 Parcel ID:21-0235-970 EISEN STEVEN E GILL LESLIE S CAULEY STACIE S EISEN MARCY A 6 WEATHERLY DR U6 8 AMERICA WAY U8AW 8 WEATHERLY DR U8 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-971 Parcel ID:21-0235-972 Parcel ID:21-0235-973 , JAMES WINIFRED J BREGOR CYNTHIA SIMONS JEFFREY C 10 AMERICA WAY U10AW BREGOR THEODORE A SIMONS J HILARY S SALEM, MA 01970 12 AMERICA WAY U12AW 14 AMERICA WAY U14AW SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 J Parcel ID:21-0235-914 Parcel ID: 21-0235-915 Parcel ID:21-0235-916 MARCHAND SOLANGE M WEATHERLY DR UNIT 18-5 STANLEY PAMELA L 18 WEATHERLY DRIVE U18-4 GIROMINI GEORGE/VERA TRS 18 WEATHERLY DR U 18-6 SALEM, MA 01970 18 WEATHERLY DRIVE U18-5 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-917 Parcel ID: 21-0235-918 Parcel ID:21-0235-919 ` BROWN FAMILY REALTY BARBER DONALD M MCGUIGGAN SHELLY J BROWN PRISCILLA A TR BARBER JANICE B 8 BURNHAM LANE 34 AMERICA WAY U34-1 34 AMERICA WAY U34-2 - DANVERS, MA 01923 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID: 21-0235-920 Parcel ID: 21-0235-921 Parcel ID:21-0235-922 GILCHRIST MILLER HOOKER CARL L MACGOWN CAROL A 34 AMERICA WAY U34-4 HOOKER SALLY ANN 34 AMERICA WAY U34-6 SALEM, MA 01970 34 AMERICA WAY U34-5 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 -_- Parcel ID:21-0235-923 Parcel ID: 21-0235-924- Parcel ID:21-0235-925 TAYLOR CLAIRE A DUNNIGAN IRREVOCABLE SHAFFER FAMILY REALTY 32-AMERICA WAY U32-1 DUNNIGAN JOHN/DUNNIGAN SHAFFER RICHARD E/JOAN S _ SALEM, MA 01970 32 AMERICA WAY U32-2 32 AMERICA WAY U32-3 SALEM, MA 01970 — SALEM,MA 01970 - Parcel ID: 21-0235-926 Parcel ID: 21-0235-927 Parcel ID:21-0235-928 RICE ANN M MITCHELL CYNTHIA M HARRISON J.GREGORY 32 AMERICA WAY U32-4 J 32 AMERICA WAY U5 HARRISON MARY ELIZABETH SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 32-6 AMERICA WAY SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-929 i Parcel ID: 21-0235-930 Parcel ID:21-0235-931 BLAKE PETER M ti/ FROMAN KRISTIE AMANTI FAMILY REALTY , BLAKE MARGARET F 14 WEATHERLY DR U14 AMANTI JOHN J 12 WEATHERLY DRIVE U 12 SALEM, MA 01970 16 WEATHERLY DR U16 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-932 Parcel ID: 21-0235-933 Parcel ID:21-0235-934 TEJWANI JAYA MOULTON-AMERICA WY RLTY _ CREIGHTON RUTH M ✓ TEJWANI SONIYA MOULTON BENJAMIN/MOULTON 28 AMERICA WAY U28-3 25 HARBOR AVENUE 9 DOAKS LANE SALEM,MA 01970 MARBLEHEAD, MA 01945 MARBLEHEAD, MA 01945 Parcel ID:21-0235-935 / Parcel ID: 21-0235-936 Parcel lb:21-0235-937 BEATRICE L STROME TRUST CULLITON RICHARD " BACHELDER HERBERT R STROME BEATRICE L/GERBER CULLITON MARY BACHELDER PATRICIA F 28 AMERICA WAY U28-4 28 AMERICA WAY U-28-5 28 AMERICA WAY U-28-6 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-938 Parcel ID:21-0235-939 Parcel ID:21-0235-940 v/ ALLEN DOUGLAS F PATRICIA A OCONNOR 2000 / TREMBLAY LEO E ALLEN LOUISE B OCONNOR PATRICIA A TR ,/ TREMBLAY ALMA M 30-1 AMERICA WAY U30-1 10 WEATHERLY DRIVE U10-1 10 WEATHERLY DR U10-2 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-941 Parcel ID: 21-0235-942 J Parcel ID:21-0235-943 JOAN M.MURNANE TRUST CHUN CHRISTINE PAUL JACKSON MURNANE JOAN M TRCHUN JAE 10 WEATHERLY DRIVE U10-5 10-3 WEATHERLY DRIVE U10-3~ 10 WEATHERLY DR U 10-4 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 ./ -2- Parcel ID:21-0235-884 Parcel ID: 21-0235-885 Parcel ID:21-0235-886 LEVINE LAURA B SAXE JODY R ARTHUR L.SCHWARTZ REV 70 WEATHERLY DR U408 71 WEATHERLY DRIVE U71 CHERYL A.SCHWARTZ REV SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 73 WEATHERLY DR U73 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-887 Parcel ID: 21-0235-888 Parcel ID:21-0235-889 MOSCHETTI WAYNE GRAYSON VIRGINIA M GELINEAU FRANCIS R MOSCHETTI JESSICA 22 WEATHERLY DR U22-2 GELINEAU BARBARA P 22 WEATHERLY DRIVE U22-1 SALEM, MA 01970 22 WEATHERLY DR U22-3 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-890 Parcel ID:21-0235-891 Parcel ID:21-0235-892 % ATKINSON REALTY TRUST EDWARDS STEPHANIE BORNSTEIN DONALD ATKINSON LAWRENCE A TR 22 WEATHERLY DR U22-5 BORNSTEIN MELISSA 22 WEATHERLY DR U22-4 SALEM,MA 01970 22 WEATHERLY DR U22-6 SALEM, MA 01970 - SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-893 Parcel ID:21-0235-894 Parcel ID:21-0235-895 - L 0 KEEFE URSULA M CASSIDY ELIZABETH A BURKE ELINORE 24 WEATHERLY DR U24-1 24 WEATHERLY DRIVE U24-2 24 WEATHERLY DR U24-3— SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-896 Parcel ID:21-0235-897 Parcel ID:21-0235-898 SELESNICK HERBERT L WHITTIER BRUCE M REVOCABLE TRUST OF JON S STERLING HINDA K 24 WEATHERLY DR U24-5 MUCCI JON S TR 24 WEATHERLY DRIVE U4 SALEM, MA 01970 24 WEATHERLY DR U24-6 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-899 Parcel ID: 21-0235-900 Parcel ID:21-0235-901 ITZKOWITZ SHIRLEY LEVY MARK BROWN MYLES E 36 AMERICA WAY U36-1 LEVY MARIA A BROWN ANNE ' SALEM, MA 01970 36 AMERICA WAY U36-2 55 BELLEVUE ROAD SALEM, MA 01970 SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907 Parcel ID:21-0235-902 Parcel ID:21-0235-903 Parcel ID:21-0235-904 OSTASKI WILLIAM M BLYAKHMAN YURIY DOLAN ESTHER OSTASKI PATRICIA L BLYAKHMAN YELENA 36 AMERICA WAY U36-6 36 AMERICA WAY U 36.4 36 AMERICA WAY U36-5 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-905 - Parcel ID:21-0235-906 Parcel ID:21-0235-907 LAURO MARY/LAURO BUTLER EDWARD R CHANDLER RICHARD LAURO THOMAS - BUTLER CYNTHIA 20 WEATHERLY DRIVE U20-3 20 WEATHERLY DRIVE U20-1 20 WEATHERLY DRIVE UNIT 20-2 SALEM,MA 01970 - SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-908 Parcel ID:21-0235-909 '� Parcel ID:21-0235-910 KESSLER REALTY TRUST THE PORCELLO PETER E BOHANNON BRENDA KESSLER JOSEPH L TR 20 WEATHERLY DRIVE U20-5 BOHANNON STEPHEN 20 WEATHERLY DR U20-4 SALEM, MA 01970 20 WEATHERLY DRIVE U20-6 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-911 Parcel ID: 21-0235-912 Parcel ID:21-0235-913 MURPHY KENT F MILLER LIZABETH H.S. KAMIN MARCIA MURPHY OLIVE G 18 WEATHERLY DR U18-2 18 WEATHERLY DRIVE U18-3 18 WEATHERLY DRIVE U18-1 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 J � Parcel ID:21-0235-854 Parcel ID:21-0235-855 Parcel ID:21-0235-856 ROW HOUSE PROPERTIES, FANALE 2016 TRUST WARK ANDREW CHRISTOPHER R.YENS FANALE ANTHONY W WARK MAUREEN 5 PARK PLACE 67 WEATHERLY DRIVE U 67 68 WEATHERLY DRIVE U68 NEWTON, MA 02460 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-857 Parcel ID:21-0235-858 Parcel ID:21-0235-859 STAVIS ROBERT E GREIF RONNA L 64 BIGELOW AVE RTY STAVIS PAMELA L 70 WEATHERLY DR U101 DIPAOLA D LANG TRS 69 WEATHERLY DRIVE U69 SALEM, MA 01970 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U102 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-860 Parcel ID:21-0235-861 Parcel ID:21-0235-862 - JUDITH A.BARGFREDE 4 LAWRENCE A.SHUMAN TRUST PETERSEN HEDWIG E BARB JUDITH/BARGFREDE MERLE SHUMAN TRUST 70 WEATHERLY DR U107 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U103 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U106 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 - SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-863 - Parcel ID:21-0235-864 - — Parcel ID:21-0235-865 ANNE BETH WINOGRAD 1993 WISTRAN DANIEL C MANSI ROSA WINOGRAD ANNE BETH TR WISTRAN JULIA A 70 WEATHERLY DR U202 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U108 70 WEATHERLY DR U201 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 – -- Parcel ID:21-0235_-866 Parcel ID:21-0235-867 Parcel ID:21-0235-868 HEELEN FAMILY REALTY 3 FIELDBROOK RD REALTY - QUINT SIDNEY K HEELEN JAMES/KATHLEEN LEINSON JOEL/LEINSON QUINT CAROLE 70 WEATHERLY DR U203 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U205 70 WEATHERLY DR U206 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID: 21-0235-869 Parcel ID:21-0235-870 Parcel ID:21-0235-871 GORFINKLE MICHAEL A MYEROW CAROLYN - BLUESTEIN MERLE 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U207 70 WEATHERLY DR U208 BLUESTEIN CHARLES SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 70 WEATHERLY DR UNIT 301 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID: 21-0235-872 Parcel ID: 21-0235-873 ^ Parcel ID:21-0235-874 HARRIET DIAMOND PORTER GAY D GILMAN ANNE DIAMOND HARRIET G TR 70 WEATHERLY DR U303 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U305 70 WEATHERLY DR U302 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-875 Parcel ID:21-0235-876 Parcel ID:21-0235-877 IDA BERSHAD TRUST COHEN NOW TR/COHEN KREPLICK HUBERT BERSHAD IDA TR C/O CHOATE HALL& KREPLICK ROBERTA 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U306 P.O.BOX 961989 70 WEATHERLY DR U308 SALEM, MA 01970 BOSTON, MA 02196 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID: 21-0235-878 Parcel ID: 21-0235-879 Parcel ID:21-0235-880 ATKINSON LAWRENCE A GUARNIERI CARLA JUDITH D MCMANUS TRUST ATKINSON JANET A 70 WEATHERLY DR U402 CASE DAYE M TR 70 WEATHERLY DRIVE U401 SALEM, MA 01970 70 WEATHERLY DR U403 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-881 Parcel ID:21-0235-882 ' Parcel ID:21-0235-883 ROGER A. FREEMAN ,. CECILIA VALNER ROGER A. FREEMAN FREEMAN ROGER A/RONNI J SCHLUSSELBERG ESTHER TR FREEMAN ROGER A/RONNI J 19990 SAWGRASS LANE U4202 70 WEATHERLY DR U406 19990 SAWGRASS LANE U4202 BOCA RATON, FL 33434 SALEM, MA 01970 BOCA RATON, FL 33434 J � Parcel ID:21-0235-824 Parcel ID:21-0235-825 Parcel ID:21-0235-826 PALUZZI JOSEPH s. MICHAUD KATHLEEN 38 WEATHERLY DR REALTY PALUZZI HELEN 37 WEATHERLY DR U37 LEMPERT MARK/LEMPERT 36 WEATHERLY DRIVE U-36 SALEM, MA 01970 1 SALEM STREET UNIT#37 SALEM, MA 01970 SWAMPSCOTT,MA 01907 Parcel ID:21-0235-827 Parcel ID: 21-0235-828 Parcel ID:21-0235-829 CHARLES AND JUDITH HARVEY ROBERT L MARGARET L. HINES CLAYMAN JUDITH TR HARVEY SANDRA V HINES MARGARET L TR 39 WEATHERLY DR U39 40 WEATHERLY DRIVE U40 41 WEATHERLY DR U41 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-830 Parcel ID:21-0235-831 Parcel ID:21-0235-832 COHEN IRWIN F MCGUIRE DONNA M GALPERN ROBERT COHEN JANICE M MCGUIRE KEVIN M GALPERN ESTHER 42 WEATHERLY DRIVE U42 43 WEATHERLY DRIVE U43 44 WEATHERLY DRIVE U44 -SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 -_- SALEM,MA 01970 - -- Parcel ID:21-0235-833 Parcel ID:21-0235-834- Parcel ID:21-0235-835 ABRAMS HOWARD E MUSINSKY LILA K MAHONEY MICHAEL R ABRAMS ISRAELLA K 46 WEATHERLY DRIVE U46 47 WEATHERLY DR U47 45 WEATHERLY DR U45 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 - - — — Parcel ID:21-0235-836 Parcel ID:21-0235-837 Parcel ID:21-0235-838 FREEDMAN RONA 49 WEATHERLY DRIVE SANGPO NGODUP 48 WEATHERLY STREET U48 SMALLER JOYCE R TRS NGODUP TENZIN KEYZOM - SALEM, MA 01970 49 WEATHERLY DRIVE U-49 50 WEATHERLY DR U50 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID: 21-0235-839 - Parcel ID:21-0235-840 Parcel ID:21-0235-841 51 WEATHERLY DR RLTY TURNER STEPHEN A ROGER CAMILLO IRREV ° DILLON JAMES TR TURNER LYNN M CAMILLO ROGER J,TR 51 WEATHERLY DR U51 52 WEATHERLY DRIVE U52 53 WEATHERLY DR U53 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-842 Parcel ID:21-0235-843 Parcel ID:21-0235-844 COOTS EDWARD HURWITZ GREGORY E PALMA-KREZMAN JENNIPHER 54 WEATHERLY DR U54 55 WEATHERLY DRIVE U55 56 WEATHERLY DRIVE U56 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-845 Parcel ID:21-0235-846 Parcel ID:21-0235-847 WOLF JEFFREY M TREMBLAY ROGER A NAKA MIYOKO 2 MONETE CIRCLE 58 WEATHERLY DR U58 59 WEATHERLY DRIVE ANDOVER, MA 01810 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-848 Parcel ID: 21-0235-849 , Parcel ID:21-0235-850 BARRIENTOS TERESA HARRINGTON SARAH M DEFRANCESCO JOSEPH 60 U60 WEATHERLY DRIVE HARRINGTON NEIL J DEFRANCESCO BARBARA A SALEM, MA 01970 61 WEATHERLY DR U61 62 WEATHERLY DR U62 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-851 Parcel ID:21-0235-852 y Parcel ID:21-0235-853 NICHOLSON KAREN E DAY JOHN T GRACE DENISE B PAVIA HEATHER D DAY LORRAINE C 65 WEATHERLY DRIVE U65 63 WEATHERLY DRIVE U63 64 WEATHERLY DR U64 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 J � Parcel ID:20-0011-0 Parcel ID:20-0002-0 Parcel ID:21-0001-0 VAVEL, LLC LAGER HOLDINGS,LLC 564 LORING AVENUE, LLC 18 JANE ROAD C/O PROPERTY TAX 9TH % 600 LORING AVENUE MARBLEHEAD, MA 01945 P.O.BOX 130548 SALEM, MA 01970 HOUSTON,TX 77219 Parcel ID:21-0002-0 Parcel ID:21-0004-0 Parcel ID:21-0006-0 560 LORING REALTY TRUST e VILLAGE SHOPS LLC 7 LORING HILLS AVENUE MACRINA KAREN A BULIS C/O CENTERCORP RETAIL 2363 LAKEWOOD ROAD STE 200 560 LORING AVE 600 LORING AVE _ TOMS RIVER, NJ 08755 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0096-0 Parcel ID:21-0235-801 Parcel ID:21-0235-802 VINNIN SQUARE APARTMENTS WEATHERLY NOMINEE TRUST KORNFELD SUSAN 1101 WORCESTER ROAD- KLEIN ERIKA TR C/O M. 3 WEATHERLY DR U3 FRAMINGHAM, MA 01701 33-B CONSTITUTION WAY SALEM, MA 01970 MARBLEHEAD, MA 01945 — Parcel ID:21-0235-803 - Parcel ID: 21-0235-804 Parcel ID:21-0235-805 SHANE DANIEL OLEARY JOANNE M GORFINKLE DAVID H SHANE BERTRA - 7 WEATHERLY DRIVE U7 GORFINKLE BUNNY C 5 WEATHERLY DR U5 SALEM, MA 01970 9 WEATHERLY DR U9 SALEM, MA 01970 - - --- - SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21'0235-806 Parcel ID: 21-0235-807 Parcel ID:21-0235-808 HARRIS REALTY TRUST FREYTSIS AVRUM TAYMORE JACK J HARRIS PRISCILLA TR FREYTSIS SOPHIA TAYMORE CYNDY S 11 WEATHERLY DR U11 13 WEATHERLY DR U13 15 WEATHERLY DR U15 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-809 Parcel ID: 21-0235-810 Parcel ID:21-0235-811 / MAITLAND PATRICIA A ALEXANDRU SIMONA V ROGER P.GAUDETTE& 17 WEATHERLY DRIVE U17 19 WEATHERLY DRIVE U19 BOURAS MICHELLE G TR SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 21 WEATHERLY DR U21 SALEM,MA 01970 i Parcel ID:21-0235-812 Parcel lb:21-0235-813 ! Parcel ID:21-0235-814 GERMAIN ARLENE KAREN L MORIARTY TRUST THE REVOCABLE LIVING , 24 BOSTON AVENUE U23 MORIARTY KAREN L TR CHAYET ELEANOR L TR MEDFORD, MA 02155 9051 CAPISTRANO ST NORTH U4307 26 WEATHERLY DR U26 NAPLES, FL 34113 SALEM,MA 01970 Parcel ID: 21-0235-815 / Parcel ID:21-0235-816 Parcel ID:21-0235-817 LOGAN ROBERT HEREDIA VERA GORMLEY JOHN L LOGAN EMMA K 28 WEATHERLY DR U28 GORMLEY COLLETTE G 27 WEATHERLY DR U27 SALEM, MA 01970 29 WEATHERLY DRIVE U29 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-818 Parcel ID:21-0235-819 Parcel ID:21-0235-820 BLAIR DAWN GALPERN RHONDA L NEEDLEMAN WILLIAM 30 WEATHERLY DR U30 31 WEATHERLY DR U31 32 WEATHERLY DR U32 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 Parcel ID:21-0235-821 Parcel ID:21-0235-822 Parcel ID:21-0235-823 V VILK YURY HAMBLET DWIGHT HEATH PEGGY SHEREMET YANNA HAMBLET ROSANNE 35 WEATHERLY DR U35 33 WEATHERLY DR U33 34 WEATHERLY DR U34 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 SALEM, MA 01970 / V Parcel ID:21-0242-0 VINNIN SQUARE APARTMENTS V/- 1101 WORCESTER ROAD FRAMINGHAM, MA 01701 J � f CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS CITY CLERK 120 WASHINGTON STREET,31D FLOOR S A L E M' M A S S SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 �9� Iryg1 Thomas St.Pierre,Director of Inspectional Services RECEIVED '] e Phone:978-619-5641 /Fax:978-740-9846 R 11 6E KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL Erin Schaeffer,Staff Planner MAYOR Phone:978-619-5685/Fax:978-740-0404 0 TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: DEPT. OF PLANNING & The Undersigned represent that he/she is/are the owners of a certain parcel of land located at:C 0 M M U N I TY D E V E LO P M E N T Address:602 Loring Avenue Zoning District: R-3 r r An application is being submitted to the Board of Appeal for the following reason(s):'ThIs'statement must describe what you propose to build,the dimensions,the zone property is in,and the zoning requirements.(Example: I am proposing to construct a 10'x 10'one story addition to my home located at 3 Salem Lane, in the R-2 Zoning District. The Zoning Ordinance requires the minimum depth of the rear yard to be 30 feet. The current depth of my rear yard is 32 feet;the proposed addition would reduce the depth of the rear yard to 22 feet.) See Statement of Grounds Attached For this reason I am requesting: X Variance(s)from provisions of Section 7.1.2 of the Zoning Ordinance,specifically from height of building and buffer from building on adjacent lot (i.e. minimum depth ofrear yard). What is allowed is 3573 stories, 75'buffer (ft?sgft?stories? %?), and what I am proposing is 49.675 stories; 53.8'buffer (ft?sq ft?stories?%?). QQ A Special Permit under Section 7.1 of the Zoning Ordinance in order to allow multi-family development in an R-3 zone ( )Appeal of the Decision of the Building Inspector(described below): ( )Comprehensive Permit for construction of low or moderate income housing(describe below): Current Property Use:Child Care Center Are Lot Dimensions Included?OQ Yes O No Why? (Example:Two Family Home) The Undersigned hereby petitions the Board of Appeals to vary the terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance and allow the project to be constructed as per the plans submitted,as the enforcement of said Zoning By-Laws would involve practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the Undersigned and relief may be granted without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS PETITION FORM The following written statement has been submitted with this application; For all Variance requests a written Statement of Hardship demonstrating the following must be attached: a) Special conditions and circumstances that especially affect the land,building,or structure involved, generally not affecting other lands,buildings,and structures in the same district; b) Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would involved substantial hardship to the applicant;and 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. 4Q For all Special Permit requests a Statement of Grounds must be attached.An application for a special permit for a nonconforming use or structure shall include a statement demonstrating how the proposed change shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood in accordance with Section 9.4 Special Permits. Such a statement should include reference to the following criteria: a) Social,economic,or community needs served by the proposal; b) Traffic flow and safety,including parking and loading; c) Adequacy of utilities and other public services; d) Impacts on the natural environment,including drainage; e) Neighborhood character;and f) Potential fiscal impact,including impact on City tax base and employment. O For all Comprehensive Permits for construction of low or moderate income applicants should refer to M.G.L. Ch.40B §20-23. Previous applications to the Board of Appeals involving this property have been submitted with this petition form. The Building Commissioner can provide documentation ofprevious applications to the petitioner or his representative. If different from petitioner: Petitioner:Vavel, LLC Property Owner:Same as petitioner Address: 18 Jane Road, Marblehead, MA Address: Telephone:(781) 309-3639 Telephone: Email:twab gmail. Email: Signature: '� � �Lr /�'W2 Signature: . y (Attached consent letter is also acceptable) Date:September 25, 2017 Date:September 25, 2017 If different from petitioner: Representative:Scott M. Grover, Esq. A TRUE Address:27 Congress St,#414, Salem, MA ATTEST Telephone.978-745 65 / Signature: Date:September , 2017 CITY CLERK DATE DPCD DATE This original application must be filed with the City Clerk. STATEMENT OF GROUNDS The petitioner,Vavel, Inc., is the owner of the property at 602 Loring Avenue,which had formerly been used as a child care center. The petitioner is proposing to demolish the existing building on the property and to construct a five story building consisting of 20 apartment units. There will be 31 parking spaces, the majority of which will be located beneath the building. Multifamily Development is a specifically recognized use which is authorized by grant of a Special permit from the Board of Appeals under Section 7.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 7.1.2 establishes a series of standards for the issuance of such a special permit,the majority of which are met or exceeded by the petitioner. However, there are two requirements that the proposed redevelopment of this site cannot meet. First,the height of the building may not exceed thirty-five feet or three stories, while the proposal is to construct a five-story building approximately 49.6 feet in height. Second, any building located on the site is required to be at least seventy-five feet away from any building on an adjacent lot, and in this instance,the distance between the buildings is 53.8 feet. On the grounds set forth below,the petitioner is requesting a variance from these two standards. The special permit requires a determination by the Board of Appeals that the adverse effects of the proposed use will not outweigh its beneficial impacts(Section 9.4.2). The criteria the Board should consider in making such a determination include community needs, traffic flow and safety, adequacy of utilities and other public services, neighborhood character, impact on nautral environment and fiscal impact on the City. As we know from recent studies,there is a significant need for rental housing projected in the City, which this project will help to satisfy. The traffic impact of a residential use is far less than the former commercial use and parking is provided in excess of the requirements under the Zoning Ordinance. There are adequate utilities serving the site and multifamily residential use is entirely consistent with other similar uses in the area. Finally, the increase in tax revenue to the City from redeveloping this site will be significant. The requested variances require a finding by the Board that there are special conditions that affect this site and that those conditions would create a substantial hardship to the petitioner if the terms of the Ordinance were strictly enforced. In this instance, the land at 602 Loring Avenue has multiple characteristics that make redevelopment of the site challenging. The land is very irregular in shape and has significant changes in contour. Also,there is a large amount of ledge affecting the property. These conditions significantly restrict the location of any building on the site. Due to the limitations on the location of the building, a literal enforcement of the dimensional standards from which relief is sought would create a substantial hardship to the petitioner by depriving him of the opportunity to achieve a reasonable density that is consistent with the terms of the Ordinance. The use of this property for a small apartment building is entirely consistent with the intent of the Ordinance and could be granted without any detriment to the public good. For the reasons set forth above, both the special permit and variances are appropriate and should be granted by the Board. CENTURY BANK AND TRUST COMPANY 11164 TINTI, QUINN, GROVER& FREY, P.C. SALEM,MA 91970 27 Congress Street,Suite 414 - 53-139/113 Salem,MA 01970 0 C C A ppy Seventy-five and NO/100. DATE AMOUNTTO THE o ORDER OF 09/25/2017 $75.00 8 Essex South District Registry of Deeds - I C C g J AUfR(Ki1ZED$ICaNATURE n90IIL64m 40LL30L3901: n'05 664 L6 011' TINTI,QUINN,GROVER&FREY,P.C. - 11164 Essex South District Registry of Deeds Check Date Invoice Number Invoice Date Invoice Amount Amount Paid 9/25/2017 10598/1 09/25/2017 $75.00 .$75.00 PITMAN & WARDLEY ASSOCIATES LLC 32 CHURCH Sl'REEF SALEK MA 01M 978-7aa-8M 0 20W PlR ♦WAr LET P Y FY x � Q N VAVEL } APARTMENTS Rev� Dere 602 LORING AVENUE AFP SPED 6T DRALL eT SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 8.20.17 AO ARCHITECTURAL A A.1 l H ) C D E F F.8 G G. .4 G.6 G 8 H 7 PITMAN & WAMLEY SiOR. ASSOCAITFS Cd.0 r�iOv eE� P14SlER ',��?�'Y,Ymj n CHURCH mrt�M OI`ING ROCI'1 9}OR. EE=RGg1 EVYi LIV+NG FOQt OINI RIXFf BE-RL`Q`1 L",- -r EQ GTF Qi11 • . •_ v I�IIIII OMl�.la»I 9]$-�44-�$2 9iOR OM UP BFDvtl9LP1 ® O n V RA�J �PliABl BdViw `\ TH 3 IN�+,_v, S KITCFIEH /iw / �' � KITCwE� ND 3 • BSAd. UNIT LWE "S" uwD UNI TWE"C° ELEVdiar� UNIT TWE "A' +++ T �.w SF.I]IB CLGBc _ ` \ SF.$l0 RQS BF.L316 APARTRIE\'T5. E E�CwJ777O 2.S _ RRI.R 2.4 a+n ELeVdi - EEDFOO'i IYd9iERW GL09Ei RECwe CL09Ei REµ" OidIR VE9iIEl1 E BEDPm+ Bdiw UNIT TE "U" IN E4'iw UNIT iWE "E" DN +r+'+ T BF,L339 ® Bd SF.I$]0 0 1011 PMdN 1"ROLET KI}CMEN KITCHEN Giv Md 71IR LIVIWi ROQt DI.ING ROLYI RAA TER d +ING pCRi 1.S Eit/ Eeoaoa'1 BEDROOIt BEDR RI Brod ti r 0� — — — \i ��/ — \/ — �/ — — z I LGW RD � Z � UNIT FLOOR PLAN (top floor shown) I--Y W\ F- 2 SCALE:118-=1'A" TYPICAL FLOOR 8,867 S.F. l LU EL I n E F F.8 G G. .4 G.6 IS 8 H •++ 4 4 >, Z U N ADA 9PRNCLER `} 9TOR OrOR vAN ELECIiEI / `\ II 10 3 8 l 0 5 4 3 2 1 nRN � - — — e•V — — — 1A LU 3 I 3 LU AIENd� l E+ TOR I Q / EL^yRAGE GRPDE 2S - — / EL910EEL I 2,4 LOB Y I f@N81ONa // I I I I I I "� __ I I 1 I I I �• ATE n ourP9reR / ITT e� LI, Oreo By \\ / 12 13 14 15 16 IF IS 113 20 — �� LS owPE er IM,ee,m \ / VESTI ILE •1Qmamn RED—C GRADE 93'-II' EL.999]' Al p PPIe Na GROUND F OOR PLAN \ ° ,' .' ,r SCALE:IIB'=1'-0' OROUNO FLOOR 8,085 SY ' � > °� ^ ARCHITECTURAL t111V1t11• OL Y Y Y Y WARDLEY ASSOCAMS LLC 32 CHURCH- Raol PerePet DO o� Snl a o1�9'ftl� M-744-8M PfINAtIIY.\XtlBYNVEiPR1I8l _ _ 51F FIoar � 2 � 6 ®_ ® ® ... 6th Fbw I I 0 30O PllHdi.W4®LEY E I o W31.UR{KC AV4NUI1 � I 3neFbm I 0 L1 V/ ZN EAST ELEVATION LU 2 scnLe rre•=na• 73 A.1 1 .8 'I G ) Try G.6 G.8 ` h7 ) } {r O Y IY II'll 16 QBE o o Ul ' 1 � 9N Flpo 00h 11 lio opo' II�IIry'I F ----------- --- - -- - —�— - -- —4 --- --I- -- .. -I-- &11444-kkklll—I- o _ .,FFI.w ��• onre W I I I 1 1N1 gra Flow ow"By DT Ila ® III ( � atee.rro ill E@ I a 9R0Rm11 ------------ 60:IA0.1NG AV1!NUL I - ]m Flaar D © ®® © OD® I���000 OOO DW,O.. -= I I , .\ IM PL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH ELEVATION A2 ARCHITECTURAL per & WARDLEY j ASSOCAM UC —_ --_—_ vtltlr F=.,.a.r 32 CHURCH STREET o ��DD ❑ M4 oin RRIW WAPtlBYfVPA6BIMT ow i I I I J /th Flow PARTR�ENTS- I I t I tlfbw ® 2011 A1M4N.W41mLEY I I I I I I I I tu � z � WST ELEVATION W > EL 2 SCALE:IIB"=T-B" } � ZU gee,....,.,_ I I ❑ � oo ❑ Aee,Fe,.,., �4 � LJ I I I I I Q I I I I I I I I I I ® ® ® RENeONB lM Floc, --- - ----I--------------- -- -- .. -------J----------------� -- �— -- �v• are e flow ®j® ® ® we FIow AFPROVW DY 0 — ----E- -- I-- — ------ - -------------------- -- CRAM DY OAORw ❑14 O OODOC�DO�©�1� Il \\ I I I bq T III CIE I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NORTH ELEVATION 1 SCNLE'.Ire"=1'�B" ARGHITEGTUR4L ', "r "`4p1UE EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN NOTES: L TIE D ISTING CONDITIONS AND BOUNDARY BS MfMWATICN WIC ED ON THIS PUN 10 COMPBFD""CMA PILIN ENTITLED'COSTING CONDIT011%002 LORNMI G AYBE,SAUDI LOBNG MA OIM.'AS PREPARED BY LAND MI INC.AND DAM JUNE 5,2017. �4p. �kf. 2 MATIONS HEREON REFER M AN ASSUMED)VERTICAL OATRA. ri LOCUS 'k• YY_^ -42• a TMs PUN IS PREPARED FOR OUR WENTs USE ONLYi'pi THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE 7 701 4 t OBTAINING PERMNS FROM ME ZONING BOARD OF APP ,AND IS NOT M BE USED s 6 - FOR ANY OTHER USE,INCLUDING CONSTRUCTION,WTHOUT ME WRITREN CONSENT OE' b THE MORIN-CAMERON GROUP.MG & NOV 'OER:s VD ATA wNAIA LLC R/T 10 JANE ROA,MMBIDIEAO.MA 01950 3 R DEED BOCK 355/5,PAGE 430 1 ]LOB1015 A£NE LLC pSSESm119 MAP 2,!DT 11 OO U ¢- OEM ORIN 3M04,PACE 44J 1 ' ]Law1c xI125 AVENUE LOT COVERAGE SCHEDU F• PAVEMENT AREA =5,740 ff BDIWING AREA .9,3747 27 O ^✓y OPEN SPA(L/WWWAY AREA .SEES SF LOCUS MAP "� 'o•.TMN I' 3 SCNL 1' 500'S 93,5' AV U . pQp�o, NgpDy 30E — ' 94.6' S0. .. ■ Q CMESTED "� [RIMESTER PA ASSESSOR'S NHNIN BOOK 3 16,PACE E oEw aloe 3utB,PACE 4as MAP 20 LOT 11 q 1 CANON WAY y^ AREM24WOt S „r i (am:Aarcs) � ;�' 949' °•:. / .,_----95_ �P a k • © VILLAGE RLC 94.0E f' �99- NE a_ DEED BOOK 24421,PACE 68 y d K®K®K® 53g ,G. B>.B' 000 LOBNG AVENUE yy - W 90.9' / 2 I� / / QD 98.Z' \\ s 92.4 DIMENSIONAL & DENSITY TABLE FOR ! LURING AVENUE - / 94 ` K R3 ZONE: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT<20 UNITS � I I \ (SEE ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 7.1) 55], SETBACK REQUIRED PROPOSED j I \ IW \ es' MM.FRONT YARD SETBACK - 11.2' WN.SIDE YARD SETBACK - 2D - / 4 e' 99.3' MIX.REAR YARD SEMACK - 3,3' WN.FRMTAE - 200' % 1 '� 1\ R yW9,� ] {84 4 AV0. 0 \ \ \ MIN.LOT AREA - 25,000 3 . \ \ \ :::::�Q•0 00 •/ II 'I01�11M �/ . MIN.LET WOM 122' 1908 � BUILDING COVERAGE - 401 12 93 B 873WNL B6 BULLDPIO HEIGHT 3 STORES 35 5 STORES k 49.8 INS 2' 80] pp1p- WRDING BUFFER ZONE R' 9.0'(2) LOT AREA PER DBEWNG I,OW SF y2W ff(A UNI15) UNIT 24j, eL ZONING: TE SUSECT PROPERTY IS USIED AS BONG IN ME R3 ZONING DISTRICT ACCORONG M TIE CITY W SNEA CRI ZONING MAP DAM AUGUST,MIN.ME FROPOSM USE ISL9,5' 24.0' I MULT-FAVSY IN ACCOPOANCE MM SECTION 7.1 OF ME SADA ZONING CRNNANCE DIMENSIONAL RELIEF REQUESTED: 907, 1. SECTION 7.122.' A VARIANCE Is REWESITD M INCREASE ME RAISED MAN ALLOWABIE HOGHT BY 145 FEET AND 2 STONES 9DEWAUf \ \ I \\ N 2.SECTION 7.125: A VARIANCE S REWESM TO DECREASE THE \ BUADING BI BY 21.2 FEET \\ 1\ W LORIN6(Puslc-VARIABLE MDTy) AVENUE CIL PARKING TABLE � � \ \ � - . VSE REQUIRED PROPOSED PROVIDED \ \ \ \ \ 45 SPACES PER DWOLNG 31 SPACES MULTIFAMILY OPUNNIT-20 U"30 SPACES (2 HANDICAP) _ r PSR (L Ly �SCNpF: I'.20' W 9 O.. 0 102 r - PROD./3595 ORAWMG.W95-MAN (PRO) REBARILAP �6- (FND) aw REBARICM TND) BM1 MAGNAL (FND) REEARAC� yl•A (FND) REGAx95 P" tYao CHO) P d PK b IFNO1��oTr O'1P5TW Clil 91 ae.3C 1 pk SAGNAIL RELDK'AP INIF 15124REE GROBVENOR HEALTHCARE �� PK(FND) /,� (FN01 8 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP DEED BOOK 11809,PAGE 424 (QR eT.�L� REBAAICM ee 012-TREE 'GROSVNOR HOUSE' 4 REBARCAP ND) (NG FNDoral e°+REBARic� PKN•s ( (FND) rTs S)1t2RREE (FD 0.0. PK` .4aro r1% (FND) ®9va9'w 0'P o� vJ&�.5 OF/qF TBMMAG NNL / SETINZA-TREE o REBPNCM ELEV°¢SBO' (FNC) CM 9�•p2'30-E (FN 5 q� (FNDI ��Y' j tiit2'TREE i .y. 4.1 NO N'FesC IR 'Oe *y&15.at�,. 84Ie $ ii33'' ( tp. T5'IGH 3A * LOT gREA a (FNI 1 _ NIF % 1s-TREE I 25,0]0 GO.FT. I VINNIN SQUARE APARTMENTS LLC / I2T�ReESE OECD BOOK]4516,PAGE 485 y� TREE I / 1 CAROL WAY / 91-K r GROUNDpLAUoy / 14-MEE / E � \ WOOD NAFI / hSTEPS VILLAGE SHOPS LLC / RET.WALL //\ DEED 800N24421,PAGER 1 CLF 600 CORING AVENUE / 12-TREE / /IB'RiEE 24 REE �. / \ � � Additional udkties may east that am not shown on INS pen. 85 % I21REE X044 /26'TRF)E I \ \CONC' 97.8 I / Pllor to any consmctlon,contact DIGGAFE 3 p!'I:"� s� % ,.f"�' 674RJEE / (1-800344-7233)09ela verlfyloweandell uNitles. UQ Me_I'X L VENT /ss \ , a�R• I NOTES; 11EEqPIPE 1 Registered Owner.ComUne Investors Realty Tmet y / zd"TREE`r,N / / OD / I'°y ♦� (WnCerCare LeeMng Center,firs) %945' % / STREE SMH me as I1� ��^� 'Anseeeore Ref.:20,0011.1 rTTRF.L 2A'TftEE I"WB18' 1 DaeE Ref..Book 11 SEE,Page 182 2.] 5�+ x9&s rc ti/ j993y _I, SMH RIM=838' / / Book 9810,Page 559 i 12-MEE _ /l ///p// O u/� / �' i� r® INV-58 a / •Ran Ref.:flan 241 of 1972 %924 14'T EC/ .66 / EXISTING 2fi'tRE \\ INV•BI9' ' ,2'iREE $ / 28TORV / f a' I T • RBn 38,Man BCOk 338 d� �5a�6} ,4%'TREE / BUIL / Y 1 X2.+ 9'rtRE I , ! I TABLEOFDIMENSIONAL REpUIREMENTB FOR R3 _ 5y/ 12•ITRC Bs,o / un GO / yy.r/ I\� s'\\ Ren 58,Ren BDok281 In 1,,zTREE 1e-rRE s/CLF - ^' . IS Ran 3,Ran Book 39] MIN.LOT AREA 25,000 80.FT. 1 127Rff �� I \ 12 7- M Ren 81,Ren Back 225 MIN.LOT AREA PER DWELLING UNIT 3.500 80.PT. Ran 3l,Ran Back lBS MIN.LOT FRONTAGE 100' x$ ` s C F / �� I I l I I 11 // / „, I I /SMH wM=8T1' •Zona:R3 MIN.LOT WIDTH 100' OKPT'b / )tll+ +! x///// /''/ .X90.t 1t§'.RSREE 26gREE�I / INV•63.T 'Distances sM1ovm were measured from MAX.LOT COVERAGE 35% TDA L ' WOOD'URB _ _ IA'_REE , `247CREE bplpng depboartl. �I II s 'Fevetlansin U.S.s urveyket ReluseConMIN.OPENSPACE xo PARw"c 1n BT. an assumed datum.MIN.FRONT YARD 15' 1PANNING MIN.SIDE YARD 29 ars° _ 1 1I �9I5'35'21'W m 1• 8- 31,12' _ x89J'S85'35'2YW IYTREE MIN.REAR YARD 30' BIT x905' x93z',� x61.5' 97.8' 3 xee.e / I %6s.5 MAX BUILDING HEIGHT 45' DRIVEWAY °�as.z' os \ Bey o / � � MAX BUILDING HEIGHT(STORES) 1 �� Nell d ATurphX LiC.hJ460 xsLI, ,i\\ \ WOODBARIE0. T •/ / a EE' E t9'TREE 24" EE / Professional Land Surw,w o ,/ _ \ / / HPINLINK FENCE _ _ q/•/ 9Ji _ � � x \ CONC WALK �2 X42 IRE s ° BR.510h�� a0 5�' EE / GP74a I GRANITECUR x91.]'RB X907 (-1 BIT. / SIDEWALK ( ( \ GRAXTECURB \ TBMMt-NAG NNL Existing Conditions sETIN DP 602 Loring Avenue CORING (PUBLIC-VARIABLE WOOHI AVENUE \ / \ ELEV•BBOp' \ '\ ocus LEGEND � �, � °\� \ Salem,Ma 01970 GRANITE CURB S \ \ p"pAF69are o m\ GRAPHIC SCALE /LR" AL RANG D9 GAsanre m '° ® puNuuwole �' —OIiW--._� // \ GRANITE OUPB� Lye�B09m.MA02127 aMw n,..ww1F oHw�__ swam,wre:Ble 0 oNw----___,Q,;Hw e"w-® ra.R7-s"'A" VICINITY MAP � � un Faa ONw--OHw—OHW`a+ t hale�20)(L _ mFE wwvOalaanaBilg¢m N)TTDSCNE Dale: June 1, 201]