7 MALL STREET - ZBA (3) D
L.7 MAT.', cmn_EET (R-1) —�
ROBERT
SOLOMON
rA�
t"
1
- i
n
�TTISa'w+f y�� 0
Salem Historical Commission
ONE SALEM GREEN, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
(508) 745-9595 EXT. 311 FAX (508) 740-0404
May 1, 1996
Stephen Touchette, Chairman
Board of Appeal
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
Dear Chairman Touchette:
The Salem Historical Commission is in receipt of your agenda for May 15, 1996. Enclosed please
find a Building Survey form for 7 Mall Street, built c1800-1810. This property is not located in a local
historic district but is located within and is a contributing building to the Salem Common National Register
District. While the Commission takes no position on the proposal, we hope that any exterior alteration
would be sympathetic in design. If requested by the Board of Appeal as a condition of approval,we would
be pleased to provide design review.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
THE SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Helen Sides
Chairperson
JGUG\BOA0695
7
c- •
r
Chi of �MjPm, ��tI85tIt�luSPttB
M
7 - 1
peal p
127 /'ii
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROBERT SOLOMAN REQUESTING A SPECIAL{;,;_
PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 MALL STREET (R-2)
A hearing on this petition was held May 15, 1996 with the following
Board Members present: Gary Barrett, Chairman, Nina Cohen, Albert
Hill, Joseph Ywuc and Arthur LeBrecque. Notice of the hearing was
sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly
published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit to allow construction of a
second floor on an existing single story dwelling for the property
located at 7 Mall Street.
The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to
this request for a Special Permit is Section 5-3(j ) , which provides
as follows:
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance,
the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and
conditions set forth in Sections 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits
for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and
for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming
lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such
change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be
substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to
the neighborhood.
In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit
requests, guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be
granted upon a finding by the Board that the grant of the Special
Permit will promote the public health, safety, convenience and
welfare of the City's inhabitants.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence
presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the
following findings of fact:
1. The petitioner had been previously heard before the Board at
hearings on May 18,1994 and June 15, 1994. An appeal of the
Board's decision was subsequently filed in Superior Court and
captioned Philip Wales v. Wendi Goldsmith st als. ' Civil Action
No. 94-1653. The matter is now before the Board on remand as a
result of an Agreement for Judgment executed by the parties and
an Order entered in the Superior Court action.
2. Petitioner purchased the property in 1992, and currently resides
at the property.
3. Petitioner intends to use the proposed addition for residential
AM,
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT SOLOMAAN REQUESTING A SPECIAL,
PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY L �l
OCATED AT 7 MALL STREET (R-2 ))
pagetwolar 27 F V
space for a growing family.
4. Petitioner stated that there would be no business conducted at
the 7 Mall Street address.
5. The proposed second story addition would be built on an existing
121x12' structure.
6. The existing 12'x12' addition has been in existence for at least
10 years.
7. Petitioner stated there would be no windows on either the first
or second floor of the proposed new addition facing the property
owned by Philip P. Wales at 16 Williams Street. Petitioner
further advised that it was the intention to follow the now
existing roof line of the main structure for the proposed
addition and that a sunlight would be installed on the roof.
8. Petitioner further stated that despite the fact that the property
is not within a historic district there is a willingness to
submit the plans t the Historic Commission for review and comment
9. Pam, Shirley and Theodore Angelakis, 9 Mall Street, submitted a
letter in support of the Petition.
10. Nancy Farrett, 5 Mall Street submitted a letter in support of the
petition.
11. Joseph and Elizabeth Palamara, 6 Mall Street appeared and
expressed their support for the Petition.
12. Peter Farrrell, 5 Mall Street, appeared and spoke in favor of the
Petition. Mr. Farrell felt the proposed addition would improve
the neighborhood and would be another example of the Petitioner's
effort to upgrade the property and area.
13. Philip P. Wales, 16 Williams Street, an abutter, and his counsel,
Dan Casey, appeared and opposed the Petition.
14. Mr. Wales expressed a concern that the proposed addition would
"box" in his yard and effect the view from his property,
15. Mr. Wales submitted a letter dated May 15, 1996 setting forth
his opposition to the Petition.
16. A letter dated April 17, 1995 from Gail M. Sdos, 16 Williams St.
was submitted in opposition to the Petition.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence
presented, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. The Special Permit requested can be granted without substantial
detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially
derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the
ordinance.
2. The granting of the Special Permit requested will promote the
public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's
inhabitants and may be granted in harmony with the neighborhood.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0 to
grant the Special Permit requested, subject to the following
conditions:
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT SOLOMAN REOUESTLiiG A SPECIAL
PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 MALL STREET (R-2 ) .
page three
1. Petitioner shall comply with all City and State statu&,17
ordinances, codes and regulations. 1 27 F/ '�
eir'
k'i2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dim@hSi;Qn"s`— 'Nass
submitted.
3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke
and fire safety are to be strictly adhered to.
4. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
5. Petitioner shall obtain a Building Permit prior to beginning any
construction.
6. Exterior finishes of new construction shall be in harmony with
the existing structure.
7. Petitioner, in accord with his agreement to do so, shall submit
the plans for the proposed addition to the Historic Commission
for review and comment as to the exterior finishes so they will
be in harmony with the existing neighborhood.
8. There shall not be anv windows installed on the 1st or 2nd floor
of the proposed new addition on the vertical wall facing the
property owned by Philip P. Wales at 16 Williams Street.
SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED
. MAY 15, 1996
Gary Barrett
Member, Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND
THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section
17 of MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the
date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk.
Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special
Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the
decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20 days
have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal
has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in
the South Essex Registry or Deeds and indexed under the name of the
owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate
of Title.
Board of Appeal
4
(�itti of 'j�ulem, flttssttthysetts
__ UL
'off �DIIr�1 D{ � P211 CITY OF SALE; ``'>S
w.n
ERn'S 0
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WENDI GOLDSMITH
FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AT 7 MALL STREET (R-2)
A hearing on this petition was held June 15, 1994 with the following Board
Members present: Stephen Touchette, Chairman; Gary Barrett, Stephen
O'Grady, Albert Hill, and Nina Cohen. Notice of the hearing was sent to
abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in
the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws
Chapter 40A.
Petitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a Special Permit to allow
construction of a second story on an existing nonconforming single story
addition. Property is located in the R-2 zone.
The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this
request for a Special Permit is Section 5-3(j ) , which provides as follows:
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the
Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set
forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and
reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement,
extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses,
provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion
shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming
use to the neighborhood.
In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit
requests, guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted
upon a finding by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will
promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's
inhabitants.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented
at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings
of fact:
1 . There was no opposition to the petitioners request.
11
2. The petitioners need the additional space to grow as a family.
3 . The proposed construction of a second level in the most feasible way
to obtain additional space.
A . Property will remain a single family.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WENDI GOLDSMITH
FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AT 7 MALL STREET, SALEM
page two
JUL 5 I I oa dM '94
CITY OF 51KL_`J.. HASS
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the eMiRkhb� Cofe'Sint ed,
the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. The Special Permit requested can be granted without substantial
detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially
derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
2. The granting of the Special Permit requested will promote the public
health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants and may
be granted in harmony with the neighborhood.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 4-1 (Mr. O'Grady opposed) to
grant the Special Permit requested, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner shall comply with all City and State statutes, ordinances,
codes and regulations.
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions
submitted.
3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and
fire safety are to be strictly adhered to.
4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to starting
construction.
5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the
existing structure.
6. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
7. No business operations are to be allowed out of dwelling.
Special Permit Granted
June 15, 1994
Ste hen O'Grady, S retary
Board of appeal
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WENDI GOLDSMITH
FOR SPECIAL PERMIT AT 7 MALL STREET, SALEM
page three
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY
CLERK
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of
MGL Chapter 40A. , and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of
filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL
Chapter 40A. , Section 11, the Special Permit granted herein shall not take
effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City
Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if
such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is
recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of
the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of
Title.
Board of Appeal
c
n o Lrl
o
w
vL
APPEAL June 5, 1996
LAW OFFICE OF CARL D. GOODMAN
17 FRONT STREET
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970-3707
CARL D. GooDMAN (508) 745-6006
JACQUELINE Voss LEES- -Al.Ad.RW i.C.mmi9,
June 5, 1996
Ms. Deborah E. Burkinshaw
City Clerk
City Hall N
Salem, MA 01970 HAND DELIVERED c
RE: Wales v. Solomon et al u�
Dear Ms. Burkinshaw:
Enclosed please find copy of Complaint and Civil Action Cover Sheet which have been
filed this day in the Superior Court.
Very t yours,
CARL D. G ODMAN
na Court lol Massacriusens
CIVIL ACTION COVER SHEET SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT R
Essex I 2 Iq
Division 2-�
PLAINTIFF(S) pEF NDANT ) -
Philip Wales Ko e r t olomon, Gary Barrett, Nina
Cohen et. al.
ATTORNEY(S) FIRM NAME.ADDRESS AND TEL.) ATTORNEY(S)(if known)
Carl D. Goodman, Esq.
17 Front Street
Board of BarWdie Fee*4# (F 44 JiiPed)745-6006 201720
ORIGIN CODE AND TRACK DESIGNATION
Place an ® in one box only:
1. F01 Original Complaint ❑ 4. F04 District Ct. Appeal c231, s. 97 (X)
❑ 2. F02 Removal to Sup. Ct. c231, s. 104 (F) ❑ 5. F05 Reactivated after Rescript; Relief from
❑ 3. F03 Retransfer to Sup. Ct. c231, s. 102C (X) judgment/order (Mass. R Civ. P. 60 (X)
❑ 6. E10 Summary process appeal (X)
TYPE OF ACTION AND TRACK DESIGNATION (See Reverse Side)
CODE NO. TYPE OF ACTION (specify) TRACK IS THIS A JURY CASE?
-02 Zoning Appeal (F ) ❑ Yes F-1 No
1. PLEASE GIVE A CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE FACTS: (Required in ALL Types of Actions)
This is an appeal of a Salem Zoning Board of Appeals decision.
• s
tr1
c` 131
2. IN A CONTRACT ACTION (CODE A) OR A TORT ACTION (CODE B) STATE, WITH PARTICULARITY_
MONEY DAMAGES WHICH WOULD WARRANT A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD THAT RECOVERY -"
WOULD EXCEED $25,000: �A
Money damages are not sought
3. PLEASE IDENTIFY, BY CASE NUMBER, NAME AND DIVISION, ANY RELATED ACTION PENDING
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT.
SIGNATURE OF ATTO OF R PLAINTIFF DATE
6/5/96
DISPOSITION RECEIVED
A. Judgment Entered B. No Judgment Entered BY:
❑ 1. Before jury trial or non-jury hearing ❑ 6.Transferred to District DATE
❑ 2. During jury trial or non-jury hearing Court under G.L. c.231, DISPOSITION ENTERED
❑ 3. After jury verdict s.102C.
❑ 4. After court finding Disposition Date BY.
❑ 5. After post trial motion I DATE:
OCAJ 6-mic 005-8188 CLERK MAGISTRATE'S COPY
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
ESSEX, SS SUPERIOR COURT DEPT.
OF THE TRIAL COURT
CIVIL ACTION No.
ctONL19
*
PHILIP WALES,
Plaintiff
-V-
:
ROBERT SOLOMON, and * -OMc' PLATNT
Lin
GARY BARRETT, NINA COHEN,
ALBERT HILL, JOSEPH YWUKLn
* N
and ARTHUR LEBRECQUE, as
c
they constitute the * -
Board of Appeals of the * T
City of Salem,
Defendants
1. Plaintiff, Philip Wales, is an individual who resides at 16 Williams Street, Salem, Essex
County, Massachusetts.
2. Defendant, Robert Solomon, is an individual who resides at 7 Mall Street, Salem, Essex
County, Massachusetts.
3. Defendant, Gary Barrett, a member and Chairman of the Board of Appeals for the City
of Salem, Massachusetts (hereinafter referred to as the "Board"), is an individual who resides
at 7 Patton Road, Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts.
Lar Office of
Carl D. Goodman
17 Front Street
Salem, MA 01970
(508)745-6006 1
4. Defendant, Nina Cohen, a member of the Board of Appeals for the City of Salem,
Massachusetts (hereinafter referred to as the "Board"), is an individual who resides at 22
Chestnut Street, Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts.
5. Defendant, Albert Hill, a member of the Board of Appeals for the City of Salem,
Massachusetts (hereinafter referred to as the "Board"), is an individual who resides at 4 Larkin
Lane, Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts.
6. Defendant, Joseph Ywuk, a member of the Board of Appeals for the City of Salem,
Massachusetts (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board"), is an individual who resides at 86 Ord
Street, Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts.
7. Defendant, Arthur LeBrecque, a member of the Board of Appeals for the City of
Salem, Massachusetts (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board"), is an individual who resides at
11 Hazel Street, Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts.
8. The defendants, Gary Barrett, Nina Cohen, Albert Hill, Joseph Ywuk and Arthur
LeBrecque, are all of the members and associate members of the Board of Appeals for the
City of Salem (said defendants shall hereinafter be collectively referred to as "the Board").
9. This action is an appeal brought pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, §17 for judicial review
of a decision of the Board, which decision was filed with the City Clerk for the City of Salem
on May 17, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Decision"). A certified copy of the Decision is
attached hereto and marked Exhibit "A" and hereby incorporated herein.
10. Plaintiff is a person aggrieved within the meaning of G.L. Chapter 40A, §17 by the
Decision of the Board in granting a Special Permit to defendant, Robert Solomon, as to real
property located at 7 Mall Street, Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts (hereinafter referred to
as "the Locus").
11. On or about April 3, 1996, the defendant, Robert Solomon, filed a petition with the
Board seeking a special permit to allow construction of a second story on an existing single
story addition.
12. Thereafter, a hearing was held on May 15, 1996.
[aw Office of
Carl D. Goodman
17 Front Street
Salem, MA 01970
(508)745-6006 2
13. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Board voted to grant a Special Permit as requested
by the defendant, Robert Solomon.
14. The Decision of the Board exceeds the authority of said Board.
15. The findings set forth in the Decision and the reasons for the findings set forth in the
Decision are insufficient in law to warrant the granting of the Special Permit.
16. The Decision is unwarranted and beyond the authority of the Board as it is contrary to
the provisions of G.L. 40A and the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Salem as
the Decision allows the expansion of an illegal structure and is otherwise contrary to law.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands that this Honorable Court:
1. After hearing, determine the facts, and upon the facts so determined, annul the
Decision of the Board on the grounds that said Decision exceeds the authority of said Board;
and,
2. Grant such other and further relief as may be appropriate.
Dated: June 5, 1996
PHILIP WALES, Plaintiff
By his attorney:
CARL D. GOODMAN, ESQ.
17 Front Street
Salem, MA 01970
Telephone: (508) 745-6006
BBO #201720
Lav office of
Carl D. Coodnen
17 Front Street
Salem, MA 01970
1508)745-6006 3
of ttlem, iassadjuzettz
4-t4,k -- A
M
s
Putts of LAppeal
4�uon MAY II ^ '^',
C/ I �I JD
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROBERT SOLOMAN REQUESTING A SPECIrAL{ ;,
PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 MALL STREET (R-2)
A hearing on this petition was held May 15, 1996 with the following
Board Members present: Gary Barrett, Chairman, Nina Cohen, Albert
Hill, Joseph Ywuc and Arthur LeBrecque. Notice of the hearing was
sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly
published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit to allow construction of a
second floor on an existing single story dwelling for the property
located at 7 Mall Street.
The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to
this request for a Special Permit is Section 5-3(j ) , which provides
as follows:
Notwithstanding, anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance,
the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and
conditions set forth in Sections 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits
for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and
for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming
lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such
change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be
substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to
the neighborhood.
In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit
requests, guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be
granted upon a finding by the Board that the grant of the Special
Permit will promote the public health, safety, convenience and
welfare of the City's inhabitants.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence
presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the
following findings of fact:
1. The petitioner had been .previously heard before the Board at
hearings on May 18, 1994 and June 15, 1994. An appeal of the
Board's decision was subsequently filed in Superior Court and
captioned Philip Wales v. Wendi Goldsmith st als. ' Civil Action
No. 94-1653. The matter is now before the Board on remand as a
result of an Agreement for Judgment executed by the parties and
an Order entered in the Superior Court action.
2. Petitioner purchased the property in 1992, and currently resides
at the property.
3. Petitioner intends to use the proposed addition for residential
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT SOLOMAN REQUESTING A SPECIAL
PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 MALL STREET (R-2) HGi i7�
page two 2^ i
space for a growing family. C' , ,Ss
4. Petitioner stated that there would be no business cond'uc:ted at,; "
the 7 Mall Street address.
5. The proposed second story addition would be built on an existing
121x12' structure.
6. The existing 121x12' addition has been in existence for at least
10 years.
7. Petitioner stated there would be no windows on either the first
or second floor of the proposed new addition facing the property
owned by Philip P. Wales at 16 Williams Street. Petitioner
further advised that it was the intention to follow the now
existing roof line of the main structure for the proposed
addition and that a sunlight would be installed on the roof.
8. Petitioner further stated that despite the fact that the property
is not within a historic district there is a willingness to
submit the plans t the Historic Commission for review and comment
9. Pam, Shirley and Theodore Angelakis, 9 Mall Street, submitted a
letter in support of the Petition.
10. Nancy Farrett, 5 Mall Street submitted a letter in support of the
petition.
11. Joseph and Elizabeth Palamara, 6 Mall Street appeared and
expressed their support for the Petition.
12. Peter Farrrell, 5 Mall Street, appeared and spoke in favor of the
Petition. Mr. Farrell felt the proposed addition would improve
the neighborhood and would be another example of the Petitioner's
effort to upgrade the property and area.
13. Philip P. Wales, 16 Williams Street, an abutter, and his counsel,
Dan Casey, appeared and opposed the Petition.
14. Mr. Wales expressed a concern that the proposed addition would
"box" in his yard and effect the view from his property.
15. Mr. Wales submitted a letter dated May 15, 1996 setting forth
his opposition to the Petition.
16. A letter dated April 17, 1995 from Gail M. Sdos, 16 Williams St.
was submitted in opposition to the Petition.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence
presented, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. The Special Permit requested can be granted without substantial
detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially
derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the
ordinance.
2. The granting of the Special Permit requested will promote the
public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's
inhabitants and may be granted in harmony with the neighborhood.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0 to
grant the Special Permit requested, subject to the following
conditions:
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF ROBERT SOLOMAN REQUESTING A SPECIAL
PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 MALL STREET (R-2 ) .
page three
1. Petitioner shall comply with all City and State statutes, #41f�
ordinances codes and regulations.g rig,.
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensi6ffs;;�;
submitted. SS
3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke
and fire safety are to be strictly adhered to.
4. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
5. Petitioner shall obtain a Building Permit prior to beginning any
construction.
6. Exterior finishes of new construction shall be in harmony with
the existing structure.
7. Petitioner, in accord with his agreement to do so, shall submit
the plans for the proposed addition to the Historic Commission
for review and comment as to the exterior finishes so they will
be in harmony with the existing neighborhood.
8. There shall not be any windows installed on the ist or 2nd floor
of the proposed new addition on the vertical wall facing the
property owned by Philip P. Wales at 16 Williams Street.
SPECIAL .PERMIT GRANTED
MAY 15, 1996 p/
Gary Barrett
Member, Board of Appeal
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND
THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section
17 of MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the
date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk.
Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special
Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the
decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20 days
have elapsed and' no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal
has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in
the South Essex Registry or Deeds and indexed under the name of the
owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate
of Title.
Board of Appeal
A TRUE COPY ATTEST
C17Y CLERK
SALEM, MASS_
May 8, 1996
City of Salem Board of Appeal
One Salem Green
Salem, MA. 01970
Board of Appeal Members:
I am writing this letter to show my support for my neighbors Rob Solomon and
Wendy Goldsmith and their plan to build a second floor addition to part of their home.
My husband and I have seen the plans and we feel this addition will enhance the
house and the neighborhood. This addition would solve the roof leaking problem.
Presently there is a black tarp which covers the roof. The addition they are planning
would be a nice improvement in the esthetics of the house. Please support these
responsible homeowners and their efforts.
Sincerely,
46� Pratt
Nancy Farrell
9 Mall Street
Salem, MA 01970
May 15, 1996
City of Salem
Board of Appeals
1 Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
To Whom It May Concern:
We, the residents of 9 Mail Street, do not object to the permit Mr. Robert
Solomon is seeking for a second story addition at 7 Mall Street. Our only concern is
that this addition not be used for purposes other than living; i.e., operating a business
from the home.
Sincerely,
Pamela R. Angelakis
Shirley A. A ge akis
'Theodore G. Angelakis, Sr.
* not present to sign
March 30, 1998
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
City Hall
Salem, MA 01970
To Whom it Concerns,
I am writing to express a few concerns I have regarding the Zoning in Salem.
I am renting a house on Williams Street which is very nice. It is my first time
living in Salem and my husband and I have been considering buying property in
Salem in the future. I grew up in Concord, MA which has many, many zoning
restrictions due to its world-renowned historical significance.
Salem's historical significance is also renowned, and the town needs to support
the architecture, which speaks to its history. The Zoning laws, or lack thereof,
have obviously effected Salem's appeal historically due to short sighted
construction projects inconveniently located next to exquisite Federal and
Colonial period homes and buildings.
It is also sad to see the haphazard and seemingly desperate measures City
Officials have embraced to either appease aggressive builders, or to encourage
commerce at any price. There are many stories of unprofitable experiences in
Salem; we all just have to look at the abandoned buildings in the center of town.
The businesses which are thriving and which will always thrive it we let them into
our communities, are national chains.
These are big problems which I believe proper long term Zoning requirements
could eradicate. Many North-Shore communities have done so.
I want to discuss an example something very small in comparison. My neighbor,
t Philip Wales, is fighting to block an obnoxious plan his neighbor (7 Mall St) has to
build an unsightly addition on to the second floor of his house. This addition
appears to be illegal, and the appeal has not been handled very well by city
officials. This signifies to our neighborhood, the Salem Zoning Boards lack of
interest in preserving old homes and their abutting properties. This is very sad,
and it really speaks to the long-term risk associated with purchasing or owning
property in the city.
I urge you to work hard to do the right thing with this case. The Remand Hearing
is scheduled for April 15. Please start to set the precedence necessary to
preserve neighborhood integrity, property values and a sense of future for Salem
families. Also, stop advocating illegal building and pay-off driven deals.
rel VAA
a arre
18 Williams Street
Salem, MA 01970 cc; The Mayor's Office