138 NORTH STREET - ZBA (3) 13 b'� ✓V cri.� S'��
�I
rt �
0
� D
Legal Notice
CITY OF SALEM
BOARD OF APPEAL
745.9595 Ext.381 t
p Will hold a public hearing for all per- t
P sons interested in the petition submit- i
ted by THOMAS PELLITIER request-
ing a Special Permit to convert an
y existing Carriage House to a single
family unit for property located at 138 f
NORTH STREET R-2.Said hearing to
be held on WEDNESDAY,MARCH 15,
2006 at 6:30 P.M. 120 Washington 1
Street 3rd Floor,ROOM 313. f
Nina Cohen,Chairman
SN-3/2,3/9/06
L L
® CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET. 3RO FLOOR
SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS 01970 n
TELEPHONE: 976b74S-969S r-<
FAIL: 978-740.9846 ;aC
7 ;T
cf?
cn
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF THOMAS PELLETIER REQUESTING APO' or-
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED 138 NORTH STREET*
2
g
A Hearing on the above-referenced Petition was held on or about March 15,2006
with a further Public Hearing and proceedings held on or about May 17, 2006.
With the following Board Members present: Nona Cohen Chairman, Richard
Dionne, Edward Moriart, Robin Stein and Nicholas Helides
Petitioner requests a Special Permit to convert existing Carriage House to a
Single family dwelling for the property located at 139 North Street R-2.
1. Petitioner, Thomas Pelletier, is requesting a Special Permit to convert an
existing carriage house to a single-family dwelling for the property located
at 138 North Street in an R-2 Zoning District.
2. Petitioner's original Petition for conversion of said existing carriage house
to a single-family dwelling was continued to allow Petitioner to obtain
additional information, including the prior Zoning Board of Appeals'
decision for the premises dated August 26, 1992 and for the further
purpose of Petitioner providing site plans with adequate parking pursuant
to the applicable Zoning Ordinance. At both proceedings Petitioner
requested a Special Permit from the Board to allow use of a historic
carriage house to be used as a single-family dwelling for the property
located at 138 North Street, in an R-2 Zoning District.
I
3. The relevant provisions of the Salem Zoning Ordinance applicable to this
request for a Special Permit include the following:
Pursuant to Article V Section 5-3 (a) generally. Provided that
permission of the Board of Appeals is obtained in accordance with
the procedures and conditions set forth in Section 9-4 hereof,
buildings and structures may be constructed, altered, enlarged,
reconstructed, and land may be used for one or more of the
purposes set out in this section.
Pursuant to Article V Section 5-3(a) and (b)(11), 5-3(c)(5) and 5-3
(d)(8), the following are Special Permit uses in the residential, one-
family, two-family, and multi-family residential districts:
A historic carriage house for use as a single-family dwelling
as an accessory use to a principal dwelling on the same lot,
provided that parking requirements are
met and upon the
condition that
there shall be no change to the exterior of the
historic carriage house unless approved by the Historical
Commission. 5-3(c)(5)
Pursuant to Section 9-4 regarding Special Permits, pursuant to
9-4(a). In hearing and deciding applications for Special Permits,
the Board of Appeals shall decide such questions as are involved in
2
determining whether such Special Permit shall be granted, and
shall grant Special Permits with conditions and safeguards as are
appropriate under this Ordinance, and shall deny Special Permits
when not in harmony with the purposes and intent of this
Ordinance. The Board of Appeals shall not have the power to grant
any Special Permit where use of land or structure is specifically
excluded from the district.
Pursuant to Section 9-4(c), a Special Permit shall not be granted by
the Board of Appeals unless and until written application for the
Special Permit is made, stating the grounds on which such permit is
requested and public notice and hearing is held in accordance with
Chapter 40A, and unless said application complies in all other
respects with provisions of this Zoning Ordinance.
Pursuant to 9-4(d) violation of such conditions and safeguards as
are made a part of the terms under which the Special Permit is
granted shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance.
The Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at
said Public Hearings, and after a thorough review of the Plans and Petition
submitted herewith, and as amended, makes the following Findings of Fact:
3
1. The Petitioner, Mr. Thomas J. Pelletier, represented himself in
these proceedings as the Owner of Record of the subject premises
by Massachusetts Quitclaim Deed dated April 26, 2006. (See Exhibit
1 attached)
2. The Petitioner represented that the carriage house in4 uestion was
i
a historic carriage house within the meaning
and definition nitr'
on of the
relevant Salem Zoning Ordinance insofar as the carriage house was
built on or about 1856 and was used as a carriage house or barn at
that
time.
I The Salem Zoning Ordinance defines historic carriage house as, "an
accessory or out-building, originally built to house carriages,
horses, or for use as a barn, that has been in existence since 1900
at its present location." See Article II Section 2-2(b).
4. Next, Petitioner represented that the existing carriage house is in
substantial disrepair inside and out, and that the cost of repair can
only be borne by conversion of the carriage house to a single-
family, income generating, home.
4
5. Petitioner also indicated that he was made aware of the prior
Zoning Board of Appeals Decision for the premises at 138 North
Street that authorized the existing two-family structure on the
same lot to be used as a lawful, non-conforming, three-family,
provided one of the three apartments is owner-occupied.
6. Petitioner indicated a willingness to convert the existing non-
conforming three-family to a conforming two-family structure with
the single-family converted carriage house equaling the third family
unit on said premises which would continue the pre-existing lawful
non-conforming three-family use of the premises as long as one of
the three-family units (either one or two in the two-family structure
or the newly converted single-family former carriage house)
remains owner occupied. (See Exhibit 2 attached)
7. Petitioner further referenced new plans showing adequate parking
under the Salem Parking Ordinance for five motor vehicles in
conjunction with the existing two-family structure and proposed
carriage house/single-family conversion; five parking spaces being
consistent with the Salem Parking Ordinance requiring 1.5 parking
spaces per dwelling unit in an R-2 Zoning District.
5
8. Next, Petitioner represented that any and all changes to the historic
carriage house, now in substantial disrepair, would be made both
internally and externally in a good, workmanlike and building code
compliant manner, and that no change to the exterior of the
historic house will be made pursuant to 5-3(c)(5), unless and until
approved by the Historic Commission, under any and all prevailing
and governing Historic Commission and Historic District rules,
regulations, ordinances, and practices.
9. A neighbor and abutter of the Petitioner, Mr. Jim Myers of 4
Dearborn Street, appeared in opposition to the proposed
conversion of the carriage house to a single-family unit, concerned
about said conversion increasing density in the neighborhood,
altering his view of the existing premises from his adjacent
windows and doors by more parked cars, and otherwise creating
parking problems in an alreadycongested neighborhood.
9 g boyhood.
10. The Petitioner indicated a willingness to pave the five designated
parking spaces in a manner and with material that was not asphalt,
and would be more consistent with maintaining open space and
decreasing density from conversion of the carriage house to a
single-family, with adjacent off-street parking.
6
11. Petitioner also indicated a willingness to work with the Planning
Department on obtaining a cost-effective permeable pavement that
would permit off-street parking for the five required parking spaces
while promoting a more open, less urban blacktop parking space
scenario in a congested and historic neighborhood.
On the basis of the above Findings of Fad, and in consideration of the plans,
documents, and testimony presented at Public Hearing, the Board of Appeals,
pursuant to any and all applicable Zoning provisions, including those expressly
above-noted, concludes as follows:
1. The large barn-like structure at 138 North Street, in an R-2 Zoning
District, is a historic carriage house and an accessory use to the
principal dwelling, a pre-existing nonconforming three-family use in
a two-family structure as defined under the Salem Zoning
Ordinance. Article II Section 2-2 and Article V Section 5-3(c)(5).
See Petitioner's Quitclaim Deed and the prior relevant Salem Zoning
Board of Appeals Decision for the subject premises dated August
26, 1992, attached herewith as Exhibits 1 and 2.
7
2. The Board further finds that the plans submitted, as amended,
provide adequate parking for five off-street parking spaces,
pursuant to and consistent with any and all applicable Salem
Zoning Ordinance Parking Regulations in the R-2 Zoning District.
3. Petitioner has agreed that there shall be no change whatsoever to
the exterior of the carriage house unless and until authorized by
the Historic Commission.
4. The Board finds that the carriage house conversion would enhance
and not detract from the neighborhood by restoring an historic
structure to its intended architectural status and best contemporary
use as a single-family residence.
5. The Board further finds that the Special Permit use is in harmony
with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, in general,
and the Ordinance authorizing by Special Permit conversion of
certain carriage houses to single-family homes with reasonable
conditions, in particular.
6.
Lastly, the Board finds that it is the express public policy of Article
II Section 1-1(b)(11) of the Salem Zoning Ordinance that historic
8
carriage houses shall be preserved whenever feasible in the City of
Salem, and that this Petition is in all respects consistent with that
important public policy determination and shall be granted
herewith.
WHEREFORE, the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals votes 5 in favor and 0 in
opposition to grant said Special Permit request, subject to the following
conditions, including the prior Salem Zoning Board of Appeals Decision of August
26, 1992, requiring one unit owner-occupancy at said premises.
9
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, 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 and
approved by the Building Commissioner.
3. Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire Department
relative to smoke and fire safety.
4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction.
5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing
structure.
6. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained.
7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City's Assessors Office
and shall display said number as to be visible from the street.
8. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Historical Commission.
9. Unless this decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted does
not authorize Petitioner to demolish or deconstruct any structure on the property
to an extent greater than 50% of the structure as measured by floor area or
replacement cost. If a structure on the property is demolished by any means to an
extent of more than fiftypercent of its replacement cost or more than fifty P P YPercent
of its floor area at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed except in
conformity with this Ordinance.
10. Petitioner shall make every effort to work with Planning Department on obtaining
cost effective permeable pavement.
11. All parking requirements are to be met.
12. No changes to exterior unless approved by the Historic Commission.
13. Owner occupancy shall remain as stated in previous decision dated August of
1992.
Special Permit (
Granted Edward Moriaty
Board of Appea( `,
7 "i , "t� b ;,, •yl CHC of Salem, '!Ettssndjusetts
' Boara of ;kitpeal
C�
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER FOR VARIANCE AT 138
NORTH STRPET . (R-2)
A hearing on this petition was held August 26, 1992 with the following
Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Richard Febonio, Francis
w _ Grealish, Edward Luzinski and Associate Ronald Plante. Notice of the
hearing was sent to abutters and others"and notices of the hearing were
C7.) properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with
zo Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
W
Petitioners, owners of the property, are requesting variance to allow an
v existing two family dwelling to be converted to a three family dwelling in
this Residential Two Family District.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this
Board that: -
1. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the.
land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting
other lands, buildings and structures involved.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the
intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented
at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings
of fact:
1. Three letters in support of the petition and one letter in opposition
were submitted.
2. Petitioner can meet the city requirement of 1 1/2 parking spaces per
unit.
3. There are other buildings in the area with three or more units.
4. Financial hardship, with regard to the property, forces the petitioner
to seek the relief requested.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER FOR
A VARIANCE AT 138 NORTH STREET, SALEM
page two
5. The property would be protected by a condition that the property remain
owner occupied.
6. There would be no changes to the exterior structure, all changes would
be interior.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidencepresented
at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property
but not the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3 . Desirable relief 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.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the
variance requested, subject to the following conditions:
1 . Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances,
codes and regulations.
2 . All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions
submitted and by legal building permit.
3. Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire
Department relative to smoke and fire safety.
4 . Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the new dwelling
unit.
5. As long as the building is used as a three family one of the apartments
must be owner occupied.
6. A minimum of five (5) legal parking spaces shall be maintained on site
in perpetuity.
VARIANCE GRANTED
August 26, 1992
Richard A. Bencal, Chairman
Board of Appeal ,'
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER
FOR VARIANCE AT 138 NORTH 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
the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20
days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City
Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 11, the
'variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a
copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20
days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has
been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South
Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record
or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
c�
m
C=
�y
J
N cj
i.
2006042800658 HOW Pg!113
MASSACHUSETTS QUITCLAIM DEED 04128/2008 13:38:00 DEED Ps tl1
J/We, Thomas J. Pelletier and Cynthia L. Pelletier, f.k.a Cynthia L.Overberg of
Peabody,Essex County, Massachusetts, for consideration paid of one dollar and 00/100
($1.00), grant to Thomas J.Pelletier and Cynthia L.Pelletier jointly, as tenants by the
entirety and to Kellie Overberg , of 138 North Street, Salem,Massachusetts, as tenant in
common, said Kellie Overberg shall have one undivided third interest in this property.
With quitclaim covenants the following property in Salem, Essex County,
Massachusetts:
The land with the buildings thereon in Salem,Essex County,Massachusetts,bounded and
described as follows:
SOUTHWESTERLY by North Street, sixty-two and five tenths(62.5) feet;
NORTHWESTERLY by Dearborn Street,ninety(90) feet;
NORTHEASTERLY by land now or formerly of Symonds, sixty-two and five tenths
(62.5) feet; and
SOUTHEASTERLY by land now or formerly of Maynes,ninety(90) feet.
Meaning and intending to convey and hereby conveying the same premises conveyed to
us by deed of Keith R. Pelletier and Nicole M. Pelletier dated October 11, 2001 and
recorded with Essex South Registry of Deeds in Book 17750 Page 212.
Witness our hands and seals this 26 day of April,2006 n n
omas J. P tier C thia L. Pelletier
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Essex, ss: April 26, 2006
Then personally appeared the above-named Th J. Pelletier and _
acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his free act deed be ore me.
No l Public: ryy PATRICIA A.NIGRO-BELAND
My Commission Expires: : Notary Pu
Co
mmonweahh o blic
1 Massachusetts
My Commission Expires
Commonwealth of Massachusetts March 6,
2009
Essex, ss: . April 26, 2006
Then personally appeared the above-nameda L. Pelletier and
acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be he free
�a and deed before qme.
��
otary Public:
My Commission Expires: PATRICIA A.NIGRO.BELAND
Notary Public
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
My Commission Expires
March 6,2009
MORTGAGE INSPECTION
BAY STATE SURVEYING SERVICE INC.
234 CABOT ST., BEVERLY, NIA.
LOCATION + SALEM. MASS. NOTES=
SCALE + 1" s 40 Ft QATE: SEP. •12. 1999 • This is a a s inspection surveyand not
REFERENCE , DEED BK: • 3798 PS. •499•-_.••- an instrument survey,Menton this plot plan is for
gF,C�OgDED IN.TME•E99EX•30UT11 ..--._�• =Mao* Inapec"on purposes only.
AIS .Ar
,4
_RQ.p€XQ4............. • This survey is based'on survey marks of
others.
.. .".:.�'4N.t�?D/�Z lut.4 ._t&:eT • 8usha,shrubs, fences and tree lines do
I hereby owft that I have ermMnsd the premises and Maw the not necessarily indleate pnpeM lines.
building(s) shown on Ibis plan are 1000W as the ground as p zoning ked to coa
ow • TM buildbp(s) an not located in tls'speaial
shn and 00 they t the ning ssfbach of Me
flood hazard zons, a defined H.U.D. :
....CIl�C_4►.;!l�lrt.%MA?S ......... when constructed. �
�o :IN "' R. SURREY IS,
:iE?fGE7
TO MERMINE
Lor 2 R 7
F .
,•- 625' -
J�ers.��6ZS*SP
o° Lo-r 273
Q '*!ae
e,2.s
IN Of
NOtZTI� �T2G�T a �c
JA
cWM
r]( N
N
•�,Y/,D4lSTER