3 WEBSTER STREET - ZBA �.
��
�.1
i
a
,'
-.,.-*
� � �
i
r
cOND17 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
Syr SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01 970
O TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595
FAX: 978-740-9846 200q All 30 P 2: 24
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL
MAYOR - '"H-E f,
CITY CLEF K. S -1EM, MASS,
June 29,2009
Decision
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Petition of PETER COPELAS seeking Variances from minimum lot area per
dwelling unit and minimum number of parking spaces required, and a Special
Permit to change from one nonconforming use to another, to allow for the
conversion of a warehouse/woodworking business to six(6) residential units on the
property at 3 WEBSTER STREET, Salem,MA(R2 zoning district).
Statements of fact:
1. Attorney Scott Grover presented the petition on behalf of the petitioner,Peter
Copelas,who owns the property.
2. In a petition dated May 27, 2009,the petitioner requested Variances from minimum
lot area per dwelling unit and required parking, and a Special Permit to change from
one nonconforming use to another,in order to convert the existing
warehouse/woodworking business into six residential units.
3. A public hearing on the above mentioned Petition was opened on June 17, 2009,
pursuant to Mass General Law Ch. 40A, % 11. The hearing was closed on June 17,
2009,with the following Zoning Board of Appeals members present: Robin Stein
(Chair),Rebecca Curran, Richard Dionne,Beth Debski,Bonnie Belair (alternate),
and Jimmy Tsitsinos (alternate).
4. The Board of Appeals received six letters in support of the project and four letters in
opposition to it. At the hearing,several residents voiced concerns about parking,
privacy and the density of the proposed project,and expressed a preference for a
commercial use for the property, rather than residential, because they felt a
commercial use would be less intensive. Other neighbors spoke in support of the
project, saying the redevelopment of the building as proposed would remove blight,
raise property values and benefit the neighborhood.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public
hearing, and after thorough review of the plans and petition submitted,makes the following
findings:
2
1. Special conditions and circumstances exist affecting the parcel and building,which
do not generally affect other land or buildings in the same district. The building,
constructed in the 1880s,was built to the lot lines,taking up the entire parcel. This
makes it difficult to accommodate all of the required parking on site, and difficult or
impossible to meet the zoning requirements for lot area per dwelling unit in the R-2
zone for any residential development,without tearing down the structure.
2. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and
without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the
zoning ordinance, as the changes proposed would result in significant
improvements to the property at 3 Webster Street. Additionally, the residential use
proposed is more in keeping with the residential character of the R-2 zone than a
commercial use.
3. Literal enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance would involve substantial
hardship, financial or otherwise, to the appellant.
4. The applicant may vary the terms of the Residential Two-Family District to
construct the proposed development,which is consistent with the intent and
purpose of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance.
5. In permitting such change,the Board of Appeals requires certain appropriate
conditions and safeguards as noted below.
On the basis of the above findings of fact and all evidence presented at the public hearing
including, but not limited to,the Plans,Documents and testimony,the Zoning Board of
Appeals concludes:
1. To allow for the redevelopment of the site as proposed,the requested Variances
from minimum lot area per dwelling unit and minimum number of parking spaces
are granted.
2. To allow for a change in nonconforming use, a Special Permit is granted.
In consideration of the above,at its meeting on June 17,2009,the Board of Appeal voted
four(4) in favor (Stein,Belair,Dionne,Debskt) and one (1) opposed (Curran) to grant
Variances from minimum lot area per dwelling unit and minimum number of
parking spaces required, and a Special Permit to change from one nonconforming
use to another, to allow for redevelopment of the site as shown on the plans titled
"Webster Street Condos, 3 Webster Street, Salem,MA," dated May 29, 2009,and prepared
by Pitman &Wardley Architects LLC,sheets A-1 through A-4 and B-1 through B-4 subject
to the following terms, conditions, and safeguards:
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 to and
approved by the Building Commissioner.
3
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. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
6. Petitioner shall obtain street numbering from the City of Salem Assessor's Office
and shall display said numbers so as to be visible from the street.
7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board.
8. Unless this Decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted does
not empower or authorize the Petitioner to demolish or reconstruct the
structure(s) located on the subject property to an extent of more than fifty percent
(50%) of its floor area of more than fifty percent (50%) of its replacement cost at
the time of destruction. If the structure is demolished by any means to an extent
of more than fifty percent (50%) of its replacement cost or more than fifty percent
(50%) of its floor area at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed
except in conformity with the provisions of the Ordinance.
RoChair
Salem Zoning 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,shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days of filing of this decision in the
office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A Section
11,the Variance or Special Perrnit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the
decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk has been filed with the Essex South Registry
of Deeds.
June 12th, 2009
To whom it may concern,
Re-3 Webster Street, Salem, Ma
I am writing this letter at the request of Lewis Legon, who is seeking a variance from the Board of Appeals
to develop
3 Webster Street into 6 residential condominiums. Currently I am a trustee and resident of 254 Lafayette
Street, Salem, Ma, another project developed by Mr Legon. I was asked to comment on parking and the
experience we have had here at 254 Lafayette Street, which also has six condominium units.
Mr Legon did a quality job in renovating this building, which was in poor condition and under cared for, for
many years. He and his team did an admirable job in overhauling and restoring the building, updating all —
the infrastructure while maintaining the fine period details. The units are all unique ranging in size
between 950 square feet and 1,300 square feet. This Queen Anne Victorian is once again a beautiful
building.
The six units here sold for between $250 K and $365 K. Regarding parking, all but one of the units were
originally sold to individual unit owners who each had one car. One was sold to a couple who has two
cars for a total of seven cars altogether.
My understanding is that the Webster Street project would have similar priced units and would
presumably attract similar buyers.
If I can answer any question, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Q��D
P
Roland Brophy
�r
Danielle McKnight
From: Paul Falconer [drfalconerlmhc@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 2:39 PM
To: Danielle McKnight
Subject: Neighborhood support for the redevelopment of the Salem Trolley Barn
*Paul Falconer, BEnvDes BArch PhD
x' 17 Pleasant St, Salem, MA 01970
Telephone: 978-594-5444*
June 2, 2009
Planning Development
City of Salem, Washington St. , Salem, 01970
Dear Mr. McKnight:
I am writing to lend my support to the redevelopment of the former Salem Trolley Barn on
Webster Street. I have attended the meetings hosted by the developer, Lewis, and I was
greatly impressed with his ability to listen to the concerns of local residents. Lewis
offered several comprises that I believe were quite reasonable, with parking remaining one`s"'`^ -
of the few concerns. This was address quite adequately in the latest scheme, with some
off-street parking, pleasing most of the local residents.
The barn remains one of the few physical remnants of Salem's trolley system, and as such,
must be preserved for its historic and local interest. The plans and elevations submitted
by the developer and his architect show a historically accurate and sensitive restoration
of the building materials.
Along with Lewis' successful track record in Salem, and the support shown by his
development team, I hope that the City is able to approve the application.
It is my understanding that the building will be offered for sale irregardless, and it is
my belief that the building, street, and surrounding neighborhood would benefit from the
renovation and rehabilitation of this historic building. Presently, the building is in
need of maintenance and repair, but it is doubtful that there will be any financial
incentive to carry this out. It could remain derelict for years, or worse yet, have an
active wood shop working all hours of the day and night. Along with my family and
neighbors, I believe that maintaining its current designation as a warehouse with a pre-
established right to a wood shop is not the highest and best use for the property.
I have a great appreciation for architectural beauty and integrity of Salem neighborhoods.
Moreover, I am delighted to see how careful the City has been in lending its support to
the redeveloping properties in our historic city.
I think this project would be an asset to the community, both visually and functionally,
allowing new residents to share in the beauty of Salem. I encourage City Council and its
various applicable committees to approve the redevelopment of this important site.
I would appreciate it if the Planning Department would take the time to consider and lend
its support to this important project. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Yours Truly,
Paul Falconer
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8 .5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.48/2148 - Release Date: 06/02/09 06:47 :00
1
I
Danielle McKnight
From: mar1<verk4WObVWr
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 10:07 AM
To: Danielle McKnight
Cc: Michael Sosnowski; Lynn Duncan; Jane Guy; info@historicsalem.org
Subject: Zoning Variance Application 3 Webster Street
Re: Zoning Variance Application 3 Webster Street I EC EE I V E
JUN 1 5 2009
PT. 04=FL ANIJAING
COA46iUN iYOE`ELOPMEA)T
Dear Chairperson Stein,
I am writing in support of the variance application to permit the residential
redevelopment of the property at 3 Webster Street. 3 Webster Street is a historically
significant property which in its present use and condition is not an asset to our
residential neighborhood. The proposed redevelopment represents a viable and creative
opportunity to preserve this piece of Salem's history, create a use that is consistent
with the residential character of the neighborhood, and that is a positive investment in
the City of Salem as a whole.
Historical Significance
The building at 3 Webster Street was originally constructed in 1887 as a trolley barn for
the Lynn and Boston Electric Railway Company. The building was among several facilities
in the neighborhood that serviced the street railway system trolleys. With the demise of
the streetcar system, most of these buildings were demolished and the sites redeveloped
with residential uses . 3 Webster Street is the last surviving building in the neighborhood
associated with the street railway system. The building is a contributing element in the
Bridge Street Neck National Register Historic District and is included in the Inventory of
Historical and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth.
The best means of preserving historic buildings is to ensure that they remain in active
use. The proposed redevelopment for residential use represents a sensitive re-use that
1
would result in the rehabilitation of this building while preserving its historic and
architectural character. It is highly unlikely that the continuation of permitted uses
such as warehousing or a woodworking shop will result in a similarly significant
investment in this historic resource. In all likelihood the property will experience only
nominal investment and continue to deteriorate over time.
Viable Reuse
The developer has proposed a reasonable redevelopment proposal given the unique
characteristics and constraints of the property. The developer has sought to address
neighborhood concerns over the density of the proposed project by reducing the number of
units to a total of 6 residential units vs. the 8 units as originally presented in
neighborhood meetings. While many in the neighborhood have suggested 4 units as a more
appropriate number, given the size of the building, and the considerable investment
required to rehabilitate the structure for residential use, clearly such a scheme is not
economically viable. The current proposal strikes a reasonable compromise.
Residential use vs. continued warehousing or other light industrial use
3 Webster Street is an anomaly in the neighborhood; it is a remaining vestige of the late
19 th c. light industrial uses that were common in the Collins Cove area that is now
surrounded by residential uses. In recent years the building has been used for warehousing
and a woodworking shop. While these uses have been characterized as low intensity with
relatively little impact on the neighborhood, with the sale of the building there is no
guarantee that similar future uses will be as benign. Such continued use presents the very
real prospect of future nuisance for both immediate abutters and the neighborhood as a
whole.
By virtue of its mid block location, the continued permitted use of the property for light
industrial or warehouse purposes is inconsistent with the existing residential character
of the neighborhood. Redevelopment with a residential uses will establish a consistent and
compatible land use in this part of the neighborhood.
2
The redevelopment of 3 Webster Street for residential use will result in a major
investment in the property and the neighborhood, positively effecting property values and
increasing the tax base for the City of Salem. The continuation of currently permitted
warehouse or light industrial uses will not result in a similar investment in the
property. As previously noted such continued use is only likely to result in nominal if
any investment and continued deterioration of this significant historic structure.
Parking
Given existing building and site constraints, the developer has indicated that the
provision of all required off-street parking is not feasible. The proposal as most
recently presented to the neighborhood includes three off-street parking spaces. Available
on-street parking would need to accommodate the development's other parking needs. As a
resident of Webster Street for the last 2 years, there rarely, if ever, is a problem with
available parking spaces either on Webster Street, and to a lesser extent on nearby
Pleasant Street. There may be a need to address parking issues through other measures such
as the implementation of resident parking restrictions, but concerns over parked cars
should not be the overriding factor in assessing the merits of this development proposal.
The overall benefit to the neighborhood and preserving this historic building should be
a clear priority over automobiles.
I trust that the Zoning Board of Appeals will take these comments into consideration as
it deliberates this variance request. Thank you for your time and consid eration.
Mark Verkennis
17 Pleasant Street
Salem, MA 01970
978-594-5444
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8. 5.339 / Virus Database: 270. 12 .70/2177 - Release Date: 06/15/09 05: 54 :00
3
SalemR e RECEIVED
Kenneth C. Foster JUN 1 1 2009
Senior Vice President
Commercial Real Estate U-PT. J<PLAP.IAG &
Direct Dial: 978.720.5728 CO."•AiAO;Wl7Y 0E'WELOPUNT
Fax:978.745.7554
ken neth.foster@salemfive.eom
June 8, 2009
Robin Stein, Chair
Honorable Members of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Zoning Board of Appeals
120 Washington Street-3rd floor
Salem, Ma 01970
Re : , Lewis Legon/Hodges Court Realty - June 17, 2009 Agenda
Request for Variance for 3 Webster Street, Salem, MA
Dear Ms. Stein and Fellow Boardmembers:
I would like to take this opportunity to write this letter
of reference for Mr. Lewis Legon with regard to his application
for a variance to convert the property located at 3 Webster
Street, Salem, MA from its present commercial use to 6
residential condominiums. -
Salem Five has provided financing to Mr. Legon for 10
renovation projects since 2004 . I am pleased to report that in
each case, Mr. Legon' s work has been of the highest caliber and
in many cases, converted a neighborhood "eyesore into a very
appealing residential home. Most applicable to this project
would be the work Mr. Legon completed at 131 Derby Street, which
included a brick commercial building in the rear that presented a
similar renovation project as the subject property. Mr. Legon
completed that project successfully and turned that dilapidated
building into a desirable residential home .
Salem Five stands ready to provide financing to Mr. Legon
if he achieves the necessary approvals to complete this property
conversion. I am sure that the conversion would be beneficial to
the appearance of the neighborhood and am hopeful that Mr. Legon
can provide a conversion plan that is acceptable to all involved.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call .
Sinde 1
Kenneth C. Foster
Senior Vice President
210 Essex Street, Salem, MA 01970 • e ww.direct6anking.com
Telephone 800.322.BANK and 978.745.5555
Offices in Boston, Danvers, Hamilton/Wenham, Lynn, Peabody, Salem, Saugus, Swampscott
RECEIVED
JUN 1 1 2009
June 5, 2009
DEPT. V PLNOUG g
COVOi UNITYDEVELOPnQcfI:T
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
120 Washington Street—Third Floor
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing in the interest of the conversion of#3 Webster Street, Salem to a residential
property by Mr. Lewis Legon. I have recently moved to Salem and purchased a unit
developed by Mr. Legon. I feel he will increase and improve the value of the properties
on Webster Street as he has done at#26 Andrew Street. Residents who live in the area
stop to say how pleased they are that a home that was in such disrepair has turned out so
nicely, and they feel it has given a boost to the neighborhood and, in fact, has increased
the value of their homes.
I understand the building is zoned for commercial use and that it is grandfathered for
such use. I know it would be important to me and my husband not to disrupt the
harmony of a residential neighborhood and blend it with businesses which would, I
assume, increase traffic as well as create a parking dilemma.
Salem is a wonderful old historic city with much to offer. Some of the properties are well
maintained and some are in need of repair, all at different levels. When there is
opportunity to improve a building, neighborhood and city, it is in everyone's best interest.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Rose Lordi
RECEIVED
HANNAH DIOZZI JUN 1 5 2009
20 PLEASANT STREET
SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 V,I6 l- p`E P &
G0A$i�AlilJliY Df:J[�OP�IE?IT
hannandd@msn.com
978-741-1154
To the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Dear Friends
Regretfully I am unable to attend your June 17 meeting. I have lived at 20 Pleasant Street for
8 Y2years, and have a view of the Old Trolley Building at 3 Webster Street from the front of my
house through neighboring yards. I am in favor of the application of the owner of this property
to convert the building into six residential condominiums. I feel that this is a building that is
worthy of preservation, and the plan that is in front of you appears to me to be one that would
accomplish that goal as well as be consistent with the residential character now prevalent in
the neighborhood.
I am aware that there is concern that new residents in this building will bring too many cars
with them,thus taking up already scarce parking spaces. As I look around the area at night and
in the very early morning, I observe several spaces that could be used by the residents of the
proposed condominium. I would prefer to see these being used by known residents than by
people who do not live in the neighborhood. The developer has revised his original proposal by
providing three indoor parking spaces, and I see this is as an acceptable compromise.
I also do not feel that the presence of six to twelve new people in the neighborhood would
create a loss of privacy to the immediate abutters. There is no outdoor space on the subject
property, and it seems reasonable that residents would seek outdoor recreation elsewhere-
the nearby beach,Salem Common, etc. -during the seasons of good weather. Proximity to
these areas would be part of the market appeal of the building.
Finally, in its current state,the building is not realizing its tax potential. My calculations put the
current tax revenue at approximately$5500 while six residential units averaging$250K each
would bring in three times that amount. I don't believe in packing a neighborhood with huge
numbers of units just to get more taxes; however,the building certainly is not achieving its
highest and best use at the present time.
Thank you.
Yours truly
i
Hannah Diozzi
RECEIVED
JUN 1 7 2009 Beth M. Paschal
DEPT.OY`PLAN:i`NG, L 26 Andrew St.#2R
CO"i,fiUNI OE LOPMENT
Salem, MA 01970
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
120 Washington St. 3rd Floor
Salem, MA 01970
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to show my support for the conversion of 3 Webster St into a residential building. I am in
favor of this development in that mainly it will prevent future commercial occupants which will
undoubtedly bring unpredictable noise and traffic implications for the neighborhood. Unfortunately,the
zoning board of appeals and residents have little input in the type of business.This seems a great risk for
the neighborhood.
This past winter I purchased a newly converted condominium from Lewis Legon the proposed developer
of the Webster Street project. I have lived in the area five years and was pleased to purchase in
downtown Salem close to shops, parks and restaurants yet at the same time in a pleasant residential
neighborhood.This is truly special. Mr. Legon is also a resident of Salem and in talking with him I believe
he respects the beauty and history of the Salem common area. His work on Andrew St has really perked
up the street. I see the proposed development as an opportunity for Salem to have one of its historic
buildings restored to be a show piece for the neighborhood and at the same time ensure the quality of
life neighborhood residents currently enjoy.
Sincerely,
I;W
Beth M. Paschal
Danielle McKnight
From: Mike Sosnowski [patajo@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 20099:48 PM
RECEIVED
To: Danielle McKnight
Subject: 3 webster Street JUN 1 7 2009
DEPT. G PLAJ,`�'rPIG&
Danielle, GOMIMUNITY DEVFLOPMF;NT
I am writing this letter in support of the direct abutters living on Webster Street that
are unanimously opposed to the proposed numbers of units at 3 Webster Street.
This is a very wonderfully unique historic property that should be developed with a keen
eye to keeping the historic nature intact. Without reciting the long history I am always
in support of any project that would maintain our heritage. However I do not want that
reasoning to be used as leverage to allow more units than zoning allows.
The property is zoned R-2 and as such would be proper for 1 to 2 units maybe
3 if all of them could have off-street parking. I have received many letters from those
that support the current plan and the point that should be made is that they do not live
on Webster Street and most have off street parking so any negative impact would not affect
them. Some have suggested that I could create resident sticker parking to help solve the
parking issue. That won't happen.
The topic of it reverting to commercial use is not on the table as there has been no
commercial use for more than two years and as such the grandfathering has expired.
Commercial use is no longer a permitted use.
Some claim that the site is in such disrepair that it is a source of rats and other
unwanted vermin. The health department on this very same issue identified the source of
the rats as a Spring Street address. That is being handled separately.
Michael Sosnowski
Councillor Ward Two
17 Collins St, Salem, MA
(o) 978-745-6182
patajo@comcast.net
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8 .5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.76/2183 - Release Date: 06/17/09 05:53:00
1
Ann Marshall Sousa
117 Webb Street RECEIVED
Salem Ma 01970
JUN 1 5 2009
To: City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals BFPT.(k PLRt.111;M3 g
Re:Variance for 3 Webster Street roe as filed b Peter Co etas GOIdi�Bt�"411"'D r
property►�' Y P �E L<)N�Cr)IT
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing to express my opposition to the changing of the zoning for 3 Webster Street I
have detailed below my three main concerns for a change in the zoning of the property,
namely spot zoning,density issues and parking
First, I would like to note that the neighborhood has a history of accommodating
commercial zoning.As an abutter to Hayden Safe and Lock I can vouch that they have been
a great neighbor with little impact on the neighborhood. Landry and Acari served the
neighborhood well and the neighborhood has recently voted to approve a new commercial
use (music school) for the building.
Secondly,the proposed changes violate the city's master land use plan (being R-2)and the
proposed density is not in keeping with the current zoning.The neighborhood is R2 and
allowing anything greater than R2 will have an adverse effect on the neighborhood and
would not be in keeping with the Webb-Webster district Again,the neighborhood has
voiced this opposition by not allowing the property on the corner of Pleasant and Webster .
to change its zoning to R3.
Finally,I would like to address the community impact of allowing 6 units.The addition of
six dwelling units in an already densely populated area would have a decidedly negative
impact on property values.
Parking is a large issue. I am legally allowed to build on my property and put a cub
cut on Webster Street. The proposed development assumes the availability of too many
parking spaces with no room for existing members of the neighborhood.
Another community impact is trash and recycles.At 6 units there could be
potentially 12 trash barrels and 6 or more recycle bins.They would take up the entire
sidewalk and further burden city resources.
One density issue is snow removal. Presently,the excess snow from Parker court,
Pleasant Street and Webb Street is placed on Webster Street. It effectively takes up 4 or 5
parking spaces. If the city were to plow to the curb it would make the sidewalk impassable.
Additionally 3 Webster Street is contiguous with the property line.In order to properly
remove the snow,the sidewalk would be impassable or there would be a parking space
eliminated.
Finally,another density issue is increased traffic to the street. The street is already
used as a cut through for traffic from the Willows and the Common. Add to that traffic from
the newly approved Music school.
In closing I would like to say that I feel the good of the community will not be served by this
proposal.I am opposed to changing the zoning.
Ann Marsh�`^-C
June 11,2009 RECEIVED
JUN 1 6 2009
DFPT. OC PLAN11;NG
Celia M. Erwin COf.4iJiLUT`!DE'WELOPPAENT
4 Webster Street
Salem, MA 01970
This is in regards to the petition for a variance on June 17,2009,for 3 Webster Street.
I do not approve of this change to make the Warehouse into 6 condo units. It was first aired to all the
neighbors at the meeting on May 9h with Mr. Legon. At this meeting he informed the neighbors that he
would like to convert the old warehouse into 8 condo units. When people did not like the idea, he came
back with to the neighbors at the second meeting that he could not go lower that 6 units. This second
meeting was held on May 23,2009.
Most people are concerned that there will not be enough parking on the street,and that is my main
concern,among a few others.
On most mornings,there are at least 10-13 cars parked on Webster Street. There were 13 cars parked
on May 23rd in the early morning before the meeting. My fear is that when the music studio is up and
running(in the former Landry and Acari business space on Pleasant Street),the neighbors on Pleasant
Street will lose their parking spaces. In turn,they will be coming to Webster Street looking for parking.
Some people already park on Webster Street as the overflow from Pleasant Street grows.
Another concern that I have is that this is an R2 zone. If this petition is agreed upon and passed to make
3 Webster Street more than 2 condos,what will happen to the other properties in the area that could
also be sold and condos of various quantities proposed. An example would be Hayden Lock and Key on
Webb Street. The neighbor on the corner of Webster and Webb has a large lot. What's to say that this
wouldn't happen. It certainly would sustain a sizable condo situation.
All of this could/would change our wonderful close knit,family neighborhood. Which,is just how
everyone here seems to like it.
Please see that each member of the Board of Appeal receives a copy of this letter. I feel that it would
not be a waste of everyone's time if these issues are discussed before the June 17 meeting.
Thank you for your time.
RECEIVED
Department of Planning & Community Development June 15, 2009 JUN 1 6 2009
City Hall Annex
120 Washington St. fIEPT.Or PEAfJt`ING&
Salem MA 01970
CO{RiAMIT Y DE'fcLOPMENT
RE: THE DEVELOPMENT OF 3WEBSTER STREET FROM COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE TO 6
RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS.
We, Donald& Tina Tucker of 5 Webster St., neighbors/abutters of 3 Webster St., Salem MA are against
the development of 3 Webster St. into a 6 unit condominium complex.
The reasons we are against this are as follows: this proposal will not meet the minimum lot requirements
of a lot area of 7500 sq ft. Per dwelling unit in the R-2 district.
The area of the lot is only 5,000 sq ft, which would result in a lot area of only 833 sq ft,per dwelling.
The city of Salem Parking requirement of 1 % spaces per unit will not be met as the lot is totally
occupied by the building which leaves no room for exterior parking spaces. The density of the
neighborhood cannot support another 6-9 cars. Parking spaces are currently limited and we have
overflow parking from Pleasant Street, Webb Street and Spring Street now.
The board recently approved the application to have a Music Studio move into the Landry& Arcari
building on Pleasant St. and as they have not finished their renovations,we have yet to feel the impact
from students and parents parking on our street. Wintertime and snow removal is another huge problem
on Webster Street. We end up with the snow from both Pleasant Street and Webb Street every storm. If
you add 6-12 more cars where are they going to park? Where are they going to put the snow that
currently sits in front of that building? Also think about the traffic impact you are adding to a very short
street that already acts as a shortcut for Webb Street and Pleasant Street.
The board refused an application to turn 17 Pleasant St. into a 3 family. If this is approved, we will now
have two other lots that could be turned into 4-5-or 6 family units. This will change the whole
neighborhood and affect everyone who has lived here for many years.
There are no setbacks from the surrounding properties at all. The first floor windows are right in our
back yard and the builder is proposing to put four balconies adjacent to our side of the building. We
would lose all of our privacy. Where would fire escapes let out, into my back yard?
Why can't this building become a two family? As it is designed now, the rear egress lets out into (9
Spring Street) a neighbors back yard. Would anyone on this board allow neighbors to enter and leave
through their yard and down their driveway on a daily basis? There can be no landscaping, as there is
absolutely no land with this building. The plans show trees on both sides of the front of the building. If
you look at the front of the building one tree would be in our driveway and the other tree would be next
to a hydrant in the Cox's driveway. The plans do not depict the true space in the front of this building.
The proposed front balcony on the front of the building would be within 6 feet of the high power and
telephone lines.
Comments have been made about the historical value of the building. There is nothing left of original
structure except the outside shell. The proposal states that it needs to be totally gutted in order to
accommodate building 6 units, if anything historic is left inside, it would then be removed for this
modern renovation. What happens to all the historical value at that point?
Our home, at 5 Webster St., was originally a machine shop when we first purchased from Peter Copelas
28 years ago. When our machine shop outgrew the building, we converted the 5,600 square foot
building back into a single-family home. 3 Webster St. would make a beautiful two-unit building but not
a 6 unit building with small low cost 877 square foot condos. Let's remember, the whole reason for 6
units is the bottom line for the developer. I am sure the developer would do a wonderful job at the site,
but let's all realize, he is only here to make money. He will not feel the impact on the neighborhood
when he sells the units and leaves. We are the people who will have to deal with the end result. What
will happen to the property value of the rest of the neighborhood after they put 6 small condos in with no
yards, no off street parking and no privacy? We believe a project like this will decrease all the current
house values in the neighborhood.
It is understood that whether or not this proposal goes through, the building will still be up for sale. If
sold as is to another buyer, the neighborhood could benefit from this. Whoever purchases this for a
warehouse/woodworking shop would have to bring the building up to current code and go before the
board to set the working hours, etc. Then maybe the building would finally get cleaned up. The current
owner who has owned this building for 28 years and has never done anything to bring the building up to
code or even make the building look decent for our neighborhood.
We would appreciate the planning board taking the time to consider all options before granting this
project approval.
Presently, this proposal, in our opinion, does not fit the needs of the neighborhood.
Regards,
Tina and Donald Tucker
5 Webster St.
Salem MA 01970
i I
ZONING PACKAGE
i
DR=
M LIST
n x aEvancx(Ddsnw*) 144
STER
STREET
ELEvdmKml tp�75E'UI IS-11
�r ELL�varrm eE7uSn�r a-2
WEB �sr E6.EVk4nCJN< a e-�
SOUT M Evans aFw9nW-1s A-3
Sa-170 ELL.EVAT49 C Dl 5-3
eAS4 EVa +DCONDOS Easr ELEvanont c=RVra
r
3 WEBSTER STREET
SALEM, MA
MAY 299 2009
Prrh" &
WAMLff
ARCIUrEM LW
E 32 RM sr.
&AUEK MA OM
478 - 744 - 8482
II
"
X15TING
DI
LUJ
LU
�I
243 MAY, 2009
®®
PITMAN 4
WARVLEY
ARGH s T8 LLG
48'-4'
32 041,11I1CH 5T.
MM Ill -1411 8982
A NORTH ELEVATION (EXI5TINCz)
i
i
i
EXI5TIN �
Ae
O ,I
LU0 1,0
caO
w
29 MAY, 300
PITMAN 4
WARDLEY
32 GCI-! 5T
99,-6, 918 44 - 89 2
rA-% WEST ELEVATION (EXISTING)
i
i
EXISTING �
� d
Z
73
---�
LU
2S MAY, 2003
PITMAN 4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
WAFVLEY
ARCHI rCM U-C
3g3�GMFZCN 3T.
9l8 -rt4�-
A SOUTH EVATION (EXISTING)
s
EXISTING �
r'
I
L
ffl q@
El El El -- I MAY, 2
0
PITMAN
wARDLEY
332qLCg� N T
9'18 -rt44
a WEST ELEVATION (EXIBTlt`G)
SCALE: l/Wil
i
III
d)
Trcuey d)
HJ a
O �
U d)
I I
uj
Ri
O2Ay, 200eI � IB I 3 II
PITMAN �
WAFVLEY
AfW:lQMM U-0
32� H ®
T.
AAL-pm-
3�8 -rt44 - ow
a NORTW ELEVATION (FROP06ED)
SCALE-
J
I
II
i�
'I
----- --- ---- ------- ---- --------- ---- - -----------�-=s -----�_--�___-_ _---- �___=_-____-_=-=-__==____=_----
-----= ------- =---------------
--- __- - ----=_---- -__ -=---_--- ______=-___--_= - _ -- - =-- - _- ----- �
s======_ass s==_== ===- - - -___=== =_=
�_ _ _===—=
�lill 11 �IIII� 1111 'III1111�---- ,VIII IIII 111 ,E �� —
-- _=
=_==' i I e�111� _ _Il, �lil� :III ��III _ _'.��' _ �Illl �llr VIII ��I X11 ��11
Till �11 _ _ _ _
1
._------_------------
�i -------- _ __________________- -___s-____-__-____ _______ �___ _____ _ ___ HEREHER .11a________ �_-___--_
__ _ _ ______- __ -- ___ _- ___ -_ _____ _
_y=_____- ______ s_____s_ __ _ _ _ e=____ _ __�__ __ ____ _ ___ _ ____ __ __ ___ __ _ ____-_ ilinum: __ ___-______ -___
MMEM Me
SM BE Ill ll i:
____ s_ __ _ _ ..........._ _ _ _ ____ __ - _____
-------- =_-s=_v==v ____-________- --�___ ___--Hal M=v=_ _ _-_"" _ __________ ___ _ _____- __ �__ _ ____mss=
-_ _ _- _s------ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __-E. - ____-_- __._ _-_- ___ �_ _SL __- __- __- ________ -
___- -s-=_'_ _�__ _ __�__�-�__ _____- s __ L---_S=" ---�- ---'-- -s='=S= s'Ts� =s ---------
- a'
Vis_----_- -
.�o I
-r o__
-- -- — — —_ ---- — _MOM
=� --- 11� :___—=___— i------- --_--- _— ---
--__ —_- 1111 _ __ __ —_ — -- ---
_ - -- - --- --
- -
- MEl
-
==
---------------------
= =
- -- ---
i - -
I
it _r I
i
I
■Li
i
i
i
lu
I
L al
d)
4-3OLIU
TL
UJ
U �
ca
i
25 MAY,, 2�
PITMAN 4
u1A7L I-Y
"C
.3322GIACN ST.
9'i8 -'fes
a SOUTH EVATNON (PiROPOSED)
SCALE. V8r,�
I
i
I
'II II
S�
11
1 i1
----- -- --- -------_- --�s=r--_----s err� r -------
i
r_.:__r -
i:= _ _ s i. �. r •—i 1111111,' 1111111 sr.
r�-
_.,-__ -
-_ X11 I_���_'- -.
� __I _ --r-
I'�=r, ---- Iii , ', 'I�_�_• r •
_ _ I— =---- I' I sir• I -- ��c— : I '' s r I
I '
____ , Int I: ���,. ����: �. :III !� I�! __ -r--s'�•- � �.,I
-_ RMOR ME
' - -- -- s_ -- __- s _==r_ -r_- r __-:rr___rr--- rr_a�- - _:_ rr:-rr rr mrr-- =-r---= -=
E-M
-_ =s
_ -
_:_-
- ------_ - --- ---- ---- ----------
. - -- --- - -- - -- -=- -- r--
- _-- - _r--- - -- - =--=r--- -- ----- ---- __ ------ == ---- - ----- -- -- -- ......=--- = - - -- = ---- - -- - - -- --
-_ --- -- r- - -- --=- r.. ---- - --
_ - _ -- - _= _ _
_ _ _ N
----
____ __ __ _ ___ 'r- -_ ME - - r
LEE
Now m
r_:_sx= ss:s____ :_� .-___ ____' �s�ss� �rrr______a- - _ _ r_ = '7. r-r::
---------------
_ ar== Irl r-
___ -
-
_ r;11 = � _ �I r--= = r=-r---�s I i�=ss ss�� -r ___ I= = =_= - -..•
,�, � 11' _ _ I'._ � Ir ■I it■Ill
I � 1
i ! I
ISI■' - ■I
I■■
MAP 36 LOT 460
MAP 36 LOT 461 7 SPRING STREET CONDOMINIUM
LISA MERRITT
9 SPRING ST.
50'
MAP 36 LOT 466
AREA = 5000 t S.F.
;o o MAP 36 LOT 467
DUNCAN & CYNTHIA COX
1 WEBSTER ST.
S _ MAP 36 L+J I 465
DONALD & TINA TUCKER
5-7 WEBSTER ST. 1' t
#3
1' t 50'
1
WEBSTER STREET
ZONING DISTRICT — R2
PLOT PLAN OF LAND
t� Ye
OF A14 . 3 WEBSTER STREET
I CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDINGS GGml
HEREON ARE LOCATED ON L. SALEM PREPARED FOR
THE GROUND AS SHOWN. raSMITH43 a LENS LEGON
�'�'"F n�G1576tt4f JF;1�
2 SCALE 1a = 20' MAY 26, 2009
/7 SSOP++iL LAN ✓
S Z� 05 ,L NORTH SHORE SURVEY CORPORATION
DA REG. PROF. LAND SURVEYOR 14 BROWN STREET — SALEM
978-744-4800
#3269