3 WHITE STREET - ZBA (2) 3 White St_ B-1
Robert Ouellette
\V
C
�� � II
• C`_
l
ifs of '5ttlrm, C assadjusr##s
Poarb of C%Fprzd
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROBERT OUELLETTE FOR A
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 3 WHITE ST.
A hearing on this petition was held July 16, 1986 with tIC3 loTC� TWRR Members
present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Bencal, Fleming an Luzinski. notice
of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and noticgf,p4 the hearing were
properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A. CITY .Lt EH.MAS S
Petitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a Special Permit to restore and
rebuild structure within the confines of the existing foundation for use as a
single family dwelling in this B-1 district.
The Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 4-0, that there is substantial difference
between this petition and a petition submitted and subsequently denied on
February 26, 1986. The Board will hear the petition.
The provisions of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request
for a Special Permit is Section V B 10, 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 VIII F and IX D, 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, makes the following findings of fact:
1 . Parking is available;
2. Single family will conform to lot area;
3. Prior building was a single family in poor condition, new
building constructed on existing foundation would be a welcome
improvement to the neighborhood;
4. If single family is not constructed this lot would be worthless.
i -
1
DECISION ON THE PETIITON OF ROBERT OUELLETTE FOR A
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 3 WHITE ST. , SALEM
page two
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the
hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1 . The proposed use will be in harmony with the neighborhood and will
promote the convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants;
2. The relief requested can be granted without substantial detriment and
without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or
purpose of the Ordinance.
h-
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 4-0, to grant the relief
requested, subject to the following conditions:
1 . A minimum of one ( 1 ) parking space must be maintained on site;
2. Building is to set on exact foundation as shown on plan;
3. Applicant must surrender building permit for two family;
4. A Certificate of Occupancy must be obtained.
SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED
,�Aames B. Hacker, Chairman
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
APPEAL FRO!.1 THIS DELI SIpN, IF ANY. SF:ALL BE MADE PURSDANi TO SECS'?'! 17 OF TF:E
GENERAL F LAWS CHn?TE@ ENS. AND SR:'L '>c FIi'D a;i'tiR: ZD DAYS 1.--� THE CA7E
I.. THE OF10E O"- THE Ci-11 CLERK. - ,.,E.I,E rER,'IT
OF THiS DELIS-C cEr7'N'� TPc r _
-c cr
F
. r+ 7 is
i C'Fk c r
_ .
,;-T 1i OIYNER S CERTI
OF F.ECCRD OR IS EECORDED ANC r•'•""
BOARD OF APPEAL
q.
i
MICHAEL E. O'BRIEN a LEONARD F. FEMINO
CITY SOLICITOR 25 ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
93 WASHINGTON STREET �°' 93 WASHINGTON STREET
and and
81 WASHINGTON STREET CITY OF SALEM ONE BROADWAY
SALEM, MA 01970 MASSACHUSETTSBEVERLY, MA 01915
745-4311 745.4311
744.3383 921.1990
Please Reply to 81 Washington Street Please Reply to One Broadway
July 14 , 1986
Walter B. Power, III , Chairman
Salem Planning Board
One Salem Green
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Dear Walter:
As you are aware, there was some confusion at a recent Board
of Appeal meeting concerning the procedure for reapplications for
variances and/or special permits within two ( 2 ) years of unfavor-
able action by the Board.
While GLc40A, s16 is somewhat unclear, the recent action of
the Board has established a policy that such reapplications should
first obtain the consent of the Planning Board that specific and
material changes have occurred to warrant a rehearing by the Board
of Appeal.
My purpose in writing to you is to advise that the Planning
Board should give proper notice (newspaper, advertisement and mail-
ing) to all parties of interest before consenting to such reappli-
cations.
Very ruly yours
j c�C/Nit c EGA \ J
ichael E. O'Bri n—
MEO/jp
cc: Board of Appeal
LAW OFFICES OF 60,ARL1
GEORGE P. VALLIS
ONE CHURCH STREET
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS OILY �20
16171745-0500 RECEIVED UU
GEORGE P.VALLIS CITY OF SALEM,MASS.
JOHN G.VALLIS
May 19, 19 86
Mr. James B. Hacker, Chairman
Office of City of Salem Board of Appeal
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
Re: 3 White Street, Salem
Dear Mr. Hacker:
This is to inform you that this office represents Mr. Robert Ouellette, owner of
real estate at 3 White Street, Salem, who, you will recall, was denied his petition to
renovate a two family dwelling.
By petition filed with the Board on May 2nd Mr. Ouellette is asking the Board to
permit him to construct a single family dwelling.
I respectfully request that this matter be heard at your Board's earliest convenience
due to the hazard the unattended building poses. Thank you for your cooperation in
this matter. I
Very tr y rs, -
i
/ ,+�
GEOFGE ALLIS
GPV/cac
t,
6,0A`.i�'0 Or
July 11, 1986 j
7
Alice and Dolores Jordan, 97 DErby Street, Sa1PmeLMdk 91970
TY 0} ,Li_ 11>#1"S.
RE: Petition of Robert Ouellette 3 White ffreet, Salem
We are sorry we are unable to attend the hearing on Wednesday July 16
but wish the Board to consider our suggestions regarding the proposal
Mr. Ouellette is submitting before you this evening.
We wish that a new building will be reconstructed on this site to be
a two story building and .in architecture shape and form to be balanced
with the community that presently houses buildings built in the 1770's
and 1800.
We would like the building to be reconstructed to be built primarily to
house a family unit rather than housing for singles. With limited parking
available on the existing lot the area cannot be further burdened with
two and three cars. This lot is surrounded by housing that already taxes
the physical space on White Street. White Street alone houses, a marina
5 condos and a 2 family unit. Adjacent to the property Mackeys property
has 4 units, and 9 condos on Derby Street that abut White Street.
Vehicular traffic is crushing the immediate area.
Unfortunately for the abutters the physical plans were not submitted to
the building inspectors office by July 10, 1986. Plans were to be
submitted prior to the hearing advertisement in the local paper. I
saw Mr.Malrtineau on Thursday July 10, at 12:45 p.m. and he told me
that the pians were not as yet submitted, so it is difficult for us
to respond to the plans, but we wish for the Board to realize
our position and our concerns for our immediate neighborhood.
On March 12, 1986 Mr. Ouellette was denied a special permit to reconstruct
a two story building and to add a third story at 3 White Street, with
this decision already made by the Board we hope that the new structure
will be a two story dwelling. Enclosed is a picture of the cottage that
existed before the dwelling was torn down without a permit in 1985.
Thank you for allowing us to testify at this hearing via our letter.
l
.®'��'-may
i
n
o ,
� �
� I
ti �.
�1 '+-- �
4
� , �
� � � � �
�a < h
4 f
� , p f4
� ��� 3 Y t
,¢CEG 2BZ
1 �
.�9
a
n
�j n
1 �
(� pl
a � � �
� � � �
ao
C F �
pO i .L
��Av a r 1�
ti � p0
'� n �
� �
'° �� � o
`� - _
ii
i
i
j
j
I 1 �
t
i } I
r +
t
3-6
3-10
r �
F oQ rJ 0 n7i ow I
ELtVMTioN of
3 wH i� 51. SPLEM
FoQ
A4