2 17 ATLANTIC STREET LUSSIER STREET - ZBA s � .
MLA
s4- .
.goNmr��o CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
7
120 WASHINGTON STREET. 3RD FLOOR
� q SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01 970
N TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595
FAX: 978-740-9846 �t
KIMBERLEY ORISCOLL 2010 JUL —8 A Q; 18
MAYOR
Decision 4o Extend f-11 E r,.
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals CI7 Y CLErsr;. SAL FI'Al t ASS
Petition of ROY LAPHAM requesting Variances from minimum lot area, minimum lot
area per dwelling unit, and minimum rear and front yard setback requirements to allow
for construction of a two-family residence on the property located at 2 ATLANTIC
STREET (AKA 17 LUSSIER STREET) in the Residential Two-Family Zoning District.
July 30, 2010
Pam Shute
1 Lussier Street
Salem, MA 01970
Re: 2 Atlantic Avenue (AKA 17 Lussier Street)
Extension of Variance
On Wednesday, August 19, 2009, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Salem voted in favor to
approve the application of Roy Lapham, 2 Atlantic Street (AKA 17 Lussier Street), Salem, MA, for
Variances from minimum lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling unit, and minimum rear and front yard
setback requirements to allow for construction of a two-family residence in the Residential Two-Family
Zoning District. A Decision dated September 1, 2009 was filed with the City of Salem Clerk's Office on
September 1, 2009.
Since the issuance of the Variances, the property has been deeded from Roy Lapham to Pam Shute.
The Decision is valid for one year from the date of the Decision unless extended by the Board.
On June 16, 2010, the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously to extend the variances
granted on September 1, 2010 for six (6) months to March 1, 2011.
A COPY OF THIS DECISION TO EXTEND HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD
AND THE CITY CLERK.
Robin Stein, Chair
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Pursuant to the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit
granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk has
been tiled with the Essex South District Registry of Deeds.
toNmrA,q CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
. » SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01 970
TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595
W� FAX: 978-740-9846 pp p
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL 1001 SEP - I P I: 29
MAYOR
CITY CLP1iK, SP,L "i, t,,,ss
September 1,2009
Decision
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Petition of ROY LAPHAM seeking Variances from minimum lot area,minimum lot
area per dwelling unit, and minimum rear and front yard setback requirements to
allow for construction of a two-family residence on the property located at 2
ATLANTIC STREET (AKA 17 LUSSIER STREET) in the Residential Two-Family
Zoning District.
Petitioner seeks Variances pursuant to the Salem Zoning Ordinance, §6-4,Table I:
Residential Density Regulations.
Statements of fact:
1. Paul Fermano,the project's architect,presented the petition.
2. In a petition dated July29, 2009,the petitioner requested Variances from minimum
lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling unit, and minimum rear and front yard
setback requirements to allow for construction of a two-family residence.
3. A public hearing on the above mentioned Petition was opened on August 19,2009,
pursuant to Mass General Law Ch. 40A, % 11. The pubic hearing was closed on
August 19,2009, with the following Zoning Board of Appeals members present:
Robin Stein (Chair),Beth Debski,Becky Curran,Bonnie Belair (alternate),and
JimmyTsitsinos (alternate).
4. At the hearing,Board members noted that the parking spaces shown on the plan
were smaller than required and that no buffer was shown. They expressed their
preference that the parking area be altered to meet these requirements and noted that
relief from tandem parking would be necessary in order to allow for these changes.
5. No one voiced opposition to or support of the petition at the meeting,and no letters
regarding the project were received by the Board from residents.
6. At its meeting on August 19,2009,the Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor and
none (0) opposed to grant Variances under§64, Table I: Residential Density
Regulations.
2
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:
1. 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.
2. The applicant mayvary the tem-is of the Residential Two-Family District to
construct the proposed house,which is consistent with the intent and purpose of the
City of Salem Zoning Ordinance.
3. 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 construction of the two-family house as proposed,the requested
Variances from dimensional requirements for structures in the Residential Two-
Family zone are granted. Additionally, relief from parking requirements is granted to
allow for four(4) tandem parking spaces.
In consideration of the above,the Salem Board of Appeals voted, five (5) in favor(Stein,
Curran,Belair, Debski and Tsitsinos) and none (0) opposed,to grant petitioner's requests for
Variances 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. 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. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained.
7. Petitioner shall obtain street numbering from the City of Salem Assessor's Office
and shall display said number so as to be visible from the street.
8. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to,the Planning Board.
3
9. Petitioner is to provide a landscape plan with construction drawings prior to
issuance of a building permit.
Robin Stem, Chair 2f
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 Permit 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.
r
PLOT PLAN OF LAND IN SALEM,MA.,
DATE: 7-27-09
SCALE: 1" = 30'
OFFSETS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE BY TAPE SURVEY
BAY STATE SURVEYING ASSOCIATES INC.
100 CUMMINGS CENTER,SUITE#316J
BEVERLY,MA., 01915
txf+cb
JAMS
Pd .26°95
0 SbR�w.
i
kN
4
�� 1 SL T SZ.So
>> LoT Z
2� Zi6) s7.so t�'�
CA 0
rAc SZSo � —
�5
113 77
qo
J
Ivo
w
J
4
4`5 IIs ,g
At
I5 Iy �- -1
g-z.Sc� \ 8S2 So
A TL. AANT/
City of Salem, MA 7/27/2009
Interactive Map
FOREST RVE
o
C
N �
Q
' ATLAPyTIG ST ��
SEWEnEAS[�EjtT � �l
A
9
0 166 yy f
feet e
oe
Property Information
Prop"ID
Location
MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY
NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT
Because of dffe t update achadulm anent pmperty
asseswrents may not reAeG recent tl gee to pmperty
ooundades.Check with are Bowl of Asaeasas m con@m
eoundades used at time of assessment Q
•
Red ec ®r
• Education®the Speed of Business*"
'forgotten over the years. Green building design and green building products are rediscovering these benefits. A building
design that takes climatic conditions into consideration requires less energy to operate,while providing improved lighting,
indoor air quality, and healthier places to live and work.
The Future of Green Building Materials
The architecture of the Industrial Revolution and the scientific revolution expresses the values and world views of society at
that time. Future "revolutions" are likely to impact the building industry as much as those preceding. New fields of scientific
investigation such as holographic philosophy,virtual reality, and chaos theory,may alter our perspective dramatically—and so
our building. The information revolution of the computer age might alter our working relationships and daily interactions and
the corresponding need for certain types of buildings. Space exploration may birth new technologies,new needs,and new
world(or worlds)view. Collapsing economies and dwindling natural resources may salute an energy revolution,impacting
building design and promoting new markets for renewable energy products.
The design of buildings individually and collectively(urban design)reflects our culture,our consistently shifting attitudes
about issues beyond the simple need for shelter. It also reflects the very real and very significant economic and environmental
factors. Traditionally, economic and environmental issues have been isolated from each other.More and more,we are coming
to understand how closely linked they are. Any one of the possible future revolutions just cited will have economic and
environmental components. The difference from previous eras,however, is that we are more likely to recognize them as they
occur.
�, "' i+�4,4Over the last five years or sow a new field of accounting has developed. It is called enrironmental
Sacco' ting and ft is supported by many economists andpolitic—'ians. Basically,environmental
�}accounting revises the financial systems in this country, (taxes,prices,GNP evaluations, etc.)to re
o •.� the value of forests, minerals,clean air and water, erosion of soils, and so forth. The theory requires a
complete restructuring of global economic systems. Obviously, without a magic wand, such a
wholesale restructuring is unlikely.Nevertheless, piecemeal applications of environmental accounting
re becoming more numerous. Piecemeal applications are already directly impacting the building
dustry in the sun rights, sewer rights, and pollution rights instituted at the local levels in cities such as
a�r4®p ew York, Houston, and Los Angeles.
apt�O PBroader examples will have indirect,but ultimately more significant, impacts in the building industry.
'Y Broader applications of environmental accounting include:
.t
• Elimination offederal subsidies to forestry, mining, and various agricultural industries : Historically such subsidies were
enacted to encourage the claiming and taming of Wild West lands.
• BTU tax: The taxation of energy and more particularly the pollution it spawns—is also a recurring subject politically.
• Raw materials tax: This is an ideal discussed by environmentalists and economists more than politicians.
• Pollution tax: Like a raw materials tax, a pollution tax works on the principle of taxing that which is undesirable, versus
that which is desirable (such as earnings).
• Trading credits: Various examples of trading credits are already emerging in both the private and pubic arenas. When
items such as solar access, sewer rights,wetlands,and "trash" are assigned a limit, they immediately gain financial
value.
• Full disclosure of corporate environmental impact: This is a significant issue for many corporations, and tends to be
driven more by economic vectors than by political debate.
• Green leases: Green leasing of building products offers a potentially profit-able new merchandising approach. It
represents stronger,more lasting business relationships, and provides the groundwork for better environmental
stewardship by all parties.
•• Revised GNP: The Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Statistics; is developing measures of economic value
of environmental assets, such as renewable resources, nonrenewable resources,air quality,and water quality.
Page 43 of 46 ,
I , S W-C-18' E -
-I----• —•--•--•--•--•--•-1-•--•--•--•— —•--•--•--•— I
i i 3
X
26'-0' _ II'-6° i S v ti
N - -'-;'--'--------------------'- '-- ----------'-- J
4D r r
15'
M__1 M.. i 3m' Min. Rear Yard Setback i > ` z
a -m/� P ! Front Yard Setback ' i W n
A I tP I I % (mmm
z 1 i m
E I
!
S i I
i
N I I
`+ i iy 4 i
-n ! I
T_ I Q1 I obi I
rn I !
O ! o iR By1j1� 1 3
33 t�ij I I
1— nmbT'v m ! !
��jj
_ I
�l � A ___= 11 11
N 1
1 I
!7Q I I I j > j
10 I ! r 10
ei i m3 ai ;
❑ 1
I I
r 1
- 1
N i
N -------1 =--------- 1
Ll
m
I
�4 I 0 I
I I
9'-(D• I i- of
IM
m
--------------
r I
• < 1
Z 1 I
! I I
1 1
1
1 !
I I (Y _N 0 3
I I I tv Q 1 03 �
—•--•--•—L•--•--•--•—--- N ---- --- W-
---— ---—--— -------- — ----1------ —
ATLANTIC STREET
D � 9 $9c
CDn, o m —n
z aN � -^ - _ Tp � r
S N r a
= REQUESTED ZONING RELIEF SCHEDULE PGF+A
ISSUE TABLE I - FRE51DENTIAL DENSITY i2EQ'TS RELIEF WOUESTED for
R2 DISTRICT DIMS.per DESIGN
_ MIN.LOT AREA 15)00 SF 5;50 OF CONSULTING
MIN LOT AREA/DWELLMG UNIT 1500 SF 2b25 SF AKHffECTS
MIN.LOT WIDTH 100 Fr 100 FT
MAX.LOT COVERAGE 35 % 31.1 % PAL +MlB
MIN FRONT YAW SETBACK 15 FT 9 FT r LUS61ER ST �dYi 6�n•apen•imiuAmrgn
15 Fr e ATLANTIC ST nr»mea.e nsew.Arw m ZM
MM SIDE YARD SETBACK 10 FT 10 Fr H.
MIN.REAR YARD SETBACK 30 Fr 115 FT
MAX BLDG NEIGNT lin Feet) 35 Fr 30'-81t
MAX BLDG NEIGNT (stories) 212 Stories 21/2 Stories
MR DISTANCE BETWEEN
51-069 ON LOT. 30 FT N/A
r
1
RXF
O
__- "b xxnKax
BEDRM2 $FDINING RM
ORM #3 KITCHEN
M. BATH `-----
o A 2-FAMY FMDECE DNM ra-
nor+ffm
v- r❑ Il LUSSIPR STfET
HALL
SALEM,MA 01910
W.I. Low
EDpMA5TE2
T
R " .i LIVING RM
M
------`- ' -- '""� APARTMENT FLATS
SECOND FLOOR
PLAN
PROJECT NQ 09-009
SCALE: 118'=1'-0'
DRAM BY: pgr
155UE DATE: 01121/09
2nd FLOOR PLAN
104-0' pL.�„� A.2
h�
PGF+A
CONSULTING
ARCHITECTS
PAUL G ffl WVO+ASSOgaIES
nFnm eu.e MsbMee4w mBB-L79
Rae imesl-arae
wo Pr...o.�nmw
STACK VENTS
TOILET EXN. (BEY'D)
"v
cA
s.1Amo_ame____ _ _________ _ ___ _ ______
r p4'
'HPPK A 7-FAM LY FESMOC.E DEWN ra-
a"°2. ----- - - - - ------- ------- - - ----- - - ------- - - - --- - -- - IT LUSSIER STREET
SALEM,MA 01910
dF13
i ® j
---- —
APARTMENT FLATS
. � - - - - - - - - — - -
` FRONT EXTERIOR
� III I I III i Q .
ELEVATION
I Q1
1 I
I
.wam em sVe I _ � 1
L ---------------
PROJECT N4: 09-009
SCALE: VS'=I'-0'
DRAUN BY: pgr
ISSUE DATE: 01,71/09
FRONT ELEVATION �.�
1/4'=1'-0'
PGF+A
�a�rr�cTs ,
PAIL fi F�ilNi0+AS90CWTE
n r�ev.a n.nMee4 ea e5a-ms
Rae -6�-0ero
- s.en p'e�
STACK VENT
STACK VENT TOILET EXH,
HOODS.
KITCHEN EXHAUST
VENT HOODS
tfJ
RN Ar!-Rom- --__ ___________ _______ _ _ _ _____________ _
M4'
� m
Fm mm
' A:-FAK�Y I OB=DESIM ra-
Royfum"
-—-— ------- - -—-— — — — — — —-—-—- - - - - -—-—-—-—-—- — — — — — 11 LUSSIER STREET
SALEM,MA 01910
APARTMENT FLAT5
REAR EXTERIOR
ELEVATION
I I I,a �• '
I I III �
I I III
I I 41
I I I
-—-— —
aw — — --- — --- ---------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ppo,ECTNg: OB-009
SCALE: AS NOW
DRAIN BY: par
ISSUE DATE: 0181/09
REAR ELEVATION
1,8 A.4
r
PGF+A
CONSULTING
NnffECTS
PAIS C�F9#IANO+ASSOgAle5
A RKe OYwt t'IsbYeetl.M11 0%-m!
Fbr 18F69FPJtB
wn pre�soramx,r
.� tt
flIL/,111L_RLiF___ _ ______ _____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _____________________ ___ fMATG_FlRR
III] E A 2-FAMILY lWM>8 E MM for
6� W Qp
R01'tBFANCRIAPfU�I
"` M�
Il LUSSIER STREET
_—_—_—_— _—___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _�_ _ —_—_—_ _ _—_—_—_—_—_ _ _ _ _ _ _
SALEM,MA 01910
----------- — -- ---- -------- ----------------- - -- ��--
APARTMENT FLATS
w
TYPICAL d ALTERNATIVE
e a l II 61 END ELEVATIONS
I
I I
r�x�v®�rs✓n I I I I __ I wL mneve
L� _t _J L----------------------------------
PROJECT NQ 09-009
SCALE: AS NOTED
DRAUN BT: pgf
ISSUE DATE: OT/lV09
LEFT SIDE ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION w .5
to-r-0. �C.1�