LOT 56 ALMEDA STREET & HILLSIDE AVENUE - ZBA L
56 Almeda St./Hillside Ave.
(R-1 )
Ogo Dibiase /
c
OI V
i
1 Y
f r .�� -"`�"T •�„�� ,�fj10 a� ��' �!"�.�� 'j��4rr,.,•:-a>r �r �� L� r���t�
r JUN
� ;;Ii 3-•v
' CITY ;. SrF10E
MAY 17, 1977 $al t;-1, ;.j; SS.
DECISION OF THE PETITION 01' UGO & ELIO. DiBIAS_E, Ti2L'STEES OF DiPIAS13
SALEM RRALTY TRUST, CONCERNING PROPERTY LOCATED AT LOT 56 ALMEOA ST.
' A hearing on this Petition was held Tuesday, May 37, 1977, with members Jane
Lundregn, Arthur Labrecque, William Abbott, and Associate Members James Poulg::r
and Douglas Hoppe as voting members, present. Notices were sent to abutters and
others in accordance with Mas. General Laws, Chapter 808. -
Atty. Peter Beatrice represented the Petitioners before the Board.
On December 20, 1973 the Board of Appeal granted the Petitioner variance to
construct a temnsrary building 60 x 100 feet for the use of storing equipment and
building materials,together with a chain link fence 7 to 8 feet in height to be
installed around the boundry lines. The Petitioner requests that the variance
granted the Petitioner be extended an additional three year period. The Petitioner
stated that prior.- to the construction of the building, the Petitioners were constantly
sul)jectel_i to theft of building materials and damage- to equipment by vandalism.
` The Petitioner stetted that the surrounding area was under-developed on which there
were no services, sewer, water or utilities, and the Petitioner stated that the present
need for the building is just the same as when the original petition was made, and the
circumstances and conditions which existed in 1973 are still existent at this time .
Several abutters appeared in opposition to the extension of the variance. The
abutters stated in contradiction to the Petitioner that the property surrounding Lot
56 Almeda St. has become more developed and there are several homes abutting the lot
in question.
The neighbors stated that the Petitioner never constructed the fence, which was one
df the conditions of the original variance. Photographs were presented showing the pro-
perty had not been kept in a clean condition but had become a place for junk, papers, etc_ ,
. and the neighbors also stated that the empty lot had become a gathering place for teenagers
and for roudy parties.
Also, Councillor Grace stated that phase two of the sewer project in Salem includes
Almada St. and that very soon the land will be receiving sewer connections.
The Board voted unanimously to deny the request for the extension of the variance
for anadditional three years. - -
;CISION -- UGO & ELIO DIBIASE, SAL13M ItLALTY TRUST }'age 2
The Board found that the Petitioners have not lent the property in good condition
and the fence that was supposed to be constructed hai never been constructed.
The Board found that the use of the property is defi-nitely detrimental to the
surrounding neighborhood and that the dogs and hcavy equipment were a nuisance to the
neighborhood.
The Board found that the presence of the building on the lot located in an R-1
District devalued the surrounding properties which consist of single family homes_
The Board found therefore, it could not grant the variance requested, that no hard-
ship had been shown by the Petitioner and that the granting of the variance would-be
detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood and would derogate from the intent of the
Salem Zoning By-law which seeks to protect the property rights of the residences in the
single family area.
The Board therefore denies the request for the extension of the variance and orders
the Petitioner to remove the temporary building which had been used for the storage of
equipment and building materials and to restore the lot to its original state before the
granting of the variance on December 20, 1973.
DENIED
Appeal from this Decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Mass.
Gen. Laws, Chapter. 808, and shall be failed within 20 days after the date of filing of
this Decision in the office of the City Clerk.
Pursuant to Mass. General Laws, Chapter 808, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit
granted herein, shall not take effect until a copy of the Decision, hearing the certi-
fication of the City Clerk that 20 days have expires and no appeal has been filed, or
that, if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded
in the South Esser. 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.
Copies of this Decision have been filed with the Planning Board and City Clerk.
BOARD OF APPEAL -
s4---'
1-
CD rYane T. Lundregan
W /Secretary
CDof
(/
r_ s--
A U
WIIIIAM F. ABBOTT
LU Y (( (fir' JOSEPH F. DOYLE
JOHN AS GRAY. SR.
J '+C9
1 ARTHUR E. ULRECOUE
i
1 Y.7�ttI, DONALD KC:EMAN
Ac�1 PY I7t 'CS WARREN BAUGHN
EMERY P. TANCM
La
UJ J J
yct
RE: - DI BIASE - SALEM REALTY TRUST
� c,a
This is a direct appeal by DiBiase-Salem Realty Trust from the applicable
terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance . The locus of the property for which
Petitioner seeks a special permit is lot 56 on Almeda Street, an R-1 resi-
dential single family zoning district. The said site and surrounding area
are relatively undeveloped property which the Petitioner owns , and for
which there are presently no services for sewer, water or utilities. The
Petitioner wishes to erect a temporary building and chain link fence ,
seven or eight feet in height, around the boundary lines, for the storage
of equipment and building material for a period of four (4) years.
Hearing was held on this Petition on October 29 , 1973 , pursuant to notices
mailed postpaid to the Petitioner, Board Members , abutters , abutters to
abutters , and others , and advertisements were duly published in the' Salem
Evening News advising o£ this Public Hearing.
Board Members present were Chairman John P.. Gray, Sr. , William F. Abbott ,
Donald Koleman, Arthur Labrecque , and Associate Member barren Baughn.
-eorge P.. Vallis , Esquire , appeared in behalf of the Petitioner and presen-
ted the following evidence :
Petitioner wishes to construct a temporary building, sixty (60) feet by one
hundred (100) feet , for the use of storage of equipment and building mater-
ials ; he also wishesto construct a chain link fence , seven (7) to eight
(8 ) feet in height around the boundary lines . Attorney Vallis explained
that the Petitioner is a developer of the property in the immediate area ,
and needs a temporary building of such described and the chain link fence..
surrounding it for security purposes. Attorney Vallis further explained
that the Petitioner has been constantly subjected to theft of building
materials and damage to the equipment by vandalism.
Mr. Frank Rizzotti , 26 High Street , Salem, Mass . , appeared in opposition to
the granting of the variance of special permit. Mr. Rizzotti explained that
he owns property nearby and feels that the construction of a temporary build-
ing and fence would detract and decrease the value of his property. Mr.
Rizzotti ' s property is a vacant lot and he has owned it for approximately
sixty-two (62) years without ever developing it. No one else appeared in
opposition.
The Board studied the plot plan submitted by Attorney Vallis . and a copy
of the Salem Assessors ' map, also submitted by the Petitioner, and reviewed
all of the evidence that had been submitted by the Petitioner and Mr. Rizzot
After reviewing all of the evidence presented and considering carefully the
glans submitted, the Board found that a variance could be granted; without
substantial detriment to the public good , and ti'.,ithout nullifying or sub-
stantially derogatin.- from the intent of the District or the purposes of
the Zoning Ordinance , and that special circumstances and conditions exist
- 2
wh' c:": peciall} affect the land and structure to be erected which do not gen-
ci'r11 . affect other lots in the area and that literal enforcement of the pro-
Vi=' ens o£ the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship to the
n- t,* '.ioner. The Board, however, does place a condition upon the granting of
% ariance :
The fence which the Petitioner requests permission to erect around the perim-
eter of the temporary building and the temporary, building itself, subject of
this variance , will be removed fror6 the premises at a period of time no longer
tha three (3) years from,. the date of the granting of this variance .
APPEAL GRANTED WITH CONDITION.
CITY
�}OFF SALEM
- BOARD
�OF,o A
PPEAL
,i BY
(Acting) Secretary `
cam'+
ti CJ
r
U-
M
O nr CD gn
UJ +n n4
N 6
U ZUi
UJ J J
O '")
r
V {-
W
Q V
�:tCEIVcD
-1
�l ' II3 .>1f c ;rott1 Jug i 14 or FH 177
/ CITY ;irFICE
MAY 17, 1977 SALEM, MASS.
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF UGO & ELIO DiAIASE, TRUSTEES OF DiBIASE
SALEM REALTY TRUST, CONCERNING PROPERTY LOCATED AT LOT 56 ALMEDA ST.
A hearing on this Petition was held Tuesday, May 17, 1977, with members Jane
Lundregan, Arthur Labrecque, William Abbott, and Associate Members James Boulger
and Douglas Hopper as voting members, present. Notices were sent to abutters and
others in accordance with Mass. General Laws, Chapter 808.
Atty. Peter Beatrice represented the Petitioners before the Board.
On December 20, 1973 the Board of Appeal granted the Petitioner a variance to
construct a temporary building 60 x 100 feet for the use of storing equipment and
building materials,together with a chain link fence 7 to S feet in height to be
installed around the boundry lines. The Petitioner requests that the variance
granted the Petitioner be extended an additional three year period. The Petitioner
stated that prior to the construction of the building, the Petitioners were constantly
subjected to theft of building materials and damage to equipment by vandalism.
The Petitioner stated that the surrounding area was under-developed on which there
were no services, sewer, water or utilities, and the Petitioner stated that the present
need for the building is just the same as when the original petition was made, and the
circumstances and conditions which existed in 1973 are still existent at this time .
Several abutters appeared in opposition to the extension of the variance. The
abutters stated in contradiction to the Petitioner that the property surrounding Lot
56 Almeda St, has become more developed and there are several homes abutting the lot
in question.
The neighbors stated that the Petitioner never constructed the fence, which was one
of the conditions of the original variance. Photographs were presented showing the pro-
perty had not been kept in a clean condition but had become a place for junk, papers, etc. ,
and the neighbors also stated that the empty lot had become a gathering place for teenagers
and for roudy parties.
Also, Councillor Grace stated that phase two of the sewer project in Salem includes
Almeda St. and that very soon the land will be receiving sewer connections.
The Board voted unanimously to deny the request for the extension of the variance
for an additional three years.
DECISION - UGO s ELIO DIBIASE, SALEM REALTY TRUST Page 2
The Board found that the Petitioners have not kept the property in good condition
and the fence that-was supposed to be constructed had never been constructed.
The Board found that the use of the property is definitely detrimental to the
surrounding neighborhood and that the dogs and heavy equipment were a nuisance to the
neighborhood.
The Board found that the presence of the building on the lot located in an R-1
District devalued the surrounding properties which consist of single family homes.
The Board found therefore, it could not grant the variance requested, that no hard-
ship had been shown by the Petitioner and that the granting of the variance would be
detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood and would derogate from the intent of the
Salem Zoning By-law which seeks to protect the property rights. of the residences in the
single family area.
The Board therefore denies the request for the extension of the variance and orders
the Petitioner to remove the temporary building which had been used for the storage of
equipment and building materials and to restore the lot to its original state before the
granting of the variance on December 20, 1973.
DENIED
Appeal from this Decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Mass.
Gen. Laws, Chapter 808, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of
this Decision in the office of the City Clerk.
Pursuant to Mass. General Laws, Chapter 808, Section 11, the variance or Special Permit
granted herein, shall not take effect until a copy of the Decision, bearing the certi-
fication of the City Clerk that 20 days have expired and no appeal has been filed, or
that, if such an 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.
Copies of this Decision have been filed with the Planning Board and City Clerk.
BOARD OF APPEAL
r W f�
r- v
i N T.O: o .�Y (ane
ecretary
LL W
J
til 1 J Ln
1' Y
IIS
CCU of Alle}tt, �ttSsttc�juse��
�9ottrA of 1ppe i MA8
N DECISION
CITY Ct�Fn`6 CgL
MARCH 1,i, 1977 SALMr HASS. !
PETITIONER: UG6 & ELIO DEBIASE, PROPERTY LOCATED AT: Lot 56 Almelo St,
TRUSTEES OF DEBIASE
SALEM REALTY TRUST ZONED; R-1 District
MAILING ADDRESS: 71 Hancock St., Everett
A hearing on the Petition of Ugo DeBiasp and Elio DeBiase, Trustees of Salem
Realty Trust was held March 1, 1977 requesting an extension on the Special Peru granted
in X973 on property located at Lot 56, Almelo St. (R-1 District) to construct a temporary
building 60' x 1001 for the use of storage of equipment and building materia}, together
with a chain link fence 7 feet to 8. feet around the boundary lines. Said hearinq Wale
held with members Donald Eames, Douglas Hopper, James boulger and Chairman John Gray
present.
Absent: Jane Lundregan, William Abbott and Arthur Laprecque ,
Notices were sent to the Abuttorq and others in compliance with Massachusetta
General Laws, Chapter BOB.
Atty. George Vallis represented the Pptitioners before the Board. On December .
20, 1973 the Board of Appeals granted to the Petitioners. Special Permit to construct a
temporary building 60 feet by 100 feet for the use of storage of equipment and bui}ding
materials together with a chain }ink fence 7 to S feet in height around the poun4oy line.
The Petitioners were granted the Special Permit for a three year Period.
The Petitioners are requesting that this Special Permit be extended for aA addlt�gnal '
period of three years. Prior to the construction of the building and fence, the PeRitigner
claim that they were constantly subjected to theft of building material and damagq tQ
their equipment by vandalism. The surrounding area is relatively undeveloped property
in which there are no services for sewer, water, or utilities. The houses in that 4;qa
are quite a distance away from the property in question, The building would be us04 for
storage of equipment and could not be used for any other purpose. Several abuttorq
appeared in opposition to the granting of. the Special Permit.
The Board voted to deny the Special Permit requested, to wit, to extend the Speptpi
Permit which was granted in 1973 to allow the petitioners to construct and use a building
for the purpose of storing materials. The Board found that it could not grant such
Special Permit without derogating from the intent of the Salem Zoning by-law or without
harm to the surrounding neighborhood. The Board found that the present building is not
maintained properly by the'owner and said lack of maintenance causes a condition that is
detrimental to the neighborhood.
DENIED tr�►rt�r,atrs#*Mfih�dAA
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Mass. General
Laws, Chapter 808, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of the decision
in the City Clerk's Office. Copy of the decision herein has been filed with the Planning Board
± and the City Clerk.
Pursuant to Mass. General Law, Chapter 808, Section 11, the variance or special Permit, granter
herein, shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearjpg the certification of the
i
n,vs..y .'NfNa
-2_
>; DECISION1 Uqo 6 Elio 4eaiase PROPERTY LOCATED Amt Lot 56 Almeda BL< •
' 3 MARCH It 1977 MEETING
n appeal e
� Citi Clark, that 20 days have elapsed and no app a ha been filed, or that t if such
an appeal has been filet}, .that it ha$ been dismissed or denied, is recorded in thq
South Essex Registry of Deed$ and indexed under the name of the owner of recOV4 of �$
recorded and noted in the owner's certificate of title.
i '
SALEM HOARP OF APPEAL'
Syo �T ne T. Fundre9an
I .
cretary
a 3/7
• -A�- �J CIC!' Lf itP,
p` 1'
1 ,
,. r
y
• a
fgi#u ofttiem, ttssttthuge##g
$ • Poara of Appeal =
�- Lel "DECISION ON PETITION OF UGO DIBIASE CONCERNING THE
;o PROPERTY LOCATED AT 56 ALMEDA ST. , SALEM (R-1 )
A public hearing on this petition was held February 20, 1985 with the following
Board Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Richard Bencal,. Acting Secretary;
Mr. Luzinski and Associate Member LaBrecque. 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.
This case is regarding a temporary building permit for 56 Almeda St. referred
back to the Board of Appeal for a new hearing.
The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to requests 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 non-
conforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of non-
conforming 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.
A Variance request may be granted upon a finding of the Board that:
a. 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 in the same district;
b. literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would in-
volve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to petitioner; and
c. 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 purposes of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after hearing the evidence presented at the hearing, makes
the following findings of fact:
1 . There was violent neighborhood opposition to this petitioner;
2. In 1977 two petitions previously denied;
3. Primary reason for granting (1973) was for storage, petitioner no longer
owns or operates apartment complex or shopping center in the immediate area;
DECISION ON PETITION OF UGO DIBIASE CONCERNING THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 56 ALMEDA ST. , SALEM (R-1 )
page two
4. Original condition of a fence surrounding property was never installed;
5. Area not maintained in a sanitary condition conducive to an R-1 Zone;
6. Violation of allowing attack dogs to roam freely without notifying
Salem Police/Fire Departments;
7. Violation of three or more attack dogs on the premises at one time.
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 . Desired relief cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good or without substantiallyderogating from the purpose of the
Ordinance or the intent of the district;
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not
involve substantial hardship to petitioner; -
3. Requested relief is not in harmony with the district and will not promote
the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously 4 - 0 to deny the permit.
DENIED ��
-74 /�:
aures B HHacker, Chairman a
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
v
o co
- lJ"
J
\ A-'-PEAL FR-1ih c uELI IJIv 'i: ANY SHA'_L BE MADE P',
2ENERAL L PURSUANT TO SECTW'v '7 r -
\v v OF it S r T:
3.-3. A^.D S°,;LL Fc DAYS A
CFFICE CF THE CITY C H, REP THt
f L _ .
R -j c L I i S IE wE SE
""'Y I] THE CP
Lc Er-LcT U ;71L A COFY Or ' - - -
t" 'R HAi F - C' S H,7 EF,
rr h c E'r.v °i E TPAT Y1 .L
. LL RELC.ROED h N c P E �_) RE*-'WRY CF C°E . AND .In1 F,[E� ^i WSJ=� LR D i .i
&EQECuRD OR IS kcb;:RDE0 AND NOTED ON Tr'E Lt;NER-S.CER71LD TIEJOF TILE.
= . ,...t cF T -
� V
BOARD
j/ OF APPEAL
a
o -0
4 �
MICHAEL E. O'BRIEN �� 9 MARY P. HARRINGTON
CITY SOLICITOR +eab�. y�*�`� - - ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
93 WASHINGTON STREET 93 WASHINGTON STREET
and CITY OF SALEM and
187 FEDERAL STREET 59 FEDERAL STREET
SALEM, MA 01970 MASSACHUSETTS SALEM, MA 01970
74.5.4311 7440350
744.3383
Please Reply to 187 Federal Street Please Reply to 59 Federal Street
January 14, 1985
James B . Hacker, Chairman
Salem Board of Appeal
One Salem Green
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Re : Storage Building
Almeda/Hillside Ave .
Dear Jim:
With reference to your letter of January 11, 1985 , please
be advised that I have no further information regarding this
matter other than the information contained in my letter of
February 17, 1984 to the Salem City Council . Both actions filed
in Superior Court (47985 and 8747) were actions pursuant to
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 21 and both. were
remanded back to your board for a new hearing on the merits .
Ve�uly yours,
/�'Michae 1 E . O' Brien'
MEO/Jp
cc: Councillor Leonard O'Leary
A
t
•e0/Y NL�` '
CITY OF SALEM MARY P. HARRING70N
n'.ICHAEL E. O'BRIEN MASSACHUSETTS ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
CITY SOLICITOR - 93 WASHINGTON STREET
;3v;ASHINGTONSTREET and
and 59 FEDERAL STREET
157 FEDERAL STREET - _ SALEM,MA 01970
SALEM,MA 01970 744.0350
745-4311
7443363 pleau Rcply to 59 Federal Street
vwu Reply to 187 Federal Street
February 17, 1984
Salem City Council
City Hall
93 Washington Street
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen=
ed on
This letter is sent in response
to your ont rder theotthree-
February 8 , 1954 ermit1-fortthethe
cement storage building at the
year temporary P responding to
. corner of Almeida Street and Hillside Avenue . In
the same , I have consulted with Ward 4 Councillor Leonard O' Leary
and examined the records at the Board of Appeals , the City Soli-
s citor ' s Office, the Board of Assessors and the Essex County Super-
ior Court.
After receiving a narrative of the background of the sit-
uation from Councillor O'Leary, my examination reveals that on
grantednitaia=., Salem
December 30 , 1973 , the Board of Aecialcpermt (.the records are
Realty Trust a variance and/or sP
temporary storage building
unclear as to which) to construct a
at lot 56 Almeida Street. Said variance and/or special permit
was granted for a three-year period. On March 1, 1977 , DiBiase
Salem Realty Trust petitioned the Boar n f Appeals
73 and tfor
r"an
ex-
tension of the' Special Permit"4 Petition was denied. On March 291 .
of the Board reflect that this P
Complaint
Super
uto MassachusettsGeneralLaws,or
1977 , DiBiase Salem Realty Tru
Court (Docket '47985) P the March 1, 1977 decision of
Chapter 40A, Section 21 appealing was held by the Board of
the Board of Appeals . A new hearing etition by DiBiase Salem
Appeals on May 17, 1977, on a new Psion
Realty Trust for a three-year exxten ndicateer
thepetitionawasd
in 1973 and the records of the
denied and the petitioner ordered .to remove the building .
2 _
On June 29 , 1577 , DiEiase Salem Realty Trust filed another
Complaint in Essex County Superior Court CDocket 18747) pur-
suant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 21
appealing the May 17, . 1R77 decision of the Board of Appeals .
The records of the Superior Court indicate that both case
'7985 and 18747 were never tried and that on :January . 31, 1980
both cases were remanded back to the Board of Appeals for a
new hearing (.copy enclosed) . The records of the Board of Ap-
Deals indicate that no new hearing was ever held and there
has been no action on the matter' since January 31 , 1980 .
I further examined the records of the Board of Assess-
ors which indicate the subject property is currently being
assessed by the City of Salem for $130, 100 . 00 ($64 , 000 . 00, land
and $66 , 100 . 00 building) .
In summary, it. appears •that the matter of the "three-
year temporary permit" is awaiting a new hearing by the Board
of Appeals .
I trust the above answers the question posed by your
Council Order. I£ not, I would be willing to meet with. you
either collectively or individually to answer further.
2y t my yours ,
chael E. O 'Brien
City Solicitor
H:O/Jp
cc : Board of Appeals
/�ri 1
«•r`>�� Gifu IT{ C ZTIT,1111 C 1c��=ilL 11ISEltS
�.
-7 � Lffice fff fhr Li�� CfuLnuil
6 WARD COUNCILLORS
JEAN MARIE ROCHNA 1984
CCJN=!LLORS-AT-LARGE PRESIDENT
GEORGE A. NOWAK
19SA JOSEPHINE R. FUSCO STANLEY J. USOVICZ. JR.
CITY CLERK STEPHEN P. LOVELY
JOSEPH M. CENTORINO LEONARD F. O'LEARy
FRANCES J. GRACE JEAN-GUY J. MARTINEAU
JEAN MARIE ROCHNA - GEORGE P. MCCAEE
RICHARD E. SWINIUCH JOHN R. NUTTING'
January 10, 1985
fames B. Hacker, Chairman
Salem Board of Appeals
One Salem Green
Salem, PA 01970
DiBiase
Almeida/Hillside Aves,
Dear Jim:
You might recall that last year I as,:. the City Solicitor
to look into the status of the "three-year temporary" permit
The Cit
for the cement storage building at the above location. y
Solicitor reported to me that br, DiBiase filed two petitions
ith your board in 1977 (March 1 , 1977 and May 17 , 1977) seeking
-, ex�ension of the three-year temporary permit granted in 1973.
to Ln -DetiLions were denied by your board and ? r. DiBiase appeal-
hed both to Superior Court. The City Solicitor further repor�ed
That on January 31, 1980 , the Superior Court remanded the two
petitions back to the Board of Appeals fcr a new hearing and
there has been no action by your board since that time.
I respectfully request that you hold a new hearing and
dispose of this long standing matter. I am enclosing a copy of
the City Solicitor' s response to me and a copy of the Court Order
for your records,
ry /truly yours,
Leonard F. O' Lea
Councillor, t'I'ard
nclosures
G of Iem, MC.aEisarhusetts
^ aarD fff CAM
}zral
January 11 , 1985
Michael O'Brien
City Solicitor
City Hall
Salem, Massachusetts
Dear Mr. O'Brien:
Enclosed please find recent correspondence from you
and Councillor O'Leary. The information contained herewith
and following your instructions, the Board of Appeal will
schedule a hearing on this matter of a temporary building
located at Almeda & Hillside Aves. Said hearing to be held
on February 20, 1985•
In order that the Board of Appeal may make a just and
proper decision, would you kindly forward any and all in-
formation or court proceedings that have transpired through
the years. If you have any questions or advice please don't
hesitate to correspond or call.
Cordially,
James B. Hacker
Chairman
__. Cc,.;ncillor Leonard O' Leary
Richard McIntosh, Zoning ,Enforcement Officer
Mayor Anthony V. Salvo
P 443 509 261
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED-
NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL
(See Reverse)
So
Stre d No.
.,Ph4
P.O., tete end Z P Code
Post e $
Certified Fee
Spacial Delivery Fee
Restricted Delivery Fee
Return Receipt Showing
to whom and Date Delivered
Return Receipt Showing to whom,
Date.and Address of Delivery
m
TOTAL Postage and Fees $
a
Postmark or Date
w
act. II
o�z
m
P.
STICR POSTAGE STAMPS TO ARTICLE
TO COVER FIRST CU158 POSTAGE,
CERTIFIED MAR FEE AND CHARGES FOR ART SELECTED OPTIONAL SERVICES.(cap fry
1.If you want this receipt postmarked,stick the gummed.-tub on the left portion of the address aide
of the article leaving the receipt attached and present the article at a post office service window or
hand It to your rural carrier.(no sora charge)
2 it you do net want this receipt postmarked,stick the Hummed stub on the left portion of the
address side of the article,date,detach end retain the receln and mail the snide.
3.If you want a return receipt,write the m"i ad-mail number and your drama and address on a
return receipt card,Form 3811,and attach tttothelrontofthu aniclo bymaans ofthegummed ends
R space permits.Otherwise,affix to back of article.Endorse from of article RETURN RECEIPT
REQUESTED adjacent to the number.
A R you want delivery restricted to the addresses,or to an authorized agent of the addressee.
andom RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the front of the article.
8.Enter fees for the services requested in the appropriate spaces on the front of this receipt.It
return receipt is requested,check the applicable blocks in hem 1 of Form 3811.
8.Save this receipt and present It R you make Inquiry.
c o SENDER:Complete Items 1, 2, 3,and 4.
3 Add your address In the"RETURN TO"
space on reverse.
(CONSULT POSTMASTER FOR FEES)
1. Tho g service is requested(check one). /n
M tollaw)nShowto whom and date delivered............... ¢
❑Show.to whom,;date,and address of delivery.. T¢
2.❑RESTRICTED DELIVERY........................... ¢
(nM Mffkied dAary lee Is¢Amaed N 8 N O
_N us awn mew fee.)
TOTAL S `e
3. ARTICLE ADDRESSED TO:
Ugo DiBiase
10 Lookout Terrace
/ 4. TYPE OF SERVICE: ARTICLE NUMBER
11 REGISTERED ElINSURED- P 474
7 7�t CERTIFIED -❑COD 720 832
❑EXPRESS MAIL
(Always obtain signature of addressee or agent)
1 have received the article described above. +
SIGNATUR Addr e A Ized gent_
6' D 1 ,pJbSTMMN
(maJ/a� me elda
x 6. ADDRESSE ADD ESS(Oarya
c _ Oj
a
y 7. UNABLE TO DELIVER BECAUSE:
m
m �
s -
oGPO:,98379&693
7
✓.} E3S�
UNITED_STATES POSTAL SERVICE A —
-
OFFICIALBUSINESS •^�-..y....-
SENDER INSTRUCTIONS
Printyour name,address,and ZIP Cade in the space 6elow.� --u®
•Comple4 Items t,2,9,and 4 on the revere. �®
•Attach to from of article R spate psrmb,
otherwise affix to back of ankle.
•Endume articN"Return Receipt Requested" PENALUUSEF.$300PRIVATE
•adjacent to number.
I
RETURNTO
BOARD OF APPEAL
(Name of Sender)
ONE SALEM GREEN
(Street or P.O.Box)
SALEM, MA 01970
(City,State,and ZIP Code)
P 474 720 832
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED—
NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL
(See Reverse)
J
S r a No.
to and ZIP Code
s �
Pos e $
Certified Fee
Sip eclat Delivery Fee
Restricted Delivery Fee
Return Receipt Showing
to whom and Date Delivered
Return Receipt Showing to whom, _
ry Date,and Address of Delivery
m
-Q+ TOTAL Postage and Feat $
0. Postmark or Date.
0
0
m
m '
E '
`o
lL
y
a.
STICK POSTAGE STAMPS TO ARTICLE TO COYER FIRST CLASS POSTACE
CERTIFIED MAIL FEE AND CKARGES FOR ANYSELECTEDOPTIONAL SERVICES.Ices bu4
1.IfyotrwamthlsrecelplyostmParked,stickthesuiiimedStubonthe left portion of theaddressstde
of tNeartfele fee ring the receipt attached and present the article ata post office service window or
hand O toyour rural carrier.Ino extra charge)
2.IT you do not want tithe receipt postmarked;stick the gummadatub on the left portion of the
address aide of the article,date,detach and retain the receipt,and mall the articte.
3.If you warn a return receipt,write the cerOliedm fl number andyour name and address on a
return receipt card,Form 3811,and attachittotheTrontufthe artidle by raesns of thequlnmeelerids
If space permft%Otherwise,affix to back of article.Endorse front of articTe RETURN RECEIPT
KEQUESTED adjacentto the number.
4.If youwant denvery,restricted to the addressee,or to an authorized agent of the addressee.
endorse RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the from of the article.
S.Enter fees for the services requested in the appropriate spaces on the front of this receipt If
return receipt is requested,Check the applicable blocks in Ram 1 of Form 3811,
8.Save this receipt and present it if you make inquiry.
P 474 720 831
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED-
NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL
U /)/6' S averse)
en to p
Op
St tl N—� .
tete and ZIP Code r)
FostaO $
Certifiod Fee
Speclul Delivery Fee
Restricted Delivery Fee
Pont.rn Receipt Showing
to v horn and Date Delivered
Return Receipt Showing to whom,
a Date,and Address of Delivery
ao
-'+ TOTAL Postage and Fees $ .
C
ly Postmark or Date
0
0
ao
N
P.
STICK POSTAGE S"..MPS TO ARTICLE TO COVER FIRST CUSS POSTAGE,
CERTIFIED MAIL FEE I:NAADES FOR ANY SELECTED OPTIOIIALsERVICE3.(too fmoo"
1.ItyoaWantthTsre stick t6gummelistubon the feftportion ofthe addreseside
of thaarticteleeving therecM. hed and pr.' theirticie at a post office service wlndbwor
hand It to your rural carrier.(no extra charge)
Y.It you do not warn this receipt postmarked,stick the gummed stub on the fait portion of the
address Ode of the arCicie,date,detach and retain the receipt,and mag the article.
3.Ifyou war a return receipt,writethe ceRRed-maIt number and your name and address on e
return receipt card,Form 3611,and attachiftothetrontofthe artiefei by means ofthe garnmedwide
N space permits.Otfterwise,affix to back of article.Endorse front of article RETl1RN RECEIPT
IiEQUESTED adjacent to the number.
4.It youwain detfvery restricted to.the addressee,or to en authorized agent a the addressee,
endorse RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the from of the article.
6.Enter tees for the services requested in the appropriate spaces on the front of this receipt If
return receipt Is requested,check the applicable biooks in Rem t of Form 7811.,
6.Save this receipt and present it if you make inquiry.
E = � flit ofttlPm, � tt�sttcljusetts
Paurb of 4pzal
January 23, 1985
Ugo DiBiase
C/o Peter R. Beatrice Jr. , Esq.
6 Beacon Street
Suite 800
Boston, MA 02108
Dear Mr. DiBiase:
It appears that the matter of a three year temporary permit
is awaiting a new hearing by the Zoning Board of Appeal. This
has been brought to our attention by Councillor Leonard O'Leary
and Michael O'Brien, City Solicitor.
As a result of this information we are scheduling a hearing
for the temporary building located at Almeda/Hillside Aves. Said
hearing will be scheduled for February 20, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. , on the
second floor of One Salem Green.
Sincerely,
James B. Hacker
Chairman
JBH:bms
CC: Michael O'Brien, City Solicitor
Councillor Leonard O'Leary
Richard McIntosh, Zoning Inforcement Officer
' ✓ I
li 1
�I
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
ESSEX, SS: SUP P.IOR COURT
N . 7985
i 8747 Ll
I
/ UGO DIBIASE, ET AL, TRS. )
Plaintiff
vs. ) MOTION TO REMAND TO BOARD OF
APPEALS
IBOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY)
SALEM )
Defendant )
OL _
Nowcomes the Plaintiff in the above entitled action and
T
imcves to remand this case back to the City of Salem Board of
a t' ' Appeals for a new hearing and determination.
i
iBy Plaintiffs Attorney,
January 30, 1980 C—Q
Date Peter R. Beatrice, Jr. , ' quire
6 Beacon St. , Suite 800
Boston, Mass - ,02108
\ Tel : 227-6060
1
Assented To:
^� William J. Tin Esquire
Attorney for Defendant )
i
I
3�.
y Ofg of 2If2m, ttS82It ' /Eq
c� �1tSEff�
�nxr of �lrpttl MAR y iU 46 NN '77
DECISION
CITY CLEP.,% :i OFFICE
MARCH 1, 1_977 SALEK HASS.
PETITIONER: UGO & ELIO DEBIASE,
TRUSTEES OF DEB7ASE PROPERTY LOCATED AT: Lot 56 Almeda- St.
SALEM REALTY TRUST ZONED: R-1 District
MAILING ADDRESS: 71 Hancock St., Everett
A hearing on the Petition of Ugo Debiase and Elio DeBiase, Trustees of� Salem
Realty Trust was held March 1, 1977 requesting an extension on the Special Permit granted
in 1973 on property located at Lot 56, Almeda St. (R-1 District) to construct a temporary
s building 60' x 100' for the use of storage or equipment and building material, toget4er
with a chain link fence 7 feet to 89_feet around the boundary lines. Said hearing was
held with members Donald Eames, Douglas Hopper,
present. James Boulger and Chairman John Gray
r°
Absent: Jane Lundregan, William Abbott and Arthur Labrecque
�. Notices were sent to the abuttors and others in compliance with Massachusetts
General Laws, Chapter 806.
Atty. George Vallis re
20, 1973 the Board of A presented the Petitioners before the Board. On December
ppeals granted to the Petitioners Special Permit to construct a
temporary building 60 feet by 100' feet for the use of storage of equipment and building
materials together with a chain link fence 7 to 8 feet in height around the 1?'oundary liner
The Petitioners were granted the Special Permit for a three year period.
The Petitioners are requesting,that this Special Permit be extended for an additional
period of three years. Prior to the construction of the building and fence, the Petitione5
claim that they were constantly subjected to theft of building material and damage to
their equipment by vandalism. The surrounding area is relatively undevelopedproperty
in which there are no services for sewer, water, or utilities. . The houses in that area
are quite a distance away from the Property in' question. The building would be used for
storage of equipment and could not be used for any other purpose. Several abettors
appeared in opposition to the granting of the Special Permit.
The Board voted to deny the Special Permit requested, to wit, to extend the
Permit which was granted in 1973 to allow the petitioners to constrSpecial
for the purpose of storing materialsbuilding
. The Board found that it could .uct and use e not grant such
derogating from the intent of the Salem Zoning by-law or without
Special Permit without
harm to the surrounding neighborhood. The Board found that the present building is not
maintained' properly by the owner and said lack of maintenance causes a condition that is
detrimental to the neighborhood.
DENIED
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Mass. General
Laws, Chapter 808, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of the decision
in the City Clerks Office. Copy of the decision herein has been filed with the Planning Board
and the. City Clerk.
Pursuant to Mass. General Law, Chapter 808, Section 11, the variance Or special per-,Tat, -antes
c_
herein, shall not take effect until a co
. py of the decision, bearing the certification of the
w _
q v=._
[.VINt. L
'\�\ 6387 y ✓/�
f �,z c W/k/r
\ \ N
HoMr
\� � 66e ! 3 jy�/GHBoiPS — %1; � v1 s } I�IC - fh �
�. \� 1ti o 40o io M 0 vA � - o � � -the E -�
�o'o 10
- A1ct �
MGD �F- Sty C � ao
)
JO J 124 ,
123 O/ O 'S �• J< II 140M _ -C%[,1 V✓A� /p
�= ` 9A
654
0 �� 5
,. 3_3 ,00. HIM 5 l a'7 � yMd /vr� gNNC - �tgr�tr
CITY OF SALEM �\ ------ �q3
t21 \\ Izo_---' �e �,. t �f 3 a Co Ig8/4-b J3 �tN -1 ►,r - T3 A-L P/ l
0 13 rtA NGr, v0t
J P ,£- 1 ti J- � (3 F/et V- 1i►? B R
_ °a o � hid .
�D� i�N� /4/Y� - 1_SS A�? U -
�
71 41 NG �J S ieb
-LULL — — $582 � m/ I-,I-v,cELLC - LL' IJFS� vl
`Zpo'6 `�-' Wim / �\� �� (� G l� � ��f � �o�i/4�l/y� - 1 �t)gm
N
E26£ v it + Jrf9 - l%DIV 4 ? D `W- CA/� oL
i \\eo / \ / a3 o5 �lofl -�IJ()AN - o
00
a
eae N ° ( Soso(' %f d- oAN - G ' NG � C !( �
OND yd '7 VES�' iJt� G 1 f tC
9\ l'e JTo, .
/\ A� 9
11
'BOARD C^ APPEAL- ('i'ri U SALL-IM.
vs .
UGO -DIRIASE, ET AL , THS .
P747
This Board and ALL 11itizens a'hould want to prctect the
c�rz-ncter of the neighborhoods , the rights of the, home owners .
If we maintain this R I ( R C ) Residential Area it is good for
the neighborhood -and good for the city. GrantinR or PxtenlinEr
terrDorary permit would be legal.v and -noralv wrong. U-,)I-r +be
Sol -TT Zoning, Ordinance R 1 Districts are , " Ore Family Residential
D`I;tri,cts which are intended to be those areas in which spacious
nei -11horhoods suitable for healthv , safe , convenient , and comfort-
able far.,.jl .v life are to be promoted and protected .' ',
11hir "laro:e white elephant" is deroFratin� from the intent and
purpose of a. one family residenti ,?.l district. We also contend that
the activity in and around this hu.J.1ding is detrinenti-I to the
rlei ^,hborhood , we ask this board to olenv anv 9pec.ial. r)erri. t( 7,) P. -
vqr.Jance( s) and we also request that this White Elephant" +hqt
s llutina our R 1,o 1 family residential
district be. removed .
The home owners that live near this building and put up with
bli -ht and noise were against Printing a temporary permit in
1077 and have been seeking to have this monster removed all these
Ve-I -S .
This Board denied Mr. DiBi-ase in 1977 an extension of a
tpmporary permit. We ask this board to denv anv special permits ,
not only is this request not in harmony with the purpose and ink
tent of a R I District. But under the Saler Zoninp., Ordinance ( o- )
The Board of Appeals shall not have the power to >,-ant any
special permit where use of land or structure is specifically
excluded from the district.
E xample Pg. 27 Ph 2 e . Anv other activity which would be
detrimental to the neighborhood . Sec . n buildings , structures or
land used or to be used by a public service corporation. Na.relv
Dibiase Salem Realty Trust is prohibited . We feel the time for
a +P.TporRry permit is over. Please restore our neighborhood to a
trllelv R I district and please -remove this architectupi nightmare :
From our and your City. Think You
z.�. 422 N
\lm\ 16387 i
\\ o '8'6, \268 / .. .�?
�.ai.ti NEiG6( 4306S - lil; Ov S� iNC th C '
- E —/3 ""4D /NG — - Cs� )
� \` ti o `eg10 400 � � _y', �\ ' VA L - o � - fl7 _
,,L, �\ \210 10400
-g' �� -7�
124 O fi
O \ 123 N
% /3,358 . � QT o���% -�'.�/7c/\
`� ISO-5 65so It.\-S\O£ ��S .. /��p /� t/ /�� / / �,• (�y�
44
5-5 _ 00.5 \G41
CITY OF SALEM \ ----- q �A o° �'
--------_-- 3 � 2 13 J5tN -t c-r — 13 ra L Dig l
121 �5 ase— �6 �^ °a 1 At 3 Co N�iR1�
`\ `0523 %/ �° l yp j3nl /aN� �J- �/4ir�� - L1EJ 7. s u
\\\ as
1p �i �2 c13 ly tj CL — SS 9I D
\z o` �: A sa ��f � ��� �t4I/y15 r- tAmf'r
,f R
" N DWatiD ,v- C A4 L - S1"�� so/ti
\ % All14
629 0 � 1YEr � - CI� �
\b PIG
os
.0 �Fx- \ \ ..« �+.— _l: ..- ,V -. �..d ♦ —;� _ .\. .. �s', . ...-r _ -F:- ,r .,v 'iry�4 . � e .}'N`F'�4� .e &'�-�'R