STEVEN A. CORBEN DMD DRB SIGN PERMIT 1993
Steven A. Corben DMD
260 Essex Street
�IIIY�RS.�
BY
No. ��®6
NASTINGS, MN
LOS ANGELES-CHICAGO-LOGAN,ON
M, GREGOR,TX-LOCUSTGROVE,GA
U.S.A.
State of the Art Family Dental Care
September 30, 1993 P(ECEfVEL!
OCT 0 1 1993
Salem uepr.
Dear Mr. Luster,
I
I have received Mr. Tremblay 's letter dated
September 28, 1993 . Please ask the Salem Redevelopment
Authority to review their earlier decision in lght of the
recent Board of Appeals' decision. Please note that the
Design Review Board already gave their verbal approval at
their meeting on May 19 , 1993 .
Sincerely,
Steven A. Corben, D.M.D. , F.A.G.D.
I
jcc: Leo Tremblay, ZEO
Board of Appeals
Councillor Fv-?ar„
I
I
I
i
Two Hundred Sixty Essex Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Telephone (508) 745-4499
ti
Salem BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Redevelopment Bar Boudreau
Barbara Cleary
William Guenther
Authority Paul I:Heureux
William E. Luster
Ewcutire Director
TO: SRA Board Members
FROM: William Luster, Executive Director
RE: Dr. Corben Correspondence
DATE: November 23, 1993
I have attached a copy of correspondence from Dr. Steven Corben, regarding his
application for a sign permit for a neon sign at his place of business on 260 Essex Street.
As you may recall, Dr. Corben was cited by the Building Inspector for installing signage
without a sign permit or approval from the SRA. Upon receipt of his violation letter, Dr.
Corben submitted a sign permit application which was approved by the Design Review Board
at their May, 1993 meeting. The SRA subsequently denied this request due to the fact that the
material of the sign, neon tube lighting, was specifically denied in the Urban Renewal District
for this type of business. Dr. Corben appealed the SRA's decision to the Board of Appeal,
seeking a variance from the City of Salem Sign Ordinance. The Board of Appeal granted Dr.
Corben's request for a variance with the condition that the signage be approved by the SRA.
Following the Board of Appeal decision, the Building Inspector forwarded an enforcement letter
to Dr. Corben requesting that the signage be removed since Dr. Corben did not have a sign
permit or approval from the SRA. The attached correspondence represents Dr. Corben's
response to the Building Inspector's letter.
I would like to further discuss this issue, as well as the SRA's options regarding
enforcement provisions, at Tuesday's meeting.
One Salem Green • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (508) 745-9595, Ext. 311 • Fax (508) 744-5918
` Titg of 19.7ttlein, Massac4usPtts
Public Propertp 33epartment
Nuilaing Department
(One Salem (6reen
5U9-745-9595 iExt. 380
Leo E. Tremblay
Director of Public Property
Inspector of Building
Zoning Enforcement Officer
September 28, 1993
Dr. Steven Corbin
260 Essex Street
Salem, MA 01970
RE: Illegal Signs
Dear Dr. Corbin:
I have received a letter from Salem Redevelopment Authority's
Executive Director, William Luster regarding the neon signs you have at 260
Essex Street. These signs are a violation of the Board of Appeal decision
which states that you must have the approval of the Salem Redevelopment
Authority and the Design Review Board. As to date no approval has been
given for these signs.
You are therefore ordered to removed these signs immediately upon
receipt of this notice. Failure to comply will leave us no choice but to
take the appropriate legal action.
Sincerely, _
Leo E. Tremblay
Zoning Enforcement Officer
LET:bms
cc: W. Luster, SRA
Board of Appeal
Councillor Furfaro
\crbn\
Certified Mail #P 921 991 545
Salem BOARD OF DIRECTORS ',
loan Boudreau
Redevelopment
Barbara Cleary
Authority William Guenther
Paul L:Heureux
William E. Luster
Executive Director
September 22, 1993
Mr. Leo Tremblay, Building Inspector
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 10970
Subject: Sign Permit for Steven Corbin, 260 Essex Street
Dear Leo:
I am writing on behalf of the Salem Redevelopment Authority (SRA), to request that the
decision of the City of Salem Board of Appeal be enforced regarding the petition by Steven
Corbin for a variance from the Salem Sign Ordinance.
As you know, Mr. Corbin erected two neon signs at his place of business, which is
located in an Urban Renewal District, without the approval of the SRA. After being cited for
installing the signs without a permit, Mr. Corbin applied to the SRA for approval of the two
existing signs. Mr. Corbin's application for approval was denied by the SRA Board of
Directors, and he then petitioned the Board of Appeal for a variance from the Salem Sign
Ordinance which required him to receive approval from the SRA for signage installed within the
Urban Renewal District (Section 3-51). Mr. Corbin's variance was granted by the Board of
Appeal with the condition that he obtain approval from the Salem Redevelopment Authority (see
attached). • .
At this time, Mr. Corbin is not in compliance with the variance granted due to the fact
that his signage has not been approved by the Salem Redevelopment Authority. I respectfully
request that you enforce the provisions of the variance granted by the Board of Appeal and
inform Mr. Corbin that his existing signage is illegal.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerel ,
v
illi m ster
Execute irector
j:/Corbinbr.BOA
One Salem Green • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 9 (508) 745-9595. Ext. 311 • Fax (508) 744-5918
State of The Art Family Dental Care
July 20, 1993 RSCEIVEC'
William Luster
One Salem Green JUL 2 3 1993
Salem, MA 01970 "
Dear Mr. Luster: ��1t�C(li B'latlr9on� 1japi
The Board's decision was indeed puzzling especially in
light of our earlier meeting with the committee and their
recommendation for approval.
Irregardless of the apparent conflicting views of the
redevelopment committees, the following facts need to be
addressed.
. 11 A great majority of my new patients are- anaergency in
nature and therefore the location of my office must be
readily and quickly discernable.
2) The above was not a problem until you decided to
reverse the direction of Essex -Street - this is now a very
serious problem.
3) The signs including their shape, size, location and
even color were designed to solve this problem in the most
conservative and unobtrusive manner possible. The signs
don't even advertise, but simply communicate the name of the
practice.
4) Approximately 50 feet down from my office, you have
a store with neon signs in every window advertising
different brands of beer! Down on Derby St. , there is the
equivalent of a neon city advertising everything from food
to bicycles - and this is in an even a more historic section ,
of Salem! ! ! "
5) Your summary denial without taking any ofthe above ,
into consideration exhibits a great lack of caring, r
sensitivity, fairness and .indeed suggests outright
discrimination.
I have already initiated proceedings with the Board of
Appeals and will file shortly in Superior Court against all
parties.
On a personal note, I have been proudly providing
health care services to the people of Salem for over 12
years. I've paid taxes, provided jobs, readily cooperated
with all the construction going on around the downtown area
and considered myself to be an asset to downtown Salem both
as a business and health care provider , Your decision and
lack of consideration obviously sends a clear message to the
. contrary.
Sincerely, ,,
Steven A. .Corben, D.M.D. ,F.A.G.D. .
Two Hundred Sixty Essex Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Telephone (508) 745-4499
NEXT ME�'IIN�-
IV" 1q,1193
B%30a.m.
SALEM REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SIGN APPLICATION
Date of Application: IV
Applicant Name: 3 O 0-
7'/
Phone #
Location of Building: 460
Number Street
Owner of Buildina:
Sign Designer : 2on
Name of individual company
Sign Type (Check more than one if necessary)
Wall/Facade Temporary
Protecting Banner RECEIVED
Window �� Mechanical
Other MAY 10 1993
Sign Illumination Salem Planrjing wept.
Internal Bare Bulb
Indirect None
Other TAa,
Submission Requirements: All items must be received two ( 2) days
prior to meeting.
(Please check )
1. Detailed scale planf o_ sign w aCe . lk
2 . Color samples �� �o r+w h t •2. ,� o fns
3 . Letter type/styleL1a, ,T/��z��
4 . Method of attachment uCu ti,[ •�i�o e
5. Method of lighting 42`e-&,„
6. Location of sign on building: Drawing Polaroid u -wo ox
7 . Fee
Approval Denied:
�Q Approval Recommended:
Date Approved:
EX/DRBSIGNS
i � �
.���.,�_
t.
�' '��
G
� SC:t ifs _".4
} �CP'Y
n":Ot.9-..
• �- � � ■
• • �-
.1
� . �
• � .
CXI ti �K)
f.
StevenCorben, DMD, FAGD
Comp. Family Dental Svcs.
260 Essex Street
Salem, MA 01970
-_I
LIJ
s
a J
Steven Corben, DMD, FAGD
Comp. Family Dental Svcs.
260 Essex Street
Salem, MA 01970
• NEcI'( MEE"LING.
ft" Iql AM
Q:30a.n,.
SALEM REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
DESIGN REVIEW 'BOARD
SIGN APPLICATION
Date of Application: M)Z -v i/ y yy" �
� 7
Applicant Name:
Phone #
Location of Building: C�,
Number Street
Owner of Building: 4/, t'f
Sign Designer : �?L'oma. /'.L�-n-,..i�` ov.-s•' ,nrytt a o O
Name of individual company
Sign Type ( Check more than one if necessary )
Wall/Facade Temporary
Protecting Banner
Window Mechanical
Other
Sign Illumination
Internal Bare Bulb
Indirect None
Other
Submission Revuirements: All items must be received two ( 2) days
prior to meeting.
( Please check )
1. Detailed scale plan of sign fy��w- �`� ii
2. Color samples
3. Letter type/style
4 . Method of attachmentc.z ..� c y
5 . Method of lighting
taz.. , �.� e .�
6. Location of sign on building: Drawing Polaroidu elpuo o�
7. Fee Cz , �P oho
Approval Denied:
/az y �� ,� c�l��; c� Approval Recommended:
/ Date Approved:
EX/DRBSIGNS
D
Yeeael(A Co4ew,
State of the ArttFamily Dental Core
� /� U��-(/ �� � �� ,vim+-O-av lJ,�,•� L...�.Gv Gam( -r_►.
/a-c.-�iy,(�l ��rw<(/(✓�L/ J .x �%ri-c,.t.� �^-r/l "" '� r/t °Co-w". �i�'_�`.w�2 c� Z�K
Gv7vt0 yy � �° ,/4,e�.-�j �/ " � "- �•��,t�/ v 1 � Ot // -est.-.--t-e
CX
�+-..•�-I�-a�' (�Aa �} f
(A.r-{Z�Nti a'�'O�°)�jf/'�'`' /�jy/ "-,� `�(/"`'2G�'--Le _ d•-d °' ..`.cn-e
,
i
Two Hundred Sixty Essex Street •= Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Telephone (508) 745-4499
♦ Salem BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Redevelopment loan Boudreau
Barbara Cleary
Authority William Guenther
Paul CHeureux
William E. Luster
Executive Director
July 27, 1993
Mr. Frank Grealish, Chairman
Board Of Appeals
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
Subject: Sign Variance - Dr. Corben, 260 Essex Street
Dear Chairman Grealish:
I am writing on behalf of the Salem Redevelopment Authority in regard to a petition by
Dr. Steven Corben, 260 Essex Street, for a variance from the City of Salem Sign Ordinance.
As you may know, Dr. Corben's office is located in the Salem Redevelopment Authority (SRA)
Urban Renewal District. This distinction requires that the SRA Board of Directors approve any
exterior facade renovations, including the installation of new signs. Dr. Corben's signs were
installed without any permits from the City or approvals from the SRA. After being informed
of this violation by the Building Inspector, Dr. Corben completed the proper applications for
approval. The SRA voted to deny Dr. Corben's request for two neon signs, due to the fact that
current SRA policies dictate that neon is only permitted for "entertainment, recreation, eating,
drinking, hotels and lodging establishments." (see attached SRA Sign Manual)
For the reasons stated above, I am writing to express the Salem Redevelopment
Authority's opposition to the petition of Dr. Steven Corben for a variance from the City of
Salem Sign Ordinance which would permit him to install two neon signs at his place of business.
At the present time, the signs are illegal and should be removed immediately, as previously
requested by the SRA and the Building Inspector.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Joan Boudreau
Chairperson
cc: Building Inspector
d2-1-" 'Salem Green • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (508( 745-9595. Ext. 311 • Fax (508) 744-5918
r
Chi of _,�ttlem, �4gttssucilusetts
. i• t.� , r7CLsEIYf B - rn
SEP O91993
Salem eta,jjjj(1g wept. C
LZ
�• w
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF STEVEN A. CORBIN FOR VARIANCE AT
260 ESSEX STREET (B-5)
A hearing on this petition was held August 11, 1993 with the following
Board Members present: Stephen C. Touchette, V. Chairman; George Ahmed,
Edward Luzinski, Stephen O'Grady and Associate Member Arthur 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.
Petitioner is requesting a Variance from the City of Salem Sign Ordinance
to allow two (2) existing neon signs to remain in the windows of his dental
business.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this
Board that:
1. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the
land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting
other lands, buildings and structures involved.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the
intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented
at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings
of fact:
1. The Salem Redevelopment Authority was not in favor and urged the Board
of Appeal to deny this request.
2. There was one ( 1) citizen, David Pelletier, who voiced his opposition,
his concern being that neon signs could become commonplace in the downtown.
3. The Board reviewed pictures of other businesses in the area that had
neon signs.
it
is
J
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF STEVEN A. CORBIN FOR VARIANCES AT
260 ESSEX STREET, SALEM
page two
L . The signs have already been purchased and ✓ere of great expense,
removing them would be a major loss to Dr. Corbin.
5. Dr. Corbin depends on these signs for purpose of identification of his
dental office.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented
at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
I. Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property
but not the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the
public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the
intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 3-0, to grant the
variance requested, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances,
codes and regulations.
2. Signs are to remain in accordance with the plans and dimensions
submitted.
3. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit for the signs.
4. Petitioner shall obtain approval of the Salem Redevelopment Authority
and the Design Review Board.
VARIANCE GRANTED
August 11, 1993
Stephen O' Grady, Member
Board of Appeal
_t
u
_ o
J '
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF STEVEN A. CORBIN
FOR VARIANCES AT 260 ESSEX STREET, SALEM
page three
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY
CLERK
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of
the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20
days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City
Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 11, the
Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a
copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20
days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has
been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South
Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record
or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
n H
T
O �yti
T
r a
ca �
�'teueK� Cow6e�r, ll,til.D., ffl�'D.
State of the Art Family Dental Care
September 30, 1993 P' ECEIVEL)
OCT 0 1 1993
. .aalet7B �f«ratiaseg
Dear Mr. Luster, L1g t.
I have received Mr. Tremblay 's letter dated;
September 28, 1993 . Please ask the Salem Redevelopment -
Authority to review their earlier decision in lght of: the
recent Board of Appeals' decision. Please note that- the
- t
Design Review Board already gave their verbal approval at
their meeting on May 19, 1993 .
Sincerely, ,J
G/ry!�j
Steven A. Corben, D.M.D. , F.A.G.D.
cc: Leo Tremblay, ZEO
Board of Appeals
Counc:.11or FUixar..
e
Two Hundred Sixty Essex Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Telephone (508) 745-4499