Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
APPEALS DECISIONS 1955-1959
pffco � S 7ci � �dnS / 9 0 GOND 101-11i#u nPourb of �tXeztt, tt �ttcCt�e## g 71 �S w �CIFpNE 1 WILLIAM F. ABBOTT JAMES H. BOULGER JOHN M. GRAY J. ARTHUR MARCHAND " > rosi81sTc5 � „y June 14, 19 i X.353t�iG He. Sa=el L. Burnett .17 marsery"Street {' The petitioner, Sa=tl L. Bu otti applie4'for w pbrmit to treat a third stoa^y addition to has dwtalling at 17 purser,"Street; , Sclera an April 25,, 1455. .a� a inep afar v 'x alit`i�sge refused tk:.ids--, perait on April 28.9 1955; on'jirounds th:t it viol-aied-tnc But to sk; Ordinances whsreupen-�y letti-e dated May 3,..lyfiS, ;the petitioner" to this Poaid. k , On June 13 1955 it 8 F. X. in tear offiao of the Inspector ibr Buildings, City ital], alex,-'a meeting of thou. Board-of ApPa1 wa4p , hold purm"t to notices,mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the;`' aaevtters and other'interested parties. ARPtaring in,Savor were. Xr-. yrs., S. . Burnett and liarvey Foots. no others appeared. �.r. Foote a glkiaed„ the proposed addition with references being'rI ta'plaas;filed a+itl; tie lns�ttctor+a offia+, and that the proposed addition i>a,i:eing ache to Increase the area of the top floor'to aceceaddate besdro=s-to a duce sto ry bousa. After due cansideratiQr thereof thePcard by a w9wimoua vote, the five aftbers being present and voting, on.the grounds that the proposed work, is an addition to an existing-dormer abide is already 3 - 4e from the lot lire, 'hnd that the wdsting dcmar *ill be changed from a peaked roof to a flat- woof and will not be ex-- tended say cloi5cr to the lot lire-then it is, at present; furthermore the extension alonr, the-r„ain line of house will -be 'le 1041 from the othisr lot line. in the opinion of the-Board said proposed additit a will not interfere with any rights of the ahutterd. APPEAL 01ANTE7. BOATO OF AP£'$'JiL Sears try r r A. ibbrosielski December 79 55 DECI3109 Sec 'niillbrcad Yoreau 25 &altonstall Parkway The petitioner, 4llbroad V6roau, applied for a p6iuit to er ct a two cAr. garape on his property at 25 Saltonstall Parkway. The Inspector ,i of buildings refused this permit on grounds that. the proposed garage I�( would be less than five feet from the lot lino as required by, the build- Ing, ordinance; whereupon the petitioner appealed to this hoard. u 3ecerber 5, 1955 at 6:00 `X. in the office of the Inspector of DAldi -1s, % ty :A113 talecr, a teeting of the board of Appeal us held pursuant to zoticcs mailed postpaid to the petitioner, :the abutters and other interested parties. Appearing in favor were: Mr. ,I f rs. uillbroad ..jreau, no others apreare4 for or a*sSnst. 1'r. ... 1:oreau explair e;c the proposed con- struction nF the parades andthe need far building said garages within two feet of his lot 11ne, etating that if r3rap, s are .dved over to be five feet from lot line than be, cannot back his car orLt of one Farago because there is a drain and A tet" inc>7 'hifh curbing directly in his path, and that the &rarest abutters home is approximately `thirty feet awa; fror- said proposed garage. After due consideration thereof the board by a ur—wA Gus trots of the four me=bera present and voting, on the grounds that no one objected nor anpearcd atminst'said petitioner vid on the further grounds that the nearest abutter tailed a letter to t.e building Ins- pector stating that he is in.f'asror of the paraprs as proposed in the application, and further that it would be unreasonable to insist up- on the fine foot, restriction whrra it would create an unsatisfactory garage and a difficult Farage to maneuver a car into. A Pl AL OAANT'1: 3. • s DOARD OF A??" BY 5eeretarf E G ii x :rxxxxcca: April. 1, 56 Dobrosielski t ` To His Honor, Francis 1. Collins, Mayor, The honorable City Council Salem, Massachusetts Gentlemen: Pursuant to the pro*>isions of Chapter 4, Section 16 of The Revised Ordinances of Salem, Aa-sachusetts, 1952, the Board herewith submits its report and a summary of decisions rendered from May, 1955 to April, 1956. Samuel L. Burnett, 17 Nursery Street, was granted a permit to erect a third story addition to his dwelling to increase the area of the top floor to accomodate bedrooms to a one story house. June 14, 1955. Varie Planondom, 278 Lafayette Street, was granted a permit to alter said dwelling to provide for two apartments on the third Floor. Aug. 9, 1955. M Joseph Hayes., 32 Broad Street, wasgranted a permit to rte oriel the third floor of a three family dwelling at said address, to pro- vide for an additional apartment. Aug. 294 1955. Robert Jalbert, 16-18 coring .!venue, was ;"ranted a permit to, use said building ar a lodging house. Sept. 1, 1955. Willbroad Moreau, 25 Saltonstall Parkway, was granted a permit to erect a two car garage at said address within two Feet of the lot line., Respectfully sunmitted, Board of Appeal [ By: Alfred A. Dobrosielski, Sew. I I xxzXxxxx My 15, 56 A. Dobrosielski Recision Re: Paul V. Carney William H.R. Donaldson 3 Everett Road On April 16 1956 a permit was issued to Mr. :Paul D. Carney to erect a one family dwehing at 3 Everett Road. The application showed Ur. Garrey to be the owner of the property. The dwelling to be erected did not include a garage. Sufficient space was left on one side of the dwelling to provide for a future garage in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code as recently adopted. However, Ar. Dilliam H.R. Donaldson, who apparently has some inte- rest in the property, has verbally applied for a permit to erect a gar- age attached to the dwelling now under construction. A permit for the proposed construction was refused by the Building Inspector on the grounds that it would be in violation of the Building Ordinance which requires a distance of at leats five feet from the lot line, whereas the proposed garage mould be about 31 feet from the lot line. On My 8., 19560 the petitioners appealed to this Board. On Uay 14, 1956 at 7:00 Pal, in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices sailed to the petitioners, the abutters and others, , said notices being mailed postpaid. All five Board Llembers beim present, the petitioners submitted their arguments. It appeared that the left front ode of proposed g4rage, facing out to the street, would be about 31 feet ram the lot line, and that ;said lot line falls array towards the rear so that the distance from the left back edge of said garage would be approximately 8* feet from the lot line at that point. There was evidence that this locale is a very recent new development with a recorded lot plan. There was other evidence that the house under con- struction apparently had not been located on the lot as per original plot plan submitted to the Building Inspector in requesting a permit to build the house. After due consideration thereof the Board by a unanimous vote, all members voting, the Board agreed that had said house been located on the lot as per original submitted plot plan, there would have been sufficient lineal space to put a garage of the type asked for in the application without the need of seeking a variance. Upon all the evidence it does not appear that this is a case where the Board may dispense faith the application of the Building Code or a came where a literal interpretation thereof results in manifest injustice, because the petitioners still have sufficient footagge in said lot to erect a garage and comply with the Building Code.foots. DMILD. BOARD OF APPLALS Attest: By: _aq",Q R, i '"xxxxxxxxKay 15 s 56 A. Dobrosielski DECISION Re. halter Blanchette 256 Jefferson Avenue The ,petitioner, t'alter Blanchette, applied for a permit to remodel the all at the rear of the dwelling at 256 Jef- ferson Avenue, Salem, to convert into a store. The Building Inspector refused this permit on ,April 5, 1956 because the proposed use would be in violation of the Building Ordinance. Whereupon by letter dated April 9, :956 the petitioner appeal- ed to this Board. On May 14, 1956 at 8:00 P.11. in the office of the Inspet- tor of Buildings, City Rall, Salem, a meeting of the Hoard of Appeals was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and ethers. The petitioner through agents explained the proposed use and construction of the conversion of said ell into a store. The premises are at present a sort of storage pAaco whereas the converted premises will �be used as a .pick-up and delivery store for a dry cleaning enterprise. No one appeared against the petition. After due consideration thereof the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting , on the grounds that the proposed construction or conversion does not appear to them to be within the intent of the chapter and therefore authorises the Building Inspector to issue said permit with the condition attached that the common wall of the house and the converted premises be wired lath and plaster on the inside of the converted premises. APPEAL GRANTED. BOARD OF APPEAL By: EJI�X Attest: 0 X.aXxxxxx May 17t 56 �L, Dobrosielski DECISION Re. T. Belleau 302 Lafayette Street The petitioner, T. Belleau, applied for a permit to convert the single family dwelling at 302 :Lafayette Street into a six family apartment house, The Building Inspector refused this permit on April 24, 1956, as the proposed change would be in violation of-the Building Ordinance, whereupon by letter dated May 8, 1956, the petitioner appealed t6 this Board. On gay 14., 1956 at 7:30 P.M. in the office of the Insp- ector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meetift of the Board of Appeals was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters, and others. The petitioner presented his case, basically a personal history, and 11r, Mahoney explained some of the construction features. No one appeared against the appeal. Upon due consideration thereof the Board by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, has no objections to altering this building to provide for two families on the first floor and two families on the second floor, provided the apartments are separated by wire lath and plaster partitions. Tha Board further notes for the record that It is not refusing nor allowing alterations to provide apartments above the second . floor at this time, pending a preparation of a proper petition and a tangible substantiation of a need for the extra apartments, so that the Board may have a reason to vary the application of the Building Ordinance in this instance. APPEAL GRANTED IN PART and D014D IN PART. BOARD OF APPaAL a �. �3e etary i j I _cooccxxx June 4, 1956 A. Dobrosielski DECIk%] Re: Joseph Collier 27 Linden Street A persiit for building a garage within 10 feet of an existing structure was refused by the Building Inspector upon application by the petitioner. The petitioner appealed to this Board by letter. 0n June 4th 1956 at 8:00 P.M. in the office 6f the Inspector of Buiidinps, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeals was held pursuant to notices mailed post- paid to the petitioner, the abutters and others. The petitioner explained the construction and, location of said garage and his need for said garage. Mrs. M. Kenneally, an abutter, was recorded in favor of the garage. A Mrs. Cora V. Lane sent a letter in protest of the appeal which was read by the Chairman of the Board. After due consideration thereof the Board unanimously voted, all five members being present and voting, on the grounds that there is a need for garages and off-street parking and therefore authorized the Building Inspector to issue said permit with the conditions attached that said gar shall be built approximately 13t 8" from. the street �a pp y Line as shown on plot plan submitted with the application and further that said garage be wire lathed and plasterede on the interior. Appeal Granted- Board of Appeal by: n" e_a Attest: i P" J i :cy c- xxxxxx dune 4, 56 Al!'red A. Dobrosielski DECISION Re: John Cappuchio 10 Linden street The petitioner applied for a permit to alter a single family dwelling at 10 Linden Street into a three family dwelling, The Building Ir'spector refused the permit as I the proposed change would be in violation of the Zoning I and Building Ordinances. On June 4,, 1956s at 7:30 P.M. in the office of the I Building Inspector, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed post E paid to the petitioner_, the abutters and others and also I as advertised in the Salem Evening NA on ?1aY R. 1956. The petitioner outlined the construction features and gave a detailed explanation of a need for additional income in order to carry the house on a sound financial I basis. No one appeared in opposition, After due consideration thereof the Board by a unanimous vote of all five embers present and voting, on the grounds that the proposed changes are asked for to alleviate a hardship .upon the petitioner, do authorize a variance in this particuaglr instance. APPEAL GRANTED. Board of Appeal / Q by, CAA;4:e Attest: V S Q.1 I CL dS '�ca 0 r Q X xx1 xx June 4, 56 Rl rcd A. Dobrosielski U) ` DECISION Re. Wilfred Hall 25-27 Briggs Street The petitioner, Wilfred Hall, applied for a permit to remodel the third floor of a three story four family dwelling. The Building Inspector refused this permit on April 23, 1956 as the proposed change would be in violation of the Building I and Zoning Ordinances. The petitioner requested an appeal to this Board, On May 14, 1956 at 8:30 P.M. in the office of the Build- ing Inspector City Hail, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was neid pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and also advertised in S the Salem Evening thews on Plot 1, 1956. The petitioner, then- ugh his agent, a Mr, Neal Goddard, presented facts and discus- sed the type of proposed construction and change-over. At this i time the Board requested the petitioner to submit a probable Profit Ac Loss Statement with respect to the operation of the dwelling on a financial basis. Then this meeting was adjourned to June 41 1956* No one appeared in opposition, On June 4. 1956 at 8:00 P.M. at the sq me place as above mentioned, pursuant to notification, the petitioner appeared in person and restated his case supplemented by his Britten statement of probable financial returns from a four family r { dwelling as compared to a five fa_milY dwelling CL After due consideration thereof the Board by a unanimous as f vote of all five members pre ent and voting, on the grounds 00 that it finds sufficient harShip on the petitoner in this pparticular instance to merit granting the appeal. C C dPPEAL GRANTED. p Board of Appeal Z By. Attest. "V"'— j xx&xxxxxx June 23, 1956 +. Lobrosielski DECISION F. Famico 18 Summer Street The petitioner, F. Famico, applied for a permit to convert the single family dwelling at 18 Summer Street into a five family apartment house. The Building Inspector refused this permit on the grounds that it would be in violation of the Building Ordinance. Uhereupoo the petitioner appealed to this Board. On -June G, 1956 at 8:15 P.M. in the office of the Building Inspector, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeals was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner,, most of the abutters., and other interested parties. Mr. Famico with the help of his architect explained the proposed changes and stated his reasons for needing five aprtments. In opposition were numerous abutters, but their grounds for opposition were not based on the matter before the Board On June 9, 1956, all five members of the Board visited the premises under consideration and inspected the premises fb&ay. After dose consideration therof the Board by a unanimous vote of four members present at a special meeting on Mune 19, on the grounds that the proposed changes and alterations, and the arguments for same do not take this case out of the class of cases wherein it does not appear to the Board to be within the intent of the Building Ordinance.. APPEAL DENIED* Board of Appel by, Attest: �; �,/�s V� Ste; ,•�-�.•.. %a/sb II G xs Xxxx June 23, 1956 A k*i),)brosielski DECISION: T. Belleau 342 Lafayette Street (8escript) 4 On May 17, 1956, the Board of Appeals made a decis3.an in , the above natter, stipulating that it would entertain further m proof and substantiation of a hardship nature in this matter. The petitioner submitted a written statement subsequently Q setting out a financial statement. a ` The Board of Appeal visited and inspected the premises on < Saturday, June 9, 1956. €upon due consideration thereof the IIoard. by a unanimous vote of four members present at a special meeting on June 19, on the grounds that the proposed changes and alterations for the two extra apartments beside the four granted, does not take this case out of the class of cases wherein it does not appear to the Board to be within the intent of the Building Ordinance. APPEAL DENIED, Board of Appeal Aljnst; . a - p v � ..¢� �a3/sL / - v v f1 m ` l ` I I KcXXXXXXK July 19, 1956 :�.. Dobrosielski DECISION: David J. Goggin 300 Lafayette Street The petitioner, David J. Goggin applied for a permit to remodel the single family dwelling at 300 Lafayette Street into a five family dwelling. The Building Inspector refused the proposed changes as they would be in violation of the Building Ordinance. whereupon the petitioner appealed to this Board, On duly 16, 1956, at 8:00 P.M. in the office of the Building Inspector, City hall, Salem, a meeting was held with all the Board of Appeal members present, pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and ,other interested parties. The petitioner outlined the construction features and gave his reasons for a need of the additional apart- ment on the third floor. He also substituted a new third floor plan for the one previously submitted.. After due consideration thereof the Board by a unanimous vote of all •fige members present and voting, on the grounds that the reasons and need for the third floor apartment are not sufficient to take this case out of the class of cases wherein it does not appear to the Board to be within the intent of the Building Ordinance. APPEAL DENIED. Board of DpAppeal By 2d`7 Q. V ,I 300��. • v October 10 56 Awh Dobroaielski DECISION Rot Lorraine & Prank Camarda 37 Endicott street The petitioners appealed from the denial of the inspector of Buildings 'to lacus a permit to erect a one story addition at the side of a dwelling located at 37 Endicott street. On October Els 1956 at 7x15 P.L. in the office of the Building Inepecter, City Balls Salem, a meeting of the Board of I Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to petitioners. abutters and otherse Vbo petitioners appeared and filed assents from their abutters with the Board. The petitioners explained the need for the • j addition and the type of construction and the fact that the .oarest building to the addition would be 13 Peet away& No one appear ad in opp©s1tJ1Gn* !After due consideration, the Board by a unanimous vote of its four members present on the grounds that the petitioners' needs are urgent and that such an addition could not be placed elsewhere on the lots. and that there remains 3.3+ between buildings on this aide and that to refuse would be unjust: APPEAL GRANTED, WARD OF APPEAL By a. secretary I 4 i ! bN Y Wa fvF'V Y �u I4;• Y 'lxn i'p j•.F �5 'M'I ! Y s r # i.Fe #• y w y4. y 4'4' ,»i» 4' '4 y '.y1i - .I a ♦ ...s fi.4. y . P.. . o r x !Eliv.-, Y * 61ti ii. • +!% : y , j. . y.. -.f t ul.. t• PaF �} } a <A •VI•% . :% Y W Uri y sit ey, •Y . S. 5.. ' We.fl e "4 ♦•.j 1 .P b:} � � 4.f� ♦nY Y •;Y. r nrl�• ae .. M » r "4.' Y` Y •' K 1'Y •.' Y^• V ra n f r# e' ) e In.r' . .fS y3. Y. ♦ t � Y a f '. y,.:- 4:y # » a f "y �y •.A Y% .ry. t.. F '. s -.. y * 45.l: k y i-.i+i rYM K119• y.r } Y..• 3.6 I.f' #e d 'y ..» pN f s iYi 4 1 • YjiYr 'a #.w R# a i` ..;y't ONtYi •.4 f S5Y * pyx% y * ) y tr. i q} rt y1. 1yy y."J yT: w a 0 (L W A#&* Dobrosielaaki October 10 56 Q z DECISION Ret Irene Diana Pelletier Q 39 Roslyn Street H The petitioners applied for a permit to alter the third floor of a 2k story two family dwelling at 39 Roalyn Street: The permit was refused by the Building Inspector on the gra.Anda that it would be In violation of the Building and Zoning Ordinance. On October 80 1958 at 8;30 Pell& a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held in the office of the Building anapector, City Rall, Salems pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner*, the abutters and others and by advertising In the Salem Evening Uevs. • A,repreaentative of the petitioners appeared, explaining the reasons for the need of said altoration and the extent of uald changes. No one appeared in opposition. After due consideration, the Board by a unanimous vote of i all four oembers present, on the grounds that the petitioners would be involved in practical difficulties it this petition were denied and that granting of said appeal would not substaxitially derogate from the purpose of the ordinance: APPEAL GR4lfMe cC WARD OP APPIML a CU m 0 o: Q 0 z 0 ¢ xaex�co4xxx AaA.Dobrosialski October 10 56 DECISION Res Sohn D. 01?Connell 28 Pleasant Street The petitioner... Sohn DoO+Connells applied for a permit to remodel the third floor on one sides of a duplex dwelling to provide for an additional apartment. This permit was refused by the Building Inspector on September 20, 1838 as it is in violation of the Building Ordinance. on October S. 1956 at 8:45 Pon* in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Rall, Salams a"meeting of the Board of Appeal wars held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioners the abutters and other interested persons* •` 11r. O*Connell appeared and explained that the third floor is already finithed and he is only requesting to put In a bathroom with necessary fixtures and to be authorised to use third floors that he is hampered in earning a good lively-hood due to the lose of one arotg that the additional apartment would increase his revenue and- alleviate any hardship, no one appeared in opposition. After due consideration thereof the Hoards with tour members present, by a unanimous vote, on the grounds that said duplex does have a masonry dividing van; that the enforcement of the regula- tions in this case would result 'in manifest injustice to the petitioner: APP D GRARTRU. ' ROARD of APPEAL c � a. secretary October 10 56 z w DECISION Rea Demetrius Bik FO 68 Derby Street V V^^ 1L ce The petitioner applied for a permit to erect an addition M and convert the ,first floor of a three story wooden dwelling at Ge Derby Street into a store on September 130 1958. The Building Inspector refused this permit as the proposed change would be in Q violation of the Building Ordinance.. O on October October B, ,1951 at es45 ?*Us In the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Dull, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held puranant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and other interested parties. • The petitioner$ bin counsel and all the 'abutters were present, Atty. Adam Staf aski explained the proposed changes and the type of construction. The Board was Informed that the petitioner has been totally blind since childhood, that said petitloner, with the aid of his family, has been earning a living by running a small variety store, That the property to be converted bee been vacant for about two years and when renovated will meas additional revenue tax vise. After due consideration thereof the Board by a concurrence of aqi four zembers present, voted, on the grounds that a refusal of said appeal would result in xmnifest injustice to a totally blind i petitioner, who has already expended ®use of money in saving this property, and would lose more if not allowed to proceed to make the addition. The lB Card grant* the permit on condition that not more than two families will occupy the rest of the building in addition to the store, and that all construction will ccnfOiZft with the building code. APPEAL ORAWM w z WARD OF A FPDD L secretary (L m Q 0 November 15, 1956 A. Dobrosielski DECISION Re: Peary J. Donovan 12 Winter Street The petitioner applied for a permit to alter the third floor dwelling atl, 12 Winter Street to provide for an additio- nal apartment. he Building Inspector denied this permit on the grounds that it was in violation of the Building Ordinan- ce, whereupon the petitioner appealed to this Board. On November 13, 1956 a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others. At the meeting, Mr. Walter Conway, a representative of • the petitioner fully explained the circumstances surrounding the application for said permit and the need of the additional apartment, making in total five apartments. Also appearing in favor were Mr. & Airs. Robert A. Young Jr. , prospective purchasers of said property. The latter outlined the con- structional changes and additions contemplated. The Board is aware that it may dispense with and vary the application or enforcement of the Building Code in cases which do not appear to them to be within the intent of said Code. In the instant case the Board feels that this is a case that falls within the intent of the Building Code and upon a vote of three members present, voted: APPEAL DENIED. Board of Appeal By: F xxxxxxxxx November 15, 1956 A. Dobrosielski DECISION Re: J. Edward Mulligan 3 Intervale Road The petitioner applied for a permit to erect a garage near his home which garage would be only 11-2" from his lot line. The Building Inspector refused the permit and peti- tioner appealed to this Board. On November 13, 1956 a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the peti- tioner, the abutters and others. Mr. Mulligan appeared and explained the construction of the garage, and also submitted a sketch of said garage in relation to the house and the lot line. This showed that the house was on a small hill and that the garage would be cut-in into the side of the hill. Abutters appeared and did not dissent from or against said construction of the garage. After due consideration, with four members present, by a unanimous vote, on the grounds that a new ordinance requires off-street parking of vehicles, hence petitioner in this case would be unduly subjected to a hardship and furthermore it would be unjust and therefore the Board allows the appeal. APPEAL GRANTED. Board of Appeals By: xxxxxxx December 10, 56 A. Dobrosielski DE=CISION Re: Parker Brothers Inc. 190 Bridge Street The petitioner submitted a preliminary plan of a proposed addition to their factory off Howard Street Extension to build an addition of second class construction having approximately 14,400 sq. ft. of floor area without a fire wall separation. The Building Inspector adtised the petitioner that Section 91 of the Building Ordinance provides that with a complete system of Automatic Sprinklers, no floor area in a second class building shall exceed 12,500 sq. ft. between fire walls, The petitioner requested a review of the matter by the Board of Appeal. • On December 10, 1956 at 7:30 P.M. a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others. Appearing in favor: Atty. Robert W. Reardon, Mr. James, Vice President of Parker Brothers and Mr. Potter of Lockwood Greene E=ngineers Inc. of Boston. No one appeared opposed. Mr, Potter explained the preliminary plan, the type of const- ruction, fully automatic sprinkler system, type of floor and roof. After due consideration, the five members present, by a unanimous vote, on the grounds that the proposed floor area without a fire wall separation exceeds the ordinance require- ments by approximately 1900 sq, ft. only and further that this addition to other property of petitioner has no abutters except the City of Salem Fire House and Scales and a National Guard Military Garage, and furthermore that the locus is bounded by three streets and open railroad property on the fourth side, it seems to create no extra hazard, the Board finds that-it ,is amicable to granting a variance in this case. VARIANCE GRANTED. Board of Appeql by: Secretary 0 0 X 7SSI January 21" 57 A. Dobrosieleti DEM3105 Hem Laurien LtItalien 302 Lafhyette Street The petit mer applied for a permit for a fifth apsrtmmnt an the third floor of the dwelling at 302 Lafayette Street. The Building Inspector refused the permit as the pewposed change would be in violation of the Banding ordiumce. The petitioner appealed to this Board and on January 16,at 7:30 P.![., at the Badding Inspectw0a office, a meeting of the Hoard of Appeal was held.. Pcrsuant to notices mailed postpaid to the patitione;, the abutters and others. At the meeting Mr, Lfltalien asked the Board to allow him the fifth • apartment because a finansial hardship would result if not .granted. The Board toot the math under advisement and instructed its Secretary to 3aepera a letter to Mr. L*Italien requesting estimates or actual pwsnt on remodelling, lusting, etc., and the cost and mortgage of the house. Bo One appeared in opposition at this nesting. On Janfmary 21, 1947, Mr. L*Italion appeared with his Attorneys Joseph B. Rarring.on. Attorney Barrington outlined the proposed fifth apartment and its need, He gave actual figures of toot of house and =artgsge outstanding. Be also gave an estimate of the costs of ruing the home on the basis of four apartments and a inmate of five apartments. He argued that this particular house lends itself to five apartments, where it is so large and has adequate front and rear AMrugv, and further that there is an ample lot arcoad the building to facilitate off *treat winter- time parting. After due eoneideratim, with all five members present, it was voted an the grounds that this particular building, after previous viewing t7 the Board, is of the type wherein five apartments may be had with a certain degree of safety, and vbersas it would be unjust to.disalloa said petition. The Board, an oondition that this fifth apartment consists of only fear roams as per plans submitted with this appeal, GRAM THE APPM- B(3 M 6P APPBAL a. C CO o: � Q z JaumMii 249 7f DECISION He: Dr. L. Alexander Vance 393 Essex Street } The petitioner,appealed from the refusal of the Building-Icspsctor to permit Mm to remodel the foes family dwelling at 393 Essex Street and convert the first floor into doctor*s offices with two apartments above, as this conversion was not in accord with the sowing ordinances. On January 21, 1957 a sleeting of the Board of Appeal was Auld pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioners the abutters, and others and by advertising in:tbe Salem Evening mews. .Appearing in favor: Attorney Newbury, Dr. Vance, Dr. Savage, Nr Audette, and three other abutters. None in opposition. a Attorney Newbury explained the proposed remodelling, the type of building at present and its dire need for repair and r*novaticn; drew attention to numerous doctors* offices in the near vicinity and the p fact that there is sufficient land an the sits to accomodate parking. c After due consideration, with all five members present and voting, (L on the grounds that the proposed remodelling and the fact that it will Ce be used for a doctor+e office will not substantially change the zoning m aspect, wherefore there are numerous much offices in the immediate ❑ vicinity and the further fact that any remodelling on or in this parti- reo cular building will enhance the locale, it voted: APPEAL GRANTED, Z BOARD OF APPEAL Q H Secretary i m 0 0 z r- Zdi07 not Dr. L. Alaaoot�Or �no0 199 Swam Ureat 1be Detlticar,am alod f*eo the rof%cal of the DanildinC juGpoater to pandt Iia to raadol tha flow lady &mnimQ at m imm ftre+ot cad O=mw tb flret floor isle doetor•o offiom with too apartmeate abava, so talo O=wcroiea was mat in aseeed with the Deal" erdiamm. a Jamaery 210 1957 a *sour* at the Boom of App=al was bold P=Vemalts e# % t esd ewa tiled pobtaid to to potltieaor, the abzttere, t47 adv0rtiair3 in to galea zwe"imd a=*. 4MLritd in theore Abd o , Dr. Vanoo, Dr. $va&v qr A03atta and threo oppaoitiea. AtteameW meobet'y smplaisad to p+eyoaod r�e111m1 the t baildiat pro=mt and its dire tsad fer repsir wd t vatic� ldtu mg atteauum to C==rc= amterol *lilacs Is tho mw viewy amd to fast that Mwe to caffioieat Lssi ea to site to aooCnsftte parkins. After dme et eoidamum, with all five =Mbero and vCtitta, m the g =m" tat the - 9 -P I r=odaliM =A tofbet that it will be aced fcr a &0texto affi0o wi11 a,* c t tantialy � to � e past, C-refers dare are ==on= CM6 omme in tha iradiate viaimiy acd the further fact eat aQ reaodollimd p c In thio parts_ saaar bon amp wille''.�noo Us 100210, it vatedt AREAL =A"=. DO= 02 APPEAL y LL �d Q < G z Q u=ar7 216, D=SrOl Dee Dr. L. Alasander' Vine gareot ft* petitiaoor,&FPealod fru the rotlual of the saildieg-Yaapsetw to permit bin to remodel tM roar !wily Ceso111ag at 999 Swu 3troot had .amort the MMA floor tats taetcrmo athee* with two aportnowto alem, as this O=vsrsioe was act !a sooerd with the seaisg ordisaaaso. On J=wu7 21, 1957 a aoatia of the Beard of Appeal waw MLA pa'emant to aoti000 called postpaid to tba pstiti asr, the ebedtwe, gel ethers cod bF advorticing to tho masa produc Cow. Appaarlag in favere Attorney Dawlary, Dr. 4eme, Dr. gavage, • 12r Acidette, and throe oth:r abdktwo. Dae is eNJ ,a ties. AttomW Dostwy ouplASaad tbo pvpaoM r'awdalllag, the type of building at pmooat acid its dire need for repair and r=gvatUn; dew Atte ntleo to c==r=o antoroo emcee in tM now viewty end tho fact that tboro io eaffiaieat Lmd as tbo olto to ecccnedato par4i . Alter deco oouolderatimo with all five eaz9ore greapt cad gevetieeg, ea tbo oeado that the prrpeood r=9dQliCg and the fast that it viii be used fbr a dootcreo ad7ieo will nt vdx*Gatially slanp the shoeing wpoet, rollers tboro oro ==mvw cc:b orrises in tM t=ediats vioi.aity and the !lather fact that mW r=odolling ca or is thio porti- maw batldiag will wee tbo 190alo, it vetode AFML =ARM. ROAM Ol APPIAL (Ir#v of �$Ukm, n ��. Pourd of �Vpeal "S �CIMINE WILLIAM F.ABBOTT JAMES H. BOULGER JOHN M. GRAY J. ARTHUR MARCHAND j=XkjftR January 24, 2957 A. Dobrosielski To His Honor, Francis X. Collins, Mayor The Honorable City Council Salem, Massachusetts Gentlemen: Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 4, Section 16 of the Revised Ordinances of Salem, Massachusetts, 1952, We Board herewith submits its report and a summary of decisions rendered from May, 1956 to January 24, 1957. 1. Paul W. Carney, 3 Everett Road, was denied a permit to attach a garage to the building at this address. May 15, 1956 • _ 2. Walter Blanchette, 256 Jefferson Avenue, was granted a permit to remodel an ell at rear of dwelling, to convert into a store. May 159 1956 3. T. Belleau, 302 Lafayette Street, was denied a permit to convert a single family dwelling at this address into a six family apartment house. May 17, 1956 4. Joseph Collier, 27 Linden Street, was granted a permit to erect a garage with conditions. June 4, 1956 5. John Cappuchio, 10 Linden Street, was granted a permit to alter a single family dwelling into a three family dwelling. June 4, 1956 6. Wilfred Hall, 25-27 Briggs Street, was granted a permit to remodel the third floor of a three story four family dwelling allowing a fifth apartment. June 4, 1956 7. Frank Famico, 18 Summer Street, was denied a permit to convert the single family dwelling into a five family apartment house. June 23, 1956 8. David J. Goggin, 300 Lafayette Street, was denied a permit for a fifth family apartment, at this address. July 19, 1956 _ 9. Frank Camarda, 37 Endicott Street, was granted a permit to erect a one story addition at the side of said dwelling. October 10, 1956 10. Gourdeau ConstructXion Company, 24 Warren Street, was denied a permit to use premises as a contractor's office. October 10, 1957 t ' _ 2 - 11. Irene & Diana Pelletier, 39 Roslyn Street, were granted a permit to alter the third floor of a 2A story two family dwelling to accom- modate a third family. October 10, 1956. 12. John D. O'Connell, 2$ Pleasant Street, was granted a permit to remodel the third floor on one side of a duplex dweeling. Oct. 10,1956 13. Demetrius Bik, 68 Derby Street, was granted a permit to erect an addition and convert the first floor of a three story wooden dwelling at this address. October 10, 1956 14. Mary J. Donovan., 12 Winter Street, was denied a permit to alter the third floor to provide for an additional apartment. November 15, 1956 15. J. Edward Mulligan, 3 Intervale Road, was granted a permit to erect a garage 19-2" from his lot line. November 15 , 1956 16. Parker Brothers Inc. , 109 Bridge Street, was granted a variance to build an addition of second class construction having approximately 149400 sq.ft. of floor area without a fire wall separation. December 10, 1956 17, Laurien L'Italien., 302 Lafayette Street, was granted a permit for a fifth apartment on the third floor od said dwelling. January 24, 1957 1$. Dr. Alexander Vance, 393 Essex Street, was granted a permit to remodel the four family dwelling and convert the first floor into a doctor's office with two apartments above. January 24, 1957 Respectfully submitted, BOARD OF APPEAL Alfr d A. Dobrosielski, Sec. 6 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE SALE", !,ASS Jan. 23 , 1.957. TO ALL DEPARTMENT 3Mh11Sz This office is in the process of preparing Annual Reports for submission to the printer in connection with the print- ing of City Documents for the year 19567 as ordered by the City Council . Late suhmisslon of Annual Renorts has in the past delayed • the preparation and printing of the City Documents. Accordingly, your early cooperation in submitting the Annual Report of your department, 7n duplicate , to the City Clerk' s Office will be grcatly a;r)rec :,t:_a. Very truly yours, At((. I TT"�, CITY CLERK January 24, 1957 To His Honor, Francis X. Collins , Mayor City Hall Salem, Massachusetts Dear Sir: I respectfully submit my resignation as Secretary and member of the Board of Appeal for the City of Salem. Very truly yours, AAD/a garch 24 290 4wqw#u= tw tw Dow* ;' AMU be lu City ill Xwch 22, 1955, A&Pted. CM C= C . F y ROBERTS, CUSHMAN & GROVER CHARLES S.GROVER - CABLE "STREBOR" BOSTON HERMAN T.GAMMONS TELEPHONE LIBERTY 2-8492 RICHARD F.WALKER RUOOLFAMANN JOHN D.WOODBERRY DIANA J.AUG ER 31 MILK STREET ROBERT T.GAMMONS JAMESH.GROVER BOSTON April 4, 1956 City of Salem Salem Massachusetts Attention: Building Commissioner Gentlemen: The Board of Appeals of the City of Newton is in the process of reorganization and as Chairman of the Board I shall be obliged if you will answer * the enclosed questionnaire about your Board and re- turn it by April 11th if possible. Yours very truly, CSG: jw *Enclosure Zoning Bulletin • 2u94 WASHINGTON STREET , BOSTON , MASS . f . A MONTHLY NATIONAL REPORT OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON ZONING January 17, 1957 Alfred A. Dobrosielski 125 Washington Street Salem, Massachusetts Dear Air. Dobrosielski : Thank you for your check of January 16th for your one year subscription to the Zoning Bulletin. This will entitle you to five copies of each issue. Your subscription will commence with the January . issue. Under seperate cover, I am sending you five copies of the January and February issue. Also the Indexes which shows the coverage of the Zoning Bulletin. Should you want a complete set of the back issues commencing with July 1953 to December 1956, they are available at '$10. including a hard covered deluxe binder which has chicago screws so that additional issues can be .added. Vepy truly yours, FAQ/rm I At the beginning of the third year of publication the ZONING BULLETIN is servicing over five hundred Cities and Towns throughout the United States. Among the subscribers are Municipal Libaries, Law Libraries, Practicing Attorneys, City and Town Counsel, Planning Directors, Planning • Consultants, Boards of Appeal, Building Inspectors, "Mayors, City Councils, City Engineers and Zoning Officials. Location of Subscribers ALABAMA — Birmingham, Fairfield, MARYLAND — Baltimore, Easton, Silver NEW YORK — Albany, Auburn, Buffalo, Huntsville, Montgomery. Spring, Towson. Cortland, Floral Park, Glen Cove, Goshen, Guilderland, Greece, Kenmore, ARIZONA — Casa Grande, Flagstaff, MASSACHUSETTS — Agawam, Arling- Lockport, Mineola, Mount Vernon, New Prescott. for, Attleboro, Avon, Barnstable, Beverly, Rochelle, New York, North Hempstead, Bedford, Boston, Brockton, Brookline, Ogdensburg, Ossining, Oyster Bay, CALIFORNIA — Anaheim, Berkeley, Bourne, Cambridge, Concord, Duxbury, Plattsburgh, Rochester, Rockville Center, Brawley, Burbank, Carmel, Cloverdale, Eastham, Foxborough, Framingham, Schenectady, Smithtown, Southampton, Compton, Chico, Culver City, Delano, Georgetown, Gloucester, Harwich, Har- Stony Brook L. I., Tuckahoe, Valley EI Cajon, EI Segundo, Eureka, Fresno, with Port, Holbrook, Holden, Holyoke, Streams, West Seneca, White Plains, Hayward, Hermosa Beech, Huntington Lawrence, Leominster, Lexington, Lincoln, Williamsville, Yonkers, Warwick. Park, Inglewood, Lodi, LaMesa, Long Lowell, Ludlow, Mansfield, Marlboro, Beach, Los Angeles, Madera, Manhattan Marshfield, Medfield, Methuen, Med- NORTH CAROLINA — Raleigh, Bur- Beach, Marysville, Millbrae, Modesto, ford, Milton, Natant, Needham, New lington. Montebello, Mountain View, Napa, New. Bedford, North Attleboro, North Easton, port Beach, Redland, Richmond, Salinas, North Reading, Orleans, Pittsfield, NORTH DAKOTA — Bismarck. San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Plymouth, Quincy, Russell, Rockport, Santa Cruz, Santa Monica, Sonoma, Salem, Salisbury, Seekonk, Shrewsbury, OHIO — Akron, Berea, Cincinnati, San Luis Obispo, South Gate, Visalia, Somerville, South Dartmouth, Springfield, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Elyria, Whittier. Stoughton, Swampscott, Swansea, Wake- Lyndhurst, Niles, Parma, Parma Heights, field, Waltham, Wareham, Watertown, Portsmouth, South Euclide, Tiffin, Toledo, Weymouth, Whi+insville, Wilmington, Wadsworth, Wickliffe. COLORADO — Fort Collins, Grand h kl OKLAHOMA— Oklahoma City. Junction. Westport, Woburn. Y• CONNECTICUT — Avon, Bridgeport, OREGON — Roseburg. Danbury, East Hartford, Fairfield, MICHIGAN — Ann Arbor, Bay City, Caro, Charlotte, Coldwater, Dearborn, PENNSYLVANIA — Allentown, Ard- Greenwich, Groton, Hamden, Hartford, Detroit, Evart, Hazel Park, Highland Park, 9 more, Bethlehem, Clairton, Eason,Harris- Naugatuck, New Haven, Newington, Lansing, Marquette, Melvindale, Monroe, burgh, Leighton, McKeesport, Now Ken. Plainville, Portland, Rocky Hill, Stamford, Oak Park, Royal Oak, South Haven, S+. sing+on, Philadelphia, Reading, Warren, West Hartford. Clair. Wayne, Willow Grove. DELAWARE — Wilmington. MINNESOTA — Columbia Heights, RHODE ISLAND — Pawtucket. Prov. FLORIDA— Coral Gables, Fort Lauder- Rochester, St. Paul. idence. Valley Falls, Warren. dale, Fort Pierce, Lakeland, Miami, New SOUTH CAROLINA — Beaufort, Smyrna. MISSOURI — Clayton, Excelsior, Charleston, Columbia, Spartanburg. Ferguson, Hannibal, Richmond Heights, GEORGIA — Waycross. St. Louis, Springfield. SOUTH DAKOTA— Rapid City. IDAHO — Boise. MONTANA — Billings, Helena. TENNESSEE — Humboldt, Memphis. ILLINOIS — Alton, Berwyn, Blue Island, Brookfield,Champaign, NEBRASKA — Gordon, North Platte, TEXAS—Abilene, Beaumont, Big Spring, gn, Chicago,Chicago Heights, Dolton, Elmhurst, Evanston, Scottsbluff, Lincoln. Dallas, Fort Worth, Friona, Longview. Geneve, Glen Ellyn, Hinsdale, O+towa, Lufkin, McAllen, Midland, San Antonio, Rockford, Waukegan. NEW HAMPSHIRE — Concord, Men- Sherman, Texas City. chaster. INDIANA — Anderson, Evansville, UTAH — Provo City, Salt Lake City. Indianapolis, Gary, Kokomo, Mishawaka, NEW JERSEY — Asbury Park, Bayonne, VIRGINIA— Richmond. Muncie, South Band, Valparaiso. Cedar Grove, Clomenton, Collingswood, Englewood, Hackensack, Haddonfield, VERMONT— Burlington. IOWA — Cedar Rapids, Des Moines, Hoboken, Little Ferry, Magnolia, Iowa City, Marshalltown, Spencer. Metuchen, Montvale, Moorestown, WASHINGTON — Longview, Seattle, Newark, North Arlington, North Bergen,- Walla Walla, Vancouver. KANSAS — EI Dorado, Emporia, Kansas Palmyra, Paterson, Rahway, Princeton, City, Liberal, Newton, Salina. Ridgwood, Roselle, Summit, Teaneck, Totowa, Trenton, Union, Weehawken, WISCONSIN — Eau Claire, La Crosse, LOUISIANA — Baton Rouge. Westfield. Madison, Milwaukee, Racine, Rhinelander, South Milwaukee,Watertown,Wauwatosa. MAINE — Bar Harbor, Houl}on, Old NEW MEXICO — Albuquerque, Clovis, Town. Las Cruces. WASHINGTON, D. C. xotp.4 .Y. (gift of Salem, 'fflassar4uee##s A � p Office of tate TTHU Tferk OY� �B �ixausYiixe J_8innmeg @I8g QIlxk - February 15, 1957 Atty. James F. Tobin 117 Mason Street Salem, Massachusetts DearSir: At a meeting of the City Council held on February 14, 1957 the appointment, recommended by the Mayor, of Atty. James F. Tobin to fill the unexpired portion of the term of Atty. Alfred A. Dobrosielski ending May 1, 195$ was confirmed by a roll-call vote of 10 Yeas and 1 Absent. • trulA yours, AIIGUSTINE TOOSY CITY CLERK ✓ Q-1111i#v of '!$aXem, 'Massaro e#ts A � O • �' �,.' (Office of the THU Tlerk 6ININ8 OO �9 ,Augustine T.Zvvmeg 49ft @Ilttk February 15, 1957 Board of Appeal City Hall Salem, Massachusetts Gentlemen: At a meeting of the City Council held on February 14, 1957 the appointment, recommended by the Mayor, of Atty. James F. Tobin to fill the unexpired portion of the term of Atty. Alfred A. Dobrosielski ending May 1, 1958 was confirmed by a roll-call vote of 10 Yeas and 1 Absent. Very truly yours, A USTINE CITY April 1, 195W ,Alfred A. Dobrosielskl, Esq,_ 125 Washington Street Salem, Massachusetts Dear Al: In accordance with our t ccnversat on of this morning, I am a tosin erewith.bill of the Salem ,News in ectio th the. Vance appeal. Very truly yourss .F'1G Enc l*. r y ESTABLISHED 1680 STATEMENT AND INVOICE TEL. SALEM 0600 THE SALEM NEWS PUBLISHING CO. • 155 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM, MASS. f City of Salem Beard of Appeals Salem, Mass. L J ALL ITEMS PAYABLE 10th OF MONTH --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE TIME ON INCHES I PAGE I RATE DESCRIPTION FOLIO CHARGES CREDITS BALANOE DUE Jan 16 3 29 3-50 10.50 Vou;� Gy Nb'°0�fp3 CYC ,°�i'y H._IFVO\ c rn 1 k4 It 62 iiIlb- 1� 46.4-5� w6 ti °ww o. w. .- = WE C) ro ca O a ti :• >m u w=.aro o a.d �w W ° oa ° en° aFe . c '� EY oww3a ao 0 0 0 � x m ciroow... roN 0.,w wa y °INT°aA.T. E.1° . THE SALEM NEWS PUBLISHING CO. PLEASE PAY LAST A 155 WASHINGTON ST., SALEM, MASS. AMOUNT IN THIS COLUMN TELEPHONE PIONEER 4-8908 NOTARY PUBLIC ALFRED A. DOBROSIELSKI • ATTORNEY AT LAW 125 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM SAVINGS BANK BUILDING SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS April 4, 1957 James F. Tobin, Esquire 237 Essex Street Salem, Massachusetts Dear "Jim: " I am enclosing bill pertinent to the Alexander Dance Appeals case marked "Paid" which I thought you might attach to the rest of the papers in this particular case for future reference. Very truly /yours, a4' /) I.t . AAD/c Enclosure } C X Ampa A0042*"m for twe ftwd tt ftwa 4au-tx #gym.. TA Citl Asa. rmvb too 107 ewwd# AMMi Ar . i i --- April 24, 57 James F. Tobin DECISION: Anastasios D. Young 190 North Street The petitioner applied for a permit to construct an addition to the commercial building at 190 North Street. The Building Inspector refused the permit as the proposed addition would be in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. The petitioner appealed to this Board and on April 220 1957 at 8:00 p.m. in the office of the Building Inspector, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held, pursuant to the notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters, and others and by advertisement in the Salem Evening News. • Mr. Young appeared and explained his needs for an addition stating that the present building used in his business of dealing in coffee was inadequate and that additional space was required for storage and blending of coffee. He outlined the construction stating that it would be a one-story building without basement, to be attached to the present building. No one appeared in opposition. After due consideration, and by a unanimous vote of the five members of the Board, on the grounds that a refusal of said appeal would result in hardship and injustice to the petitioner, the Board grants the permit on condition that said building will be used soley for the purpose of storage and blending of coffee in connection with petitionerts business, and that all construction will conform with the Building Code, APPEAL GRANTED. BOARD OF APPEAL By Secretary DATE TIMES OR INCHES PAGE RATE DESCRIPTION FOLIO CHARGES CREDITS BALANCE ODE APR 4:'97 may® `•�y�.�ys�ry�y�p�. •^ i1J{ Jam/ �� P,PPR12'57 2 2/ 31 3 YOUNG.-APPEAL 8 75 8 75* ,PR 23'57 5 � � l ddd THE SALEM NEWS PUBLISHING CO. PLEASE PAY LAST 155 WASHINGTON ST., SALEM, MASS. AMOUNT IN THIS COLUMN It i 4.N o, Titg of r{e 4 4, ?Public jJrnper#U Vepar#men# ^Obip Obi' PuilDing Pepar#men# 2Rnnm 7, (6itg Mall May 17, 1957 Mr. Anastisios D. Young 190 Noyth Street Salem, Mass. Dear Sir: Returning herewith your check in the amount of $7.00 that was deposited in this office to cover cost of advertising in connection with your recent Board of Appeal case. This office is informed by Mr. James F. Tobin, Secretary of the Board of Appeal that the cost of advertising is now $8.75. Thereforer,,, will you kindly submit a new check to cover in the amount of $8.75 to replace the check being returned to you. Very truly yours, I Ins cto Buildings JJOTR:LD tt, e CITY OF SALEM APPROPRIATION CHARGEABLE , BOARD OF APPi+' PAY TO , Named_ T ' $free .�:?.._^^ -- r• n ' city..-Snlelxi................................................................... Invoice Invoice Pur.Ord. Date Number Number Amount Expenses: s'tarnps3 envelopes, stamped envelopes, folders, loose-leaf paper. . . . . . . . .. . . . . 048.0.2 TOTALVO..42............. CITY OF SALEM APPROPRIATION CHARGEABLE BOARD OF APPi's.AL PAY TO N a m a.Dolores E. Labrie .................................................................................... 237 Essex Street Street........................................................_.......................... Cit val CTll Invoice Invoice Pur.Ord. Date Number Number Amount Services X275.00 $275.00 TOTAL........................ 1 a V (L W -- April 2#s 57 ds �. Tobin Q O ' Z DECISION: David J, Goggin 300 Lafayette Street On July 16' 19562 the Board of Appeal made a decision denying appeal on the above matter. On April 22, 1957 Attorney John R. Serafint representing the petitioner David J. Goggin, appeared before tMs Board requesting reconsideration of said decision wherein the Board danied approval for a four-room apartment on the` third floor of said building. Attorney Serafi.nt stated that at the time petitioner purchased i, the property he was not familiar with the building Code and to deprive him of an apartment on the third floor would result In a financial hardship, He submitted a new plan for a three- . room apartment instead of four rooms on the third floor as originally submitted, A motion to reconsider was made and seconded, four members being present and voting for reconsideration, a After due consideration of the evidence submitted by Attorney Serafini, the Board, by a unanimous vote of the four members W� present, on the grounds that to disallow said appegl would 0 work a financial hardship on the petitioner granted the permit provided that the third floor apartment consists of throe rooms s as per plans submitted with this appeal, APPEAL GRANTED. (L 's BOARD OR APPEAL M Q By secretary Ln I 3 v Offire of the (Ci#LJ (clerk 61v of 'Massac4usrits 0 .v O�6/MINL O�� e� 19 •.� �1T�itStlltC �l-�Uuttl2{�1 Qlifg C.A April 30, 1957 Board of Appeal City Hall Salem, Mass. Gentlemen: At a meeting of the City Council held on April 25, 1957 the following named gentlemen were re-appointed members of the Board of Appeal for a term of three years expring May 1, 1960; recommended by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council.- William F. Abbott 26 Hathorne St. J. Arthur Marchand 159 Lafayette St. Very trulyyo , 71"wl� AUGUq CI CLERK e I June 120 57 Jemen F. Tobin i DECISION: William HcCarran 214 Loring Avenue i The petitioner, William Mc Carran, applied for a permit to erect a porch at 214 Loring Avenue. The Inspector of Buildings refused this permit on May 14, 1957 on grounds that the proposed addition would be less than five feet to the lot line, whereupon the petitioner appealed to this Board. f On June 10, 1957, at 7:30 p.m., in the office of the Inspector "of Buildings, City Halla Salau, a meeting of the Board 'of Appeal was held, pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others. No one appeared either for or against the petition. APPEAL DENIED BOARD OF APPEAL By 7 Secretary f w A I i James F. Tobin June 12, 57 DECISION; Richard Roy 36 Palmer street The petitioner applied for a permit to remodel the third floor of a two and one-half story two-family dwelling -at 36 Palmer Street to convert into a three-family dwelling. Tae Inspector of Buildings refused the permit as the pro- posed change would be in violation of the Building Ordinance: The petitioner appealed to this Board and on June 10; 1957, at 7:45 p.m„ in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held, pursuant to the notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, t:he abutters, and others. No one appeared in opposition. Robert R. Roy, son of the petitioner,appeared stating that his father suffers from a heart condition. He explained that 36 Palmer Street is in an area zoned for business, that there is a three-family house across the street, as well as a twelve-room apartment house. He stated that his father, because of his physical condition, was experiencing financial difficulties. After due consideration, and by a unanimous vote of the five members of the Board, on the grounds that the peti- tioner would be involved in practical difficulties, and that granting of said appeal would not substantially deviate from the purpose of the Ordinance, in view of the nature and character of the street: APPEAL GRANTED BOARD OF APPEAL By. �- �V-J 7 Secretary it _ June 120 57 James F. Tobin DECISION: Salem Housing Authority Adjacent to Fort Avenue The petitioner submitted a preliminary plan of a proposed housing project for elerly persons in Salem, on land adjacent to Fort Avenue and requested a variance in the Zoning Ordinance to permit said construction, as said land is zoned as a Single Residence District. On June 100 2957 at 8:00 p.m., a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices postpaid to the peti- tioner, the abutters and others, and by advertisement in the Salem Evening Hews. • John J. O'Rourke, Treasurer of the .Salem Housing Authority, appeared in f avor and described the plan and construction of the proposed project which he stated would be of the multiple unit-type dwellings, including a community building, in connection with the proposed Old Age Housing Program. No one appeared in opposition. After due consideration, and by a unanimous vote of the members of the Board, on the grounds that the proposed project would benefit public interest and would not interfere with any rights of the abutters: VARIANCE GRANTED BOARD OF APPEAL ByG Secretary r J " s F.-Tobin June 12, 57 0 DECISION: Sun Oil Co. V 1 119 Boston Street The Petitioner submitted a plot plan of a proposed Service m Station and Lubritorium at 119 Boston Street to the Inspec- tor of Buildings, and requested a variance in the Zoning 0 Ordinance to permit said construction, inasmuch as approxi-mately 40% of the area is in a residential two-family district. The matter was referred to this Board by the Z Inspector of Buildings. Q On June 10, 1957s at 8:00 p.m., in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, .Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held, pursuant to the notices. mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters, and others, and by advertisement in the Salem Evening News. James A. Craig, Jr., Real Estate Representative of the Sun Oil Company, appeared for the petitioner. He out- lined the proposed construction and type of building to be erected, and dress attention to the fact that the building would be built on zoned laird but that the 50, section which would be used for driving, parking and planting was not zoned for business. Eight members of the Endicott School PTA appeared in opposition. Their opposition was based on the theory that it would create a traffic hazard. .. After due cansideration, with all five members present and voting, on the grounds that the proposed construc- tion will not substantially change the zoning aspect because of the nature and character of the area, and that in the opinion of the Board no traffic hazard" would be treaded: VARIANCE GRANTED. a BOARD OF APPEAL �Seeretary (L 00 0: Q O Z J t • WW4 James P, Tobin June 27 57 .�,T:Gmon: Arthur Js Jannall 19J Washington sq, North The petitione-* applied for a permit to concert the Second Church: In Balem (Unitarian) at 191 Washington 4q, North into a =museum, and was r+afused by the Inspector of buildings as this museum would be opora.ted as a commercial enterprise, and the proposed use would be in violation of the Zoning Ordinance, This area is zoned as a residence apartment house districts The petitioner appeaaled to this Board, and on June 26, 1957, at 8:00 p.m., in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Mall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held, pursuant to the notices mailod postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and also as advertised in the Salem Evenin; stews on June 17, 19579 The petitioner stated that he was buyingtt:e p^opesrty to tae used as a srasaaxm only, wher<„ valuable rsncient cars would be on display, as well as ot:;ar I ricana, such as as apothecary shop, grocery store, toy shape doll collection, an antique blacksmithehop, and a collection of coinaa and stamps. Ne further stated that a charge Mould be made for persons visiting tree museum, tlant t-ter® would be no sales force, tb at he did not intend to change the character of the structure in any dray, and that j no signs would be inst^fled otiser tkarus'teisted at present, The abutters appeared and had no objections if the character of the building was unezanged and was operated as an Americana museum only. After due consideration, the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, an the grounds that the proposed conversion would not substantially change the zoning aspoet of the arra, authorities the Inspector of Buildings to issue said permit, and ,grants said variance specifically as petition reads,, with the condition attached that said property will revert to its original status in the event, that the petitioner ceases to maintain said museum or sells said property, VARIANCE GRAiTA'A. ��B}}OfARD OF Ar PKAL June 27, 1957 DECISION; William McCarran 214 Loring Avenue On June 12, 1957, the, Board of Appeal made a decision denying appeal in the above matter. On June 26, 1957 the petitioner appeared before this Board, requesting reconsideration of said decision wherein the Board Cdenied approval of erection of a porch at 214 Loring Avenue. Petitioner stated he had not appeared at the hearing on June 12, 1957, because he had received no notice. CC A motion to reconsider was made and seconded, five members being s present and voting for reconsideration. 0. cc No one appeared in opposition, and the petitioner stated that the • M abutters had no objections. xAfter due consideration, the Board, by a unanimous vote of the 0 five members present, on the grounds that said proposed addition Z will not interfere with any rights of the abutters. APPEAL GRANTED. 11 Fa- BOARD OF APPEAL to By, Secretary' S a w � � J i h Fe Tobin June 27, 57 r DECISION: 'Thomas L. Pelletier r6 Ancient Roars The Petitioner applied for a permit to ez•ect Pjt addition to his furniture repair shop located at the re�.r of 6 Ancient Road, The Building Inspector refused the permit as the proposed addition would ba in violation of the Zoning, Ovdin4nces This area is zoned a €x single residence district, On June 269 29579 at 7:45 peat. in the office of the Inspector of quildIngs, City Hall, Salon, a m3etin3 of the Board of Appaal was held, pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the i ! petitioner,, the a,uttora and ott:?:rs, and also as advertised in the Saler Evening News on June 2,s 1457 , No one %)pearedd either for or againwt the Petition. APPFAaL BOARD Or APPEAL aeCreta I • .lune 27, 57 James-F.-Tobin DECISION': Ralph F. Salvo 16 Geneva Street On .Tune 189 1957, the petitioner was notified by the Inspector of Buildings that- he was revoking his permit for erection of a dwelling at 16 Geneva Street on the grounds that the dwelling was being erected less than five feet from the lot ling in viola- tion of the Building Ordinance. The petitioner appealed to this Board, and on June 26, 1957, at 7:30 p.m, in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City full, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Vppeal was held pursu-int to notices mailed "to the petitioner, the abutters and others. • The petitioner appeared": and explained that the plana which had been submitted to the person who put ,in the foundation, were in error. After due consideration, the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members present, on the groundo that the petitioner would be involved in practical and financial difficulties if this petition were denied and that granting of the said appeal would not substantially derogate from the purposes of the ordinance. APPEAL GRANTED. BOARD OF APPEAL / Secretary Y July 23, 1957 D'3018XON Wilfred Miall, Feat Headquarters, frac. 21 Rockford Street The petitioner applied for a per-nit to romodel the Baird floor of dwelling at 21 )Beckford Street to provide for an additional apartment, The Building inspector refused the permit as the proposed change would be in violation of tlo Building 4rd:inence, On July 22, 1957.9 at, 8:00 p.m. , in the Office of the Building Inspector, City Tdall, Salem,, a meet Ing of the Board of Appeal was heft prarsuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, • The petitioner deoak4bed the construction features and sutsm1tted statements shoarrira3 the coat of the property and alteration costs and explained the raced for additional income in order to carry the houses on a profitable beans, ' No one appeare€3 in o;rposition, After due consideration thereof the Board, by a unaaar£sa:�>us vote of all five: member* present end voting, on the grounds that the proposed chatnc;a is inked to alleviate a hardship upon they petitioner aid that the gra~ntirig of this apnsal will riot Sub- stantially change the natureor ehaar acte2, of tine area. APPEAL ta'FRAITTED4 BOARD OF APPEAL aeretary i July 23, 1957 MCISION1 Harriet E. Stockton 33 flow Street On ,Tune 12, 1057, the petitioner wsas notified by the Inspector Of .Buildings that he was revoking permit to erect a dwelling at 38 Bow Street as the construction of the dwelling was in violation of Section ll of the Zoning Ordinance, and not in accordance with the plan r1l9d with pstitlonerss application, as the required 10 ft. driveway was not provided, The p€stitioner appealed to this Board, and on July B, 1957, at 7130 p.m., In the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, 31 atlem, a meeting of the Board of plapeal was held pursuant to notices mauled to the petitioner, the abutters and others. Attorney Iiganan Marcus appeared for the petitioner. Be stated that the property had been surveyed sod the foundation put in ! according to the surveyorsa plan, touring the course of the hearing It developed that the lot line between land of the petitioner and that of Crestwood Realty `frust (surveyed by Flober I,-Bx'oia7, lis Boulder street, gust ay=e Mass. ), was in dispute, The hearing, wat continued for two weeks with the understanding that the surveyors would submit a new plan showing the correct line between land of the petitioner and that of the Crestwood Realty Trust. 01" July 22, 1957, at 7:30 P,m, in the office of the Tnaspector of Buildings, City Rall, Saalara, the hearing was reaiufted, with Edwin 2'. Brudsynash:i and rioger L. Brown, surveyors, present. Although the line in question wau still in dispaatm, as a rea4llt Of evidence suUmItted by both surveyors., it was determined that the foundation was V.-.iolly on ,lie laid of the petitioner. After due consideration, the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, ora the grounds that the founda- tion wAs laid in accordance w4th surveyors yl -i and is entirely on petitionerts load, and that granting of this aapaaal will not substantially derogate from the purpose of the ordinance, APPZAL GRANTED* BOARD OF APPZAL cam,..-, ��p/syn/ ��-,-�....��ff4t+,�.c�-• Secretary �"M-f• QN 1./�N /1. I • August 229 1957 DECISION2 i en jp.:min F'effer 16 Walter Street The petitioner applied for to permit to construct an addition to the commercial building at 16 Walter Street, The Building Inspector refused the permit as the proposed addition would be in violation of the Building Ordinance. The petitioner appealed to this board and on August 12, 1957 at 7s30 P.M. in the office of the Building Inspector.. City Ball, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was hold pur-- snaant to the notices m-wiiled postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others. Mr, Puffer appeared sdad explained his need for an addition stating than , the bu-111dinl would be used for the manufacture of toys; that no laequer would be usod, sn d the proce+.,ss mould consist of baking enamel with no open flame, the toys being • dipped In the enamel. Fie further :stated that the building would be equipped with sprinklers and that the now addition would be completely fire-proofed with fire walls and one opening with .a fire door, and that at no time would thea•a be stored more than ore hundred to one hundred and fifty gallons of baking enamel, and that the toys would not be sprayed. After due consideration, by a aaaaanimous vote of the five members present and voting, on the grounds that a refusal of said appeal .could result in hardship and injustice to the petitioner, and that such variance does not conflict with the spirit of the Suiill',nS Laws, tyle Board grants the permit on the condition that said addition be usod solely for the manufacture and dipping of toys In corriection with patitioner#s business, and that the addition be completely tireproofed with one opening; heaving a fire door. APPEAL C�fidNTTI3. BOARD OP APPEAL B Secretary August 22, 1957 DECISION; Isidore L. Gallant 68 Dearborn Street The petitioner applied for a permit to use the property he owns at 68 Dearborn .Street .for the storage and maintenance of boats. The Building Inspector refused the permit as the proposed use of this property would be in violation of the Zoning Ordinance• The petitioner appealed to this Board and on August 12,1957 at 8;00 poet. in the Council Chamber,, City tial&, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to the notices mailed post- paid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and by advertise- went in the Salem Evening Vows. .Attorney William Z. O'Brin© appoured in behalf of the petitioner, stating that for same years boats have been stsred at this looa- tion; that the petitioner does not intend to build boats, a boat house, or make extensive repairs to boats; that if this permit were granted tine petitioner could police the area and keep old boats off the property. He further stated that this was a non- conformIng use because the property has been used for the storage • and maintenance of boats for over thirty years and that the ,petitioner was merely asking the Board to accept an existing situation; and that the petitioner has owned this property for twenty-four years, Attorney k+illiam He K, Donaldson appeared in opposition in behalf of residents in the area, stating that this property is zoned as a single residence district and granting of the permit would be a breach of the Zoning Ordinance. Attorney Robert H. Reardon appeared in opposition in behalf of the North Zhore Babies Hospital, stating that granting of this permit would interfere with the patients of the hospital. Ap- pxo ximately forty residents of the ansa appeared in opposition. The Hoard is aware that it is authorized to grant a variance where, owing to conditions especially affecting such area but not affecting generally the zoning district in which it to located, a literal Inforoement of the provisions of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship to the petitioner and where dei. rable relief may be granted withaout substantial detriment to the public good, end without nullifying or substantially derogating from the Intent or purpose of such ordinance, but not otherwise. The Board Poole, in this case, that, any such variance vA th or wi thout restric- tions would be nullifying and derogating from the intent or purpose of the Zoning Ordinance in this particular instance. APPEAL DF1TM, �� a. • ,„,._�_Q ( HOARD OF APPEAL • !,� ' Bya Secretary October 6, 1957 RECISION. Edward Go Leonard 11 Appleton Street the petitioner applied for a permit to re=del the three-family dwelling at 11 Appleton Street into n four-family dwelling, The Building Inspeetor refused tiro permit as the proposed c7hange would be Ixi viola- tion or the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, The petitioner appealed to this Hoard and on September 30. 1957 at 7a30 P,mo In the office of the Building inspector, Gita* Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was hold pursuant to notices mailed post- paid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and by advertising in the Salem Evening 'News, Attorney Sumer L. Raymond appeared for tho petitioner, He described the construction features sold aubmitted Statements, showing, the cost of t. e property aa3d altera- tion costs mnd explained the nt*ed for additional Income In Order to carry this property on a profitable baste. So one appeared in opposition's After due considersAtion theroofo the Board, by unanimous vote of all dive members preswit and votingo on the grounds th%t the proposed chango was Raised to alleviate a hwdship upon the petitioner and that the granting of this appeal will not asubstantially cbeangs than mature or c€(r atter of the area. APPEAL U0= BOARD OR APPEAL r • October $, 1957 DECISION; Hobert C, ohinmel 8 Pershing Road On. Auguast 27, 19VT the petitioner applied for a perr,3t to erect a garage end breezeway at 3 Per*hing Roads The Building Inspector refused the permit an the proposed construction .would be less than .lave feet to the lot line according to plan submitted with petitioner's application, and therefore in violation of tie City of Salem lluilding'3rd.inances I pe titioner appealed to this Board, and on September .30, 1957 at 8 P.W. in the office of the inspector of • Ruiidingrs, City HaII, Salaam, a meting of the Board of Appeal wt.s held, pursua-Lit to the notices mailod postpaid to the petitioner, tAe abutters and Ethers,. The petitioner appeared and explained that the existing house foundation had not been loceatod ucrrectly on the lot as planned anti that the averall distance from the adjoining ds4elling would be greater tinkm wIghteen foot. No cane oppoared in opposition, t,fter due considOration thereof, the Board, by unanimous vote of fall five meebers present and votua„ on the graasads that granting the permit will not aubstnntially derogate} from the purpose of the Ordinance and will not substgnti.aal.ly cnari3e the nature and c sa+racter of the area, APPAL GRANTMo iiOAhD OF APPEAL tary cls eLERxos OFFICE � SALEM, MASS. January 8, 1958 TO ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS: This office is in the process of preparing Annual Reports for submission to the printer in connection with the printing of City Documents for the year 1957, as ordered by the City • Council. Late submission of Annual Reports has in the past delayed the preparation and printing of the City Documents. Accordingly, your early cooperation in submitting the Annual Report of your department, in duplicate, to the City Clerkas Office will be greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, , A S E EY CITY CLERK ,�c ,� ;,, „-�. . . � P:1 n S �t ' �GOnDl}q, �7 (ft#uJ IItt�Pl1i, WILLIAM F. ABBOTT +" JAMES H. BOULGER 4anuary 14., 1958 JOHN M. GRAY J. ARTHUR MARCHAND JAMES F. TOBIN To His sonar, Francis X. Collins, Mayor The Honorable City Council Salem, Massachusetts Gentlemens Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter. 4. Section 16,of the Revised ordinanoas of Salem, Mess+richusettes 195'# ;the Board , . of Appeal herewith submits its report and a summary of decisions rendered from April 340 1957 to October S, 1957. le Anastasia !3e Young, 190 Horth street, was granted a permit to construct an additions to the building at this address, with conditions. Apzril. 24.0 1957, 2e Cavin Ja 0oggin# 300 Lafayette Street, was granted a permit for a three-room apartment on the third floor at this, address* Aril 240 1957. 3e Richa►rd ,Roy, 36 Paltrier Street# was granted a permit to remodel the third floor at this address to convert into a thzroo0family dwellissge June 130 1957. 4e Salem housing Authority was granted a variance to construct a housing project for elderly persons on land adjacent to Fort Avenue. June 120 1951s 5. Sun ail Company was granted as variance to build a service station and lubritorium at 1i9 Boston Street. Tune 12, 1957s 6e Arthur Jo Jannell was granted a variance to convert the Second Church in Salem (Unitarian) at 191 Washington Square North mato a museum, with conditions. - June 27. 19571, 7e WilliamMcCarron# 234 Loring Avenue, was granted a permit to erect a porch at this addrosa, June 270 1957. $r Thomas L.Pelletier, r6 Ancient Road, was denied a permit to erect an addition to furniture repair shop at this address. June 27, 1957. 9. Ralph y'. Salve was granted a permit for creation of a . dwelling at 16 Geneva Street, less then five feet from the lot line. June 270 1957'. •C� Board of Appeal • 10: Wilfred Hell; Beat Headgtitaarterao Eno'., 21 beckford Street:, was granted a Permit tor emodel the third floor of dwelling at this eddrea s, allowing an additional aper tment, July 23► 1957. 11, Uarriet D» 5toogton, 36 Sow Street, was granted a permit to Great a swelling at tble addreess# without provision for a t «*foot driveway. .Tiny 23, .1957. 12, 8"48Min Yoffer► 16 Halter Strd6t, arae granted a permit to construct an addition to tho eommeresial building at this address► with e®nditions. August 220 1957. 13, Isidore L: Gallant, 68 Dearborn street► was denied a porialt to use property at this address for storage and maintenance of boats. August 22► 1957. . 14. Odward GF. Leonard, 11 Appleton Strset, was granted ,a permit to remodel the three-tamily dwelling at this address Into a four•family ,dwelling► October 89 1957. 15. Robert C. Schimmel* 6 Pershing Road$ was ,granted a permit to erect a garage And breezeway at this address, with less than five root to the lot line. October 8► 1957. • Respectfully submitted, BOARD OF AP11SAL . are a 'T` James F6 o: , eo • J February 18, 1958 DEC, ISIONt Albert .C. Meyer 164-168-172 Lafayette street The petitioner applied for a permit to erect an office building at 164-168-172 Lafayette Street, to be Teased to' the ;Metropolitan Life Insurance Company,, and was refused a permit by; the Inspector of Buildings as .the proposed use would be in. violation of the City of Sales=Zoning;.Ordinance, the particular area being zoned as an apart- went house district, and the it oposed use would be in. vlolation of Section 6 of the Zoning Ordinance, The Petitioner; appealed to this Board and on February .10, 1958, at 8:00 p.m: in`the_offica of the Inspec tor of Buildings; CityHall, : a1'®mi a: melting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to the noticss mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and as adverb®ed in.; the. Salem. Evening News on January 31, 2958. • rAttorAey John,Allen, Murphy appeared for the pstition®r.. Attorney Leo He Tracy 'appeared in behalf of. the owner, Mrs. Florence Saunders, Mr. Norman F. Kennedy, manager of the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company office in Salem appeared in favor, Attorney John .4. Carson appeared in opposition, in behalf of Mrs, Eva K, Cimon, ,Trustee under the Will of Alfred. Cimon, owner of .property in the .vicinity but not abutting .the land -in question, Mr. and Mrs. Louis Fisher, abutters, appeared in favor,' No opposition was offered from the other abutters, Evidence was presented that the petitioner has an option to purchase the _land .from P16rence Saunders and that he proposes to erect a one- story colonial ,masonery building to be occupied by; the Metropolitan Life Insuranee:Company, the building to be leased toTthem exclusively as an office building; that the building is to be 103+ on Cedar Street by 1512 on Lafayette. Street;that .theValue would be approximately . 200 .000,; that the landrmedsures. 1202 on Cedar Street by 1682 on Lafayette :Street, The Board was':Also informed that the�Saunders family owned this :property,since the turn of the century and that, in 1914 the buildings burned down and the lend has since been vacant; that the owners have paid taxes to the City of Salem since that time; that the land to not adapted for construction of an apartment house because of the location, its depth, and the necessity for parking facilities; that the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has been doing business in Salem for approximately forty-five years ,and wishex • to stay in Salem; that it anticipates an expansion in the next five years necessitating an increase in employees(the majority of .whom would be residents of Salem), and that .because of the additional tax revenue, the. City as a whole would derive a diaect benefit, After due consideration, the Board, by unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, being familiar with the location, and being aware that the location as presently zoned ,could be used for • erection of a dwelling for three or more families, a lodging house, a nursing or convalescent home, an apartment house„ an apartment hotel or hotel, trade or business school, collegeor club; and on the grounds Wit , the proposed variance does not substantially derogate from the intent and purpose of the Ordinance and that it would result in direct benefit to the City, and that denial of the proposed variance. would create a practical difficulty .and unnecessary hardship upon the- owner, authorizes the inspector of,Buildings to issue said .permit and grants=.said variance with the condition attached that the building be a one-story colonial masonw y structure to be occupied by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company as an insurm ee company office only, and that the ,,property 'revert to its original status in the event that the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ceases to occupy said premisesas an insurance company office, VARIANCE GRANTED, BOARD OF APPEAL rj Secretary ._Z, March 18, 1958 Re: Rene Marquis 17 Chandler Road ( Lot 18) The petitioner applied for permit to erect a two-family dwelling at 17 Chandler Road (Lot 18) . The Building Inspector refused the permit as the proposed building would be in violation of the Zoning Ordinance, the area being zoned as a single residence district. The petitioner appealed to this. Boar d and on March 17, 1958 at 7:45 p.m. at the office of the. Building Inspector, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and as advertised in the Salem Evening News on March 8, 1958. However, the hearing on this petition was cancelled as the Board was informed that the petitioner had withdrawn his application. • • March 18, 1958 hBCIBZ02Ta Laurlea Ls Italian 56-56 gseex. Street The petitioner applied for a permit to alter the third floor of dwelling at 58*58 Neoax Street to provide for two additional apartments, The Building Inspector denied this permit on the grounds that it was in violation of the Building Ordinance, whereupon tha petitioner (Appealed to this Board, On February i0, 1958 a meeting of the Board of Appeal was hold pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, . the abutters and others. The petitioner explained the need of the two additional apartments, sae-Clog +a total of six .spare- mentat and outlined the changes and additions contettplatedb Decision In this case was withheld by the Board until the nest meeting„ The Board to aware that it may dispense with and vary the application or enforcement of the Building Code in as ass which do not appear to them to be within the intent of said Code. In the instant case the Board feels that this is a case that falls within the intent of the Building Code, At a meeting of the Board held March 17, 1958, at 7:30 p.m•, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, voteds APPAL ABNUD Board of Appeal Sy March 18,11 1958 DECISION; Wilfred Hall, Treas. Heat Headquartere, Inc. . 6- Andrewe Street The petitioner applied for a permit to remodel the third floor of dwelling at 6 Andrews Street to provide for an additional apartment. The Building Inspector refused the permit as the proposed change would be in violation of the Building and Zoning Ordinances, The petitioner appealed to this Board, .and on February 10, 1958, at 7:30 p.m, in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting .of Ue Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and as advertised in the Salem Evening News on January 319 1958. • A representative of the petitioner appeared and described the construction features and explained the need for additional income in order to carry the house on a profitable basis. No one appeared in opposition. The Board made no decision at this hearing pending receipt of a statement .of income and expenses concerning this property, which was submitted February 12, 1958, and on March 17, 1958, after due consideration thereof$ the Board,, -by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, on the grounds that the proposed changes are asked to alleviate a hardship upon the petitioner, does authorize a variance in this parti- cular instance. APPEAL GRANTED. Board of Appeal • By - -- of . l �Csv�• ` secretary V Rarch 18, 1958 DECISrON1 Armand 0. Kate 59 Hasan Street ,The petitioner applied for a permit to alter' the existing three-story three•ramIly dwelling at 59 aseax. 4treet to a dire-family dwelling. The Building Inspector rai'usod this permit as the proposed change would be in violation or the Building Ordinance, whersupoh the petitioner appealed to this Board. On March.17, 1958 at 7;30 psme in the office or the Building . Inspector, City full, Salem, a meeting or the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others* • The petitioner preseated his case# and explained the need for additional income in order to carry the hcuse .on a pound financial basis, No one appeared in opposition, Upon due consideration thereof, the Hoard, by a unanimous vote of all rive members present and voting, authorised the altera- tion .to provide for two families. on the first floor, but is denying alterations to provide for additional apartments on the second and third floors• APPEAL GRANTRb IN PART and DMICO IN PART. Board or Appeal t�aora wg March 18, 1958 DECISION: Moses Alpers 11 Hancock Street . The petitioner applied for a permit to alter a. two and one- half story two-family dwelling at 11 Hancock Street into a four-family dwelling, The Building Inspector refused the permit as the proposed change would be in violation of the Zoning and Building 'Ordinances, The petitioner appealed to this Board, and on March 176 l958 at 8:0p p.m, at the office of the Building ,Inspector, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pur- suant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters; and others, , and as advertised in the Salem Evening News on March 8, 1958. • Attorney :Albert R, Fite off appeared for the petitioner and outlined the construction features contemplated by the peti- tioner, and explained the need for additional income in order to carry the house on a sound financial basis, stating that the dwelling had been vacant for the past year and one-half, After due consideration thereof, .the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, on the grounds that the proposed changes are asked to alleviate a hardship upon the petitioner, does authorize a variance in this parti- cular instance, APPEAL GRANTED, Board of Appeal By Secretary ppHq, (1Ii ofttiem, sttcl�>�se##s A o .r Offite of foe (9i#g (91erk 9�CfMlni ppm' 19 �ugusiine �J_ �avmeg (gap(Ui..h April 11, 1958 Board of Appeal City Hall Salem, Mass. Gentlemen: This is to notify you that at a meeting of the City Council held on April 10, 1958 the Mayor's reappointment of Mr. James H. Boulger and Mr. Jaws P. Tobin as members of the Board of Appeal for terms ofothree years expiring May 1, 1961 were confirmed under suspension of the rules by a roll call vote of 11 Yeas. Yours truly, • � n AiJ�UST T�A2�7( CITY �LpMOlT9.9 Q OB yP O g a • Y + r !/�� �<P/NINE oO�P Ctv of '*alem' ass. Titg fdlerk's M££ire April 11, 19 58 Mr. James P. Tobin Dear Sir: .You are hereby notified that you have been appointed as a member of the Board of Appeal of the City of Salem for the term of ?year s ending may 1, 1961 Please call at your earliest convenience and take the oath '. of office. res ectful 4ry�y Oath of Office.Administered of k. 12 D42 1M.9.12-46 J4arae 170 1958 t3��[�ltit �esearae tias^araisa 22(024 Pleasant no the petitioner applied ror a vomit to Alter the third MOO of the wooden dwelling at 22-4 Pleasant dtraet to pravido for two additional apartmanta. Vho guildirag - pectOr- an the posit to the proposed *;*tang*- mould be to Violation of the Building Ord3xaaasa00e The petitioner appealed to this Board and on May 190, 1956 at 8100p0an. In the office or the Thapeotor of Hulldinss, city Salle 54$.0:4, sa meotlxag of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notice* 1104 postpaid to the petitioners the .abutters #44 othore, Attorney itumaaep Low ftnymcnd appeared for the petitioner and described the construction features Brad esap141nod the need for additional Incefs In order to carry the house on a profitable basis* no one appeared In pppositione The doaard and* no decision at this bearing pending receipt of a statement of Saco= and expenses aonoernina this pro- perty, and the teens was continued to F3141e 9, 1958. 00 Jane 9, 1958 the hearing was rtanmxad and the statement Of ina«ctMO aand e)Waaraeoe eras aubanitterd by Attorney Re rad, Jitter slue a QUOI teratlOn Wereaf, the Board, by a unanimous vote or all five membera present and voting, on the grounds thgt the proposod change was auk*4 to alis vista a 31ardsh1p upon the paatiltioner, and that the granting or this appeal will not substaantlolly derogate froz the purpose and Intent of the ftl4ding Orddi:aaaace, W—. R4L ORAeITMe Board of Appeal .19 � � r use June 17, 1958 DECISION: Casimir F. Obremski 10 Oak Street On March 10, 1958 the petitioner applied for a permit to erect a 161 x 221 wooden garage at the rear of dwelling #10 Oak Street. The Building Inspector refused to issue the permit as two sides of the garage would be close to the lot lines of the adjoining properties, and therefore, would be in violation of the City of Salem Building Ordinance. The petitioner appealed to this Board and on May 19, 1958 at 7:30 p.m. , in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was ' held, pursuant to the notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others. The petitioner appeared and explained that it would ,be necessary to build within 2* feet of the adjoining land to avoid the removal of a tree. Helena Kneeland, an abutter,_ .appeered and had no objection to the granting of the permit if a fence was erected on the line of her property and that of the petitioner. It was agreed between the parties that a fence would be erected and Helena Kneeland would pay one-half of the coat, not to exceed $25.00. The hearing was continued with the understanding that Vie fence would be erected. Subsequently, the petitioner notified the Board,, through the Inspector of Buildings, that she was no longer desirous of . erecting a garage and requested that her application be withdrawn. At a hearing held June 9, 1958s the appeal was dismissed. p Board of Appeal Secretary July 34 12958 pROISIONs gdith Co MaoWhinale, 0 DuFfum street (Lot No. 4) The ;�stltloner, applied for a Permit .to sub-divide her pro porty at Buffum Street as shown on a plan filed with the Inspector. -of Buildings and was informed by the Inspector of Suildingo that these was no objection except in the case of Lot Hoe 41 as the proposed lot line would provide leas Space than as specified In the Building (Ordinance and would, t6hareafore, be in v Blatt= of said ordinance* The petitioner appealed to this Doerd* and on July 28# 7958 at 8too p*m* In the office of the Znspeotov of BuIldings, City 8611, 6alOM# a Meetln3 of the Bastard of Appeal was hold pursuant to notice$ assailed postpaid to the petitioner$ the abutters and Others* The petitioner outlined the proposed sub«division and stated that it was necessary to have the lot line at Lot floe 4 as Ohom on said plan to permit access to Lot Nee 3 witbout Grespasslas on Lot Noe 4* No one appeared in oppoeltiun* After dues consideratlon thereof* the Dowds by a unanimous vote of all five members present and gating, on t.%e grounds that the .facts 1n this case indicate these is sound reason for placing said line an indicated on the plane APFFAL GRANTO°De Board of Appeal ��c�etary +3u17 31, 195 DMGISIOUt Eleanor Wo Clarke 46 1faatter street; 'the pstitio tr= aPta116d for permit to remodel the third flow of fs dwelling at Itb Walter Street to provide for an additional apartment. The Tx spector apo 3ulldings rgl'usad t:be tsssrrait as the proposed change would be in violation of tbo i'oning and Building Ordinances, The Petitioner appaailod to this Bosrd, ar_d on Jr ly 284, 1958 at 8:30 P,m. in 1,140 office of bats Zae}pector of DUP1 dings,, tit$ Hall., Buser:, a neating of tt'aa Board of Appeal was ziald Pursuant to notice$ mailed Poetnal'a to the patktIoner, the aautttsrs and others, and as advor- Used in thn 3telfmi even ,itng flows ort du:iy 23, 1958. *'osVph Cla 'kes, husbarr"a of the pe; ztjoror, �.ppeared a*nd espy.-Ined that his :rife: had purcassue�d the property* in ebruf-any to muit,t;aain it as a two-family house Taut that after ' madp o- 1, repairs it eraa not possible to c%rr;f this house on a grofitablo }baasls WaOLthout additional Tacoma, Letters from three abutters were received by the dotard In which the abutters etteted they had no obueactions to granting arld permit. go arae .appearee In opposition, + After due ecngldsr._e tic>r�. .,taarmo�, th..n EQsrK, by as aanaaia?tt3ua vote Of all five membere present; and voting, on the grounds that tho proposed changes are Basked to alleviate a hardship aapvta vho POt:.lt ionor, dose authorize a variance La this j>ArtT0U1%r iaasstar*,40o APPtSAL GRANTIi:, Dowd of Appeal i Jh17 31s, 1958 87 Jacksor. street The pet;tioner applied for permit to erect an 18+ x 28+ store at 87 Jackson ;�Lreet, and w.w re.'�' sed by the lnes"p etor of BuIldInSo as the proposed use would be in violation of the ?on ng, Ordinance>, The L)Q't '1tioner EIpveoled to this Board, and on July u�y 1956 at 7zY) porno in to office of he Lizpaator of 'Ou4,faiixkr4e, City Uall; wi;-Umo a moestir of the 1'oard of appeal vmr� hold, pus"vuent to t,a3 rioticos ri ci'led postpat d 'tai the w.,titiU.t er, tl.e abutters end others* and as advertised In tits Scae . Evening Maws on July 190 195$, • Arztia= La5on;eY fgppo red .for t';e petitioner and atated tbmfa the aetore lie uscd a , n. 1tinchsonette and sard-wiah shops mi h parking fac1 'Ities provided on mi adjoinin,; lot. An abutter, Dents ::nr+ spas, appeared in favor, 140 one appeared tion.apposil After dae consIdergtion, the D*I- rd, by a ut wilmous vote of all five membfire present and votin=;, on the groi ids that the proposed use would not snbatnntlally o3 ange the Zoning € spect of, thc a a, ant; oozes taie Tarspector aBuildingz to Issue said pexnmi,t. `lf,A'SAl° 4 GRANTRD. Doar of Appeal 7 Secretary • CITY OF SALEM r APPROPRIATION DEPT. Board of Appeal ITEM • PAY TO Name Dolores E, Labr e Street 237 Essex Street City..........alem,...............................State.._Z.ftas.............. i i r t r vPur.Order Invoice Dlscount Net r Services $250.00 I w TOTAL 0250.00 Enclosedplease find cheque in payment of your account. For r additional information please contact the department involved. • September 15r 1958 f»I:3IOM 0ohn E. Belockp M.B. Richer d S. Doyle, M.ID. 66 Highland Avenue The petitioners applied for a, permit to ereet a medical build Snag at 86 HIghlaand Avenue as shown on a plan flied with the 'Inspector of Buildings. The Inspector of Buildings refused to issue the permit as the proposed building, to be of frame construction, would be an In- sufflo&4it distance from the lot line as required by the Building Ordinance, and would, therefore, be in violation of said Ordinance. The petitioners Eapealed to this Board, and on September 6, 1959 at 7:30 p.m. in the Offlce, of tqe Inspector of Buildings, City Hull, Salsms a meeting of vie Sos" d Of Appeal was held • pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioners, the abutters and others, Dr. John E. Selock and John J. Mahoney appeared and stated that the reason for the building being erected on the lot line as Shown on plat filed, to to allow a driveway on one side of the property to provide for parking at the rear. They stated that the nearest abutter involved had been eon• suited and she stated that she had no objection to the plans as submitted. No one appeared in opposition. ` After due consideration thereof, the Hoard, by a unanimous vote of all mombera present and voting, on the grounda that onfbrcement of the regulation would result in an rejustice to the petitioners: APPEAL GRAN M. Board of Appeal 41 Secretary • • October 1, 1158 D=1310114,4 �Petexr Cepol.88 y 7 Buff IVn The petitioner applied for a permit to remodel the third floor of for bwo and one-half story dwelling at 57 Buff'um Street: to provide for an additional apartment, i d the Inspecto.- ofBuildings: refused ltlio permit as the pY'6y3 ueft change Mould be in violation of `,tae Building and Zoning Ordinances, The petlt:ioaier appealed to this Boaxd, aazad on September 29, 195 zit: 6:00 p.m. ;n tAa office of the Inspector of Buildings, City BaaU, Ualam# a meant ng of the Board of Appeal was hold pursuant to--noticas mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the slyatters, r4mi others, and as advertised In the :alom wv€rn3ng Flews on .September 23, 1953. • The petltloner appoara and stated that he had purchaaed they house about slx years ago to maintaaln It as a two-family diial:lin.g. He furtber stated tbat after a tetasl.ve repairs and improvements, the rent from the two apartments did not permit Hiatt to carry this house on a profitable baasi.s. Be also stated that }ted owns the house adJoining 57 Buffum; Street and It has a third floor apartment. Flo one ap aired Un opposition* After due consideration thereof, the Board* by a unaniatous vote of all five members present and vot3zsg, on the grounds that the proposed obange is askad to ellsvi:-ate a hardship upon the petitioners nad that the canting of thio appeal will not substantically chenge the nature and character of the areae APPI4f, €RANTF . Board of Appeal. f October 12 1958 DBOI9TONE Warren F. Jones 64 Summer Street The petitioner applied For a permit to remodel the two- family dwelling at 64 Summer Street into a throe-family dwelling, and was refused a permit by the Inspector of Hutldinga aae the proposed alteration would be in viola- tion of the tatty of Salem Zoning Ordinance. The petitioner appealed to this Berard, and on September 29, 1958 at 7a30 p.m. in the office of the Inspector of Baaildings, City Mall., Salem, s meeting of the Board of Appsal was held pursuant to notices mEaflled poatpatd to the peatItIoner, the abutters;, and others, snd as adver- tised: in the Salem Zvening News on September 22, 1953, u€ge Philip Y, Durkin appeared for the petitioner and stated th t the first floor apartment was a large one and that because of extensive repairs and improver"nta made by the petitioner the rent required year the first:, floor opartment was too high for the averego f:-tmily to pc,y. lie further stated tbmt two %partments on the first floor would permit the petitioner toeaarrg this house on a profitable basis, which he is unable to do at ;)resent. go one appeared in oppositions Pfter due consideration thereot's the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members pr".#) at and voting, on tl-,e grounds that the proposed change to asked to tallovieatreD a wardship upon the petitioner, does authorize a v€�rlence I this particular instanoe. APMAL GRANTED. board of Appeal By October 17, 1958 DECISIONi Salem Housing Authority Summit Avenue The petitioner applied for a permit to construct multiple dwelling units for the aged, on Summit Avenue, and was refused by the Inspector of Buildings as the proposed construction would. be in violation of the Zoning and Building Ordinances. The petitioner appealaO to this Board, `and on October 14, 1958 at 7:30 P.m. in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held- pursuant to notizes mailed to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and as advertised in the Salem 'Pvening News. John J. Mahoney, architect, appeared- for the Salem housing Authority and outlined the plan and construction of the proposed project, exrlaz ping that there would be four twos• • �sto-ry dwellings with ei ht units In each dwelling.. Alice Miller, Scott 11, Curtis .for Ernest G. Curtis, and Mr. =�.d ,Mrs. John L. Tranos appeared in opposition. After due eonsigration, the Board by unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, being familiar with the location and on the grounds that the proposed variance does not substantially derogate from the intent and purpose of the ordinance and that it bTould result in direct benefit to the City, and that denial of the proposed variance would create a practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship, and that the proposed variance would not substantially change the aspect of the area, authorizes the Inspector of Buildings to issue said permit and grants said varialce with the condi- tion attached that parkin; facilities be provided; VARIANCE GRANTED. Board of :Appeal By VSboretary CITY OF SALEM APPROPRIATION DEPT. BOARD OF APPMU ITEM PAY TO Name Dolores E. Labrie . street 237 Es'ea Street City......;a!QTt1A..................................State.... 1499 ............. Pur.Order Invoice Discount Net Services $100.00 • TOTAL 100.00 Enclosedplease find cheque in payment of your account. For additional information please contact the department involved. CITY CLERKS OFFICE SALEM, MASS. � . January 14, 1959 To ALL DEPARTMENT READS: This office is in the process of preparing Annual Reports for submission to the printer in connection with the printing • of City Documents for the year 19581 as ordered by the City Council. Late submission of Annual Reports has in the past delayed the preparation and printing of the City Documents. Accordingly, your early cooperation in submitting the Annual Report of your department, in duplicate, to the City Clark's Office will be greatly appreciated. Very yes AUGUSTINE J. TOOMEY CITY CLEW • T'ckL _. ,� V January 23, 1959 DECISION: Grace Holland 18 Lee Street The petitioner applied for a permit to erect a one-family dwelling at 18 Lee Street on a lot 251 wide and 1021 deep. In the opinion of the Inspector of Buildings, the proposed structure would comply with the Building and Zoning Ordi- nances, but did not issue said permit as he was notified by Attorney Morris J. Gordon, attorney for certain residents of that area, that they would be aggrieved by the issuance of said permit. . (Lee Street is zoned for single residence dwellings, ) The matter- was referred to this Board by the Inspector of Buildings in accordance with Section 17 of the Zoning Ordinance, and on January 12, 1959 at 7130 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the • Board of Appeal was held, pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner., the abutters, and others, and as advertised in the Salem Evening News on January 3, 19599 Attorney Charles F. Manning appeared for the petitioner and outlined the .plans and construction of the._proposed dwelling, stating that the dwelling would be erected in acoordance with both Building and Zoning Ordinances, and requested :that a permit be issued and a variance granted, if necessary, in accordance with the plans on file. Attorney Morris J. Gordon appeared for Frank W. Monson, " an abutter, and others, and argued that issuance of said permit would impair• the value of his clients' property and the appearance of the street, as this proposed dwelling was not. of the type existing in said area, and objected to the issuance of a permit under Sections 48 and 51 of the Building Code. Several residents of the area appeared in opposition. Attorney Gordon requested time to file a brief, and the hearing was continued until January 19, 1959 . 0n January 14, 1959, a cpmmunication waswr$ceived from Attorney Gordon requesting an extension of one week to file a brief, and the extension was granted. On January 21, 1959, Attorney Gordon filed a brief. • On January 23* 1959, after due consideration of the Board, by unanimous voteofall five members present and voting, being familiar with the location, on the grounds that issuance of the proposed permit would not substantially change. the..aspect,.-of the area, and that denial of the proposed 'permit ,would .result in manifest Injustice and would create a practical difficulty and unnecessary hard- ship, and, that issuance of said permit would not conflict with the apkit of the building laws, variance of the Building` Gode' Is gr'rited in accordance with plans on file In the Inspector of Buildings' Office, and the Inspector of Buildings `is authorized to issue a permit `in ,accordance with said plans. Board of Appeal Secretary � J February 11, 1959 0=1310is Salam H0001 Authority summit Avenue The petitioner :applied for ac permit to construct two multiple dwelling units for the aged on suamaait Avenue. and was refused by the Inspector of Buildings. as the proposed construction would be in violation of` the City of Salem Building Ordinance, The petitioner kopeaaled to this Board, and on February 9. 1959 at 700 p.sn. in the office of the Inspector. of Suildings, City* Ball, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed to the. petitioner, the abutters,, and others, and an :advertised in the Salem Evening Nows an February 2. 1959, John J, Mahoney, architect, . appeared for the Salem grousing Authority and, outlined the plana and construction of the • proposed project$ explaining: that each building would consist Of a teen-€family apartment house of ordinary frame construction, covered in print by brick veneer. Stephen lisson, a member of the Salem ftouaaing Authority, informed the Hoard, that the design of the proposed buildings would conform with the area, that each building would consist of sig: apartments on the first floor and four apartments on the second floor, and thait the plana, called for fire walls separated Into four units, also, that Whe proposed construction has the approval of the State Housing Authority , Several abuttersa aappesx`ed in opposition to the frame construc- tion of the bulldinge, After due considerationje the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members voting, on the grounds that the proposed variance does not conflict with the spirit of the building laws, or of the Suildinj Code, in view of the fire walla separating each multiple dwelling into four units, and that as variance would result in di ect benefit to the City, auto orizms the Inspector Of BuildlAja to issue said parmi.t and gr€xa is said variance, according to the plans on file. VARIANCE GRANTED. Board of Appeal Secretary February 16, 1959 To His Honor, Francis X. Collins, Mayor The honorable City Council S lom Massachusetts Gentlemen: Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 4* Section 16 of the .Revised Ordinances of Salemo Massachusetts, 1952, the Board of Appeal herewith submits its report and a summary of decisions rendered from February 18, 1958 to October 17, 1958. 1. Albert O. Meyer was granted a variance to erectan office building at 164-168-172 Lafayette Street, with conditions. February 16, 1958, 2. Rene marquis appealed to this Hoard for a variance to • erect a two-family dwelling at 17 Chandler Road, and subsequently withdrew lila application. 3. Laurlen Lrf>talion was denied a permit to alter the third floor of dwelling at 56»58 Essex Street to pxovide for two additional apartments. March 18, 1958. , 4. Wilfred Hall, Treasurer or Heat Headquarters, Inc. was granted a pe3*.eait to remodel the third floor of duelling at 6 Andrews Street to provide for an additional apart- ment, March 18, 1958. 5. Armand 0. Hlais was granted a permit to alter the first floor of 59 gasex Street to provide for two families and denied a permit to alter the second and third floors to provide for additional apartments, March 184, 1958. 6. Hoses Alpers was granted a variance and permit to alter s two and one-halt story two-family dwelling at 11 Hancock Street to. a four-family. dwelling. March 18, 2958, 7. Jeanne Minn3.a was grantea a permit to alter the third floor of the wooden dwelling at 22-24 Pleasant Street to provide for two additional apartments. Junes 17, 1958. 8. Casimir F. Obremski applied for permit to erect a wooden garage at the rear of 10 Oak Street; subsequent to the hearing she notified the Hoard that she was no longer desirous of obtainin a permit and arcked that he aa��ppl,ics- tion be withdrawn, ppeal d emissed. June 17, ri9�o. 9. Edith C, XaoWbianie was granted a permit to sub-divide her property at Buffum Street. July 310 1958. 10. gloanor W. Clarke was granted a variance to remodel the third floor of the dwelling at 46 Walter Street t4. provide for an additional apartment. July 31, 1958, 11. Philip f3, Roklas was $ranted as variance to erect a store at 67 Jackson Street. July ,31s 1958* 12# Jahn Tit.. Melocks 2 .D* and Richw d J. Moyle. M.n, were granted Fa permit to erect a medical building at 86 Htghlmnd Avenuo. September 15s 1956. 13. Peter Copelas was granted a permit to remodel the third floor of the two and one-half atkary dwelling at 57 8uf'f"um S?ta�yyrh . eenet to provide for an additional apartment. October 1, x{.95 V.' 14. Warran, ,P. Jones was granted a variance to remodel the two-family dwelling Eb 64 Summer Street to as three-fa:aily dwelling. October 1, 1958, 15. Salem Rousing Authority was granted a variance to construct • multiple dwelling units for the aged on Summit Avenue, with condition. October 17, 1958. Respectfully submitted, BOARD OF APPUL icy amob Fs To-n. Socreta d tt . VbrAt tax A==X Arpm;rlatt= for MOX14 at AtQV4 al,%Wto 43$0.0 ctu of �*Ulent, 4169sar4uatta Mire of the Qtitq QIlerk AUVW&W t goo=% April 24, 1959 Board of Appeal c/o Atty. James F. Tobin 237 Essex Street Salem, Massachusetts • Dear Sir: This is to notify you that at a meeting of the City Council held on April 23, 1959, Mr. John M. Gra , St. was appointed to the Board of Appeal for the term expiring May 1, 1962. Yours truly,. CLERK i • May 210 1959 DECISXON3 NUszmar Market, Ina, 109 Bridge Street The petitioner applisd. for a permit to'.' erect .an addition and convert the existing first floor apartment to increase the size of the existing store at 109 Bridge Street and was refused by the Inspector of Buildings as the proposed :change would be in violation of the tits of Salem Building, Qrdinaned, The petitioner appealed to this Board, and on May 18,1959, . at 7 :30 p.m, in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, Edmund Kuszmar and Theodore Kuszmw appeared for the petitioner, They Informed the Board that they had been in business at this • location for the past twenty-seven years and because of the growth of their business it was necessary to expand, They ex- plained that the addition would be of masonery construction, with a brick wall on the lot line. No one appeared in' opposition, Upon• due consideration thereof, the board, by--a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, on the grounds that the proposed change would not substantially derogate from the Intent and purpose of the Ordinance, and that denial of the proposed variance would create a practical difficulty and un- necessary hardship to the petitioner' authorizes the Insp©ctor of Buildings to issue said permit and grants said varianoe, is.th the condition that the petitioner provide egress neuessary for the second floor apartment as specified by the Inspector of Buildings, APPEAL GRANTED. Boar of Appeal Secretary I • X210 1959 BROISTONt Laurien L' Ttalien 56-58 Essex street On February 109 1958, .the Hoard of Appeal made a decision denying appeal of the above matter, By letter dated May 1, 19590 Attorney Jahn R, Serafini representing the petitioner, requested re-opening of this matter for a. h©aring . on further evidence of hardship, end on May 18, 1959, ,at BoOO p,m,. �n the office of the Tnepector of Buildin-,s, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal. was held„ pursuant to notices mailed, postpaid, to the petitioner, the abutters and others, Attoxmey Serafini appeared in behalf of the petitioner and furnished the Board with statements showing the cost. of main- taining this property and explained the need for additional. Income in order to carry this property on a profitable basis, No one appeared in opposition. • After due consideration of the evidence submitted bl Attorm y Seraflni, the Board,• by a unanimous vote of the five members present and noting„ on the grounds that to disallow said appeal would worts a •finaneial hardship on the petitioner, Authorizes the Inspector of Buildings to issue a permit to remodel the third floor of the three-story, four-family dwelling at 56-58 Essex Str®et to provide for two additional. apartmentse APPEAL GRANTED* Boar of Appeal � � i May 23, 1959 DECISION: The 'Essex Institute CrOUninshteld-Bentley House The petitioner applied for a 'permit to allow wooden exterior sidewalls on a building to be re-located from outside the fire limits to an area within the fire limits, at the corner of Essex Street and Washington Square, to be restored as a historical structure, and was refused by tine Inspector of Buildings as it would be in violation of Section 43 of -the Building Ordinance. The ,.petitioner appealed -to this Board, 'end' on May 18, 1959'9 ° at 8m15 p.m. , in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a, meeting of the Board, ofAppeal was held pursuant to notices mailed to the petit.ioner,' the abutters and others, • ° : Albert Goodhue and Frederick J,,' Bradlee appeared in behalf' of the petitioner, They explained .that 'the building would be maintained as & historical structure; that it would be placed 16f from a brick stable ( the nearest structure)q' that , it would be set back 18+ . from the lot •line on Washington Square, 559 from the lot line on Essex Street, m d 90+ from . . the Safford House, and that all the buildings abutting this' property are of brick construction. Mr, and Mrs, Thomas Barrow and Miss ffuldah M, Smith appeared in favor and no one appeared in opposition, 'After due consideration, the Board, by a unanimous vote of . .all, five members..prssent. and, voting, on the grounds that the proposed -0ariance does not conflict hd th the spirit of the Building Ordinance in view of, the fact that the building would be maintained as• an historial structure and that the buildings abutting this property ara .of ,briek construction, and that the house, being of unusual Importance. historically and architecturally, would enrich the status of the City of Salaam from the standpoint of visitor appeal and interest, does authorize a variance in -this instance. APPEAL GRANTED, 7" .., Boar of .Appeal • ( _ y ,�,-.-,�6w~�- Secretary August 18, 1959 DECISION* smile O. Moreau 26 Dow �3treet The petitioner applied for a petrmit to sitar the third floor of"tine two and one�half atony two-family-duelling at 26 Docs Street to prov1dev for an additional apartment on tha third floor, The Inspector of Buildings refused the Permit as the proposed change would be in violation of these Building Ordinance. The petitioner appealed to thla Board# and on August iD, 1959 at 7130 P-me in the office of the Inspector of Buildings,. City Ball, Belema, a meeting of tics Bowd of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the, petitioner, the abutters and others, The petitioner explained that he occupied the second floor spart ment of five rooms with his f a miler of seven; that he, desired to alter the third floor to provide for a four-rooms apartment and retain two rooms on the third floor for his oats use# 'Het stated the ,additional four-room apartment to needed to pr'ovtdo additional income to permit him to carry this house on s profitable basis* 'Ito one appeared in op- position* After due donaldoratlon theroof, the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, on the, groundei that the proposed change to asked to alleviate "a hardship upon .tbe petitioner, and that the granting of this appeal Will not substantially derogate from the purpose €ani! intent Of the Building Ordinance. APPEAL GRANTED. Board of Appeal Secretary �3y r r i August 14 1959 DECISION: Anthony Goulet 21 Charles Street The petitioner applied for a permit to ,erect an addition to the garage at .21 Charles Street for storage- of refri- gerated. trucks. .The Inspector of Buildings refused the permit , as the proposed change would be in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. The petitioner appealed to this Board, . and on August 10, 1959 at 8t00 p,mi in the office of the Inspector Of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held, pursuant .to. the notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and as advertised in the Salem Evening News on July 25, 1959, The petitioner stated that the existing garage has been at • its present location for approximately twenty-five years and has been used during that time for the garaging of re- frigerated trucks owned by him; that the enisting garage has settled snd caused cracks in the structure, He stated : that contractors have estimated that it would be 'less costly and result in better work if portions of the existing garage were tak on down and rebuilt. The petitioner explained that the. street is higher than the garage floor and .that water comes into the garage;that it would be necessary to build up. the garage floor and 1'ay s new cement slabofor a floor, After due consideration, the, Board, by, a unanimous. vote of all fiv®, members "present and voting$ on the grounds: that the proposed addition would not substantiel ly change the zoning aspect of. the araa�, authorizes the Inspeotor of Buildings te;.eiasue said permit, with the condition attached that the p3Qirty --revert to its original status;.In the. event, the petitioner ceases to utilize said premises for the storage of refrigerated trucks. VARIANCE GRANTED, Board of Appeal `^ 3' • 171 4"71 r A September 1, 1959 DECISION: Newhall Realty, Inc, 7 Carpenter Street The petitioner applied for a permit to erect an -addition to ,,_the Nursing Home at 7 Carpenter Street and was refused by the -Inspector of Buildings as the proposed addition would be In ,violation of the City of Salem Building Ordinance, he :petitioner appealed to this Board, and on August 100 1959 at M5 Pom, in the office of the inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal, was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others , Mr, Leo Gordon appeared for the petitioner and explained the need for additional rooms to accommodate the present number of patients and to provide for a sitting room and recreation • room. No one appeared in opposition, No action was taken pending a view of the premises by the members of the Board, On August 22, 1959 at 900 a.m. the members of the Board viewed the premises and on August 31, 1959 at 700 Pomo in the office of the Inspector of Buildings,, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board was held to act upon the petition, After due consideration thereof, the Roard, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, on' the grounds that the proposed change would not substantially derogate from the intent and purpo,f, the Ordinance, and that denial of the proposed variance Mould create a practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship to the petitioner, authorizes the Inspector of Buildings to issue said permit and grants said variance, with the condition that the petitioner install sprinklers on the entire first floor of the existing structure and the first floor of the proposed addition. APPEAL GRANTED. BoaFd of Appeal • �( ^ Secretary �y CITY OF SALEM APPROPRIATION DEPT. BOARD OF APPEAL TEM Expenses - supplies PAY TO Name James F. Tobin Street 237 Esser Street Salem Masi• City.............................t.............................State..__........_.................. Pur.Order Invoice Discount Net stamps, envelopes, stamped env--lopes, loose leaf paper 35,00 TOTAL 35.00 Enclosedplease find cheque in payment of your account. For additional information please contact the department involved. CITY OF SALEM Iry APPROPRIATION € DEPT. BOARD OP' APP :111 TEM Services PAY TO Name Dolores E. Lsbrie Street 237 Essex Street city........Sru?m,...............................State...._.Ma s............._ Pur.Order Invoice Discount Net clerical services rendered $a 215.00 • TOTAL ; 215.00 i r 1 r Enclosedplease find clieque in payment of your account. For additional information please contact the department involved. I November 17, 1959 DECISION: John P. Conley r320 Canal Street The petitioner applied for a permit to erect a motel at the roar of 320 Canal Street and was refused by the Inspector of Buildings as the proposed construction would be in viola- tion Iola-tion of the Zoning and. Building Ordinences. The petitioner appealed to this Board,, and on November 90 1959 at 7s3O p.m.. in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall,, Salem,. a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to the petitioner, the abutters and others, and as advertised in the Salem Evening News on October. 15 and 190 19$9. Mr. Joseph Plahoney appeared for the petitioner and outlined • the plan and construction of the proposed motel. He described it as a ten-unit, one-story structure, floor on panel, with central heating plan. Ike further stated that a portion of the land in question 'is now zoned industrial, and the motel would be built on that portion now zoned residential. No one appeared in opposition. The petitioner informed the Board that he was withdrawing his appeal for variance from the application of the Building Ordinance, and that the motel would be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Building Ordinance. After due consideration thereof, the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, on the grounds that the granting of this appeal will not substantially change the zoning aspect of the area. VARIANCE GRANTED, Board of Appeal B � By Secretary • .,e,_,�.-,..�� rte, r November 17, 1959 DECISION: Naumkeag Trust Company 24x26 Central Street The petitioner applied for a permit to erect an auto bank building at 24-25 Central Street, and was refused by the Inspector of Buildings as the proposed construction would be in violation of, the Building Ordinance. The petitioner appealed to this Board, and on November 9, 1959 at 8:00 p.m. in the office of the Inspector of Buildings, City Hall, Salem, a meeting of the Board of Appeal was held pursuant to the notices mailed postpaid to the ,petitioner, the abutters and others. Mr. W. H. Jones, architect, appeared and explained that the proposed auto-bank would be a single-story modern building and that while it, would have exposed wood„ it would be • pressure treated, and that su-h structures were approved In areas having; severe building oodes. He further suited that most of the wall area on three sides -would be of glass, that there would be very little exposed wood trim, and that non- combustible building materials would be used. No one appeared in opposition. After due consideration thereof, the Board, by a unanimous vote of all five members present and voting, on the grounds 'that the granting of this appeal would not substantially derogate from the purpose and intent of the Building Ordinance, and that granting of this appeal would result in benefit to the public interest. APPEAL GRANTED. Boar of Appeal By Secretary December 2, 1959 DBUSION: James He Boulger, fir. 12 Monroe Road The petitioner applied for a permit to erect an addition to his dwelling at I2 Monroe :t-oad for a two Car garage end was refused b the Inspector of Buildings as the pro- posed construtti,on would be less than five foot to the lot line rand, therefore, In violation of the tuil.ding . Ordinaant e. The petitioner appealed to his Board, at d on December 1, 1959 at 760 P*r.. in the oftlee of the Irapeator of Buildings4 City Halls Salemp a meeting of the Hoard of Appeal was held, pursuant to notices mailed postpaid to • the petitioner, the abutter€: area others. The petitioner appeared and explained the construction of the S-grape and submitted a sketeb of the said garage In relation to the house and. the lest line. This showed haat th9 pt°opoaed porage would be lc 6" from the lot line, After Sue consideration thereon, tVe Board, by uiaanimov vote of all five members present and voting, on the grounds, -mat It would, be unreasonable to piesis t upon the five, foot rostricti.on because the petitioner does not have sufficient footage in said lot-.,to erect a gavage and comply with the Building Ordinan e, and a literal Interpretation thereof would result in manifest injustice. APPEAL GRAATIM6 Board of Appeal Secret;r8 { CITY OF SALEM APPROPRIATION DEPT. BOARD OF APPEAL ITEM Expenses PAY TO Name James F. Tobin Street 237 �-',nox Street Cit Hass. City...........................................................State.... ............................ Pur.Order Invoice Discount Net Subscription Zoning Bulletin : 25.00 TOTAL 025.00 Enclosed please find cheque in payment of your account. For additional information please contact the department involved. CITY OF SALEM APPROPRIATION DE". BOA` D OF APPEAL ITEM Services PAY TO Name Dolores H. Labris street 237 ,Essex Street icity.......... .............................. ........... i 4 Pur.Order Invoice Discount Net r i Clerical services rendered 075.00 r I I w i i TOTAL $75.00 E i Enclosedplease find cheque in payment of your account. For additional information please contact the department involved.