Loading...
260 LAFAYETTE STREET - ZBA ( 260 Lafayette St. R-1 Greystone Realty Trust o� 71 r* i � 4y 6 PM } �a of *IPM, �g$�tfju�etf$ Poarb of �ypr .I OrT ;0 2 52Ou '�E DECISION ON THE PETITION OF GP,EYSTONE REALTY TRUST FOR A VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 260 LAFAYETTE ST. CITY Cil-0 = A hearing on this petition was held October 15,, 1986 with the following Board Members present: Japes Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Fleming, Luzinski, Strout and Associate Member Labrecque. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner, owner of the property, requests Variances & Special Permit from density and setbacks to allow a single family dwelling to be converted to a three unit condominium in this R-3 district. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. special conditions and circumstances exist which especially. affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings and structures in the same district; b. literal, enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner; and 3c. desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is Section V B 10, which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section VIII F and IX D, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1 . Neighborhood was in favor of the conversion; 2. Structure is too large to make it economically feasible to remain as a single family dwelling DECISION ON THE PETITION OF GREYSTONE REALTY TRUST FOR VARIANCES & SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 260 LAFAYETTE ST. , SALE:•. page two I 3. This conversion will tie in with the existing development. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1 . Special conditions exist which affect this property but do not generally affect other property in the sane district; i 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would work a substantial hardship to the petitioner; and 3. The relief requested can be granted without substantial detriment to the i public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance 4. The granting of the Special Permit requested will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant a Special Permit to allow single family to be converted to three unit condominium, Variances from minimum lot width, lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling unit and side yard setback on the northerly side of the property. Special Permit and Variances are granted subject to the following terms and conditions: ,I 1 . Building must comply with all applicable Massachusetts State Building Code requirements; 2. All regulations of the Salem Fire Prevention Bureau must be adhered to; 3. A Building Permit for all construction must be obtained; 4. A Certificate of Occupancy for each unit must be obtained; i 5. Must meet any conditions of the Planning Board and the Historic Commission < GRANTED Peter Strout, Member, Board of Appeal A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK APPEAL FROM THIS DECISION, IF ANY, SHALL EE I„bi;E PLIR UANT TO SECTioG 17 OF THE MASS. • GENERAL LAWS, CHAPTER 209, A?:D SHALL RE HLED :!TFflN 20 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF FILING OF THIS DECISION IN THE 0FrICE GF TFF CITY C.Edii. -- - P02SAiJi TC Lif.ES, CEi'i CI- U1:S, CHAP=F: F?:',. S' IDS! 11. THE \';-.R;^:CE OR SPEC'AL FER.ilIT CRANiED HEREIN, SH=.LL f if'(E CF :T Citi iL A C -Y C' THE - FICATI.;'! OF THE Cii'1 CLER'; 'i F.'A; 20 D: . ' HA"S E CED R::J rH..S C76i FLED, OR 1'HAT. IF SO::'✓. A:7 APrEAL H ” e_:i; Fi.@. ?Ha i� K.S EEEii D =:J e2 DIC z: IS REGC:iOEO if! -,H.- S ;F! ECSES C[UCTf.'! GF i4c0 A;D C' - T;_ +,c i,..., OF THE OYlilci !F RE:;;"n;) 02I' R_e RDED AND-NG1ED i,,; TSF G InER'S CERTIFICATE OF iiTLE y BOARD OF APPEAL .CO r m� of "iaCem, 'Massfu4use##s Wm �$alrm Gum October 15, 1986 Mr. James Hacker, Chairman Board of Appeal One Salem Green - Salem, MA. 01970 Re: Petition of Greystone Realty Trust for Variances/Special Permit from density and setbacks to allow single-family dwelling to be converted to a three unit condominium at 260 Lafayette Street. Dear Mr. Hacker: Enclosed please find a copy of a consent for reconsideration signed by the Planning Board on March 20, 1986, regarding the above-referenced petition. The Planning Board carefully reviewed this plan during its deliberations on the development of ten units on the adjacent parcel. at 258 Lafayette Street, and again when the consent for reconsideration was voted. The Board is of the opinion that this proposal is an appropriate and compatible use for this site. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely yours, Walter B. Power, III Chairman Enclosure µ'CONN y� jorf /O�141P4L L� C":1U la(AL �T .� 5 iv .z .�c'T1t2lT1T� IIMTL� OYCE -52iI¢Itt. GIPEY[ Consent We the members of the Planning Board of the City of Salem, hereby consent to reconsideration by the Board of Appeal of the City of Salem of the action of the Board of Appeal' s on a certain petition filed on behalf of.Lafayette Real Estate Trust, dated July 24, 1985, relating to proposed construction at 260 Lafayette Street, Salem. A copy of said petition is attached to this consent. This consent is given in accordance with and under the terms of Massachsetts General Law, Chapter 40A, Section 16. Signed this b day of \ p A(.� 1986. I' S . �� 1Z 2 ��� 5.= GittjIIf �calem Ma 55 L Lib 5 W = 1 s 'aarb of c'�} enl� o 3 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LAFAYETTE REAL Ee_ATE TaiST, GEORGE BELISLE & DAVID JACOBSON, TRUSTL:S FCP A SPttTA1, p PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR 260 LAFAYETTE ST. , '6L 3 04 N '85 A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 198= Continued until July 24, 1985 with the following Board Members present: Fe Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Charnas, Gauthier, Luzinski and Strout. Notice $ire - ar �' Ssent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly publis`heH in Lne Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioners rest a Special Permit to convert single family residence to a four unit condomin. m and variances from all applicable density requirements in this P.-3 district. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is Section V B 10, which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance- with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section VIII F and IX D, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the exist_ng nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terns, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule that a Sbecial Permit request may be granted upon a finding by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the public heals ,, safety, convenience and welfare of the City' s inhabitants. The Variance 'which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings and structures in the same district; b. literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would in- volve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to petitioner; and c. desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of Appeal , after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: L -s DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LAFAYETTE REAL ESTATE TRUST, GEOR E BE-1-ISLE & DAVID JACOBSON, TRUSTEES FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE. FOR 260 LAFAYETTE ST. , SALEM page two 1 . Most units in the area are three family or less, with the exception of those dwellings that predate the Salem Zoning Ordinance; 2. Granting this petition would increase traffic and noise; Laurel Street is a small street and not conducive to extra traffic flow; L . This is a proposed historical district and the Historical Commission was opposed; Petition was presented in conjunction with another petition; f Petition was filled out in error and incorrect owe er was listed. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board of Appeal concludes as follow: Desired relief cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without substantially derogating from the purpose of the Ordinance or the intent of the district; Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not involve substantial hardship to petitioner; Requested relief is not in harmony with the district and will not promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare o,` - the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal by a vote oI' th,ee to two, 3-2, (!jr. Hacker and Mr. Charnas voting in opposition) denied the relief requested. SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE DENIED /James B. Hacker, Chairman A COF'_' OF THIS DECISION AND PLANS HAVE BEEN FILED WITH THE PLA1dNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK A.=PEAL FRChS THIS DECISION. IF ANY. SHALL BE MADE PURSUANT TO SECTION 17 OF THE MASS. G E.':ERAL LAWS. CHAPTER SOS, AND SHALL Bt Fi.ED WITHIN 20 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF FILING DF ;HIS DECISION IN THE OFFICE GF THE CIN LLEP.K. SPECIAL PER1'IT PUp<„Ni TO 1t.ASS. GENERAL Lt"N— CHAPTER SOS. SECTION 11, THE VARIANCE OR c« RT- HAVE ELAFS 61d] ND 'APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED. i F:di;EO HEP.EIS. SHALL RG'; Tqr_ EF.'EC_'T UNTIL A COPY OF THE GCGSIDN, EEAki11G THE CE i:'•:: OF THE CITY CLER\ THAs ~RLE, Tr AT IT H^% EE u' OIS"i�;SSED CR CC:;I'D 15 ,k ':ii AT, IF SUCH A:1 AFPEA: HA., E" OBE'DRDED F VP.ECORDIORTHS RECORDED S"D c NOTED YONrTHEDEEDS OW NER-SI CERTIFICATE Of TITLE. AtdE 0"r THE OWNER BOARD OF APPEAL