Loading...
271 LAFAYETTE STREET - RODERICK, RICHARD & MARY - ZBA 271 Lafayette St. R-3 Saul Toby & Clifford Abel- son (petitioners) J � — Richard/Mary Roderick (own) -� mac, 3 yy.covrr, .�� •. of "§n1e , tt ttc11 �## s varb of �kpp •84 FEE 24 P '- :1 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF SAUL TOBY AND CLIFFORRItBELSON..- (PETITIONERS) RICHARD & MARY RODERICK (OWNERS) FOR A-. = _: VARIANCE FOR 271 LAFAYETTE STREET, SALEM A hearing on this petition was held February 15, 1984 with the following Board Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs., Charnas, Luzinski and Associate Member Bencal. 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 requests a Variance to allow them to use the first floor of the . premsies as a professional office. The property is currently owned by Richard D. and Mary R.B. Roderick and is in an 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, buidlings 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 the petitioner; 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_ After hearing the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal makes the following findings of fact: 1 . The size of the building on the premises is extremely large, and the first floor itself is so spacious as to be uneconomical to heat as a residential unit; 2. If the first floor cannot be used con:^ercially, the owners will be under a substantial financial hardship; 3. These conditions are unique to this property in the district. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board concludes as follows: 1 . Literal enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance will work a substantial financial hardship upon petitioners; 2. There are special conditions which affect the lot and which are uniou-- to and do not generally of€eet the district; DECISION ON PETITION OF SAUL TOBY & CLIFFORD ABELSON FOR A VARIANCE FOR 271 LAFAYETTE STREET page two 3. The relief requested can be granted without substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and without sub- stantial detriment to the public good. Therefore, the Board of Zoning Appeal voted unanimously to grant petitioners the Variance requested, provided that: 1 . At least six parking spaces be maintained on the premises; 2. A Certificate of Occupancy be. obtained; and _ 3. An approved A.C. Fire alarm system including smoke detectors, heat detectors, audible/visual alarm devices, converted to a fire alarm panel, be installed. VARIANCE GRANTED - Scott E. Charnas, Acting Secretary A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK ' n r 03 a V -r..� is c !F A;IY. SHALL BE MADE PURSUANT To SECTI022 17 OF THE GSC-SS• � _ APPEAL FRO:-. TH!S DECISION. GEY,ERAL L:.;i S. CHAPTER S':S. W D SHALL B FILED WITHI"7 20 DAYS AFTER THE LATE OF F1Lh{C CF T'.!S OEC1-1—vei IN THE OFFICE CF THE CITY CLERK. rc Sp". . PC S:�R'i TO .:`.ASS. G&1ERAL CA::S. C!1A°-ER SCS, SECTION 11. THE VARIAF... C'. "`IAC KE EFiEC7 UPlTIL A COPY OF THEGEC1SP=iI. B 'E 'HEC A - SHA'L _ ^�Hc CI'Y CLEH� iH'1 >0 DrAeS H'19E ELAPSEO AND NO AP?EAS HAS BEE;, F![cp CR Tii�.T. IF S!1E AN APPEAL HAS ", ..LE. THAT IT HAS BEEN DIS':ISSED CRD JVD is RECORDED IN THE SOUTH ESSEX REGISTRY OF DEEDS AND INDEXED UNDER THE AiA�\tE OF T•cir CSiiti' OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND NOTED ON THE OWNER'S CERTIFICATE CF TITLE... . BOARD OF APPEAL . r -< AT of tt1�zn, ttssncl�u p#ts ��ttrD rrf ��,penl ��lyl.M1a yl DECISION ON THE PETITION OF ROBERT D. BOWES, JR. ET AL. , REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR 301 LAFAYETTE STREET A hearing on this Petition was held on January 20, 1982, withthl Board Members present: Douglas Hopper,, :Chairman, Messrs. Hacker, Piemonte, eeliefryl { OL and Associate Member Martineau. Notices of the hearing were sent to abp{tse2rs and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. CITY i lE3•ti- Sk1_E'4,kAS& The Petitioners are requesting variances for the property at 301 Lafayette , Street to use the first floor of the property for a law office. A variance is required because the property is in a R-3 district where the proposed use is prohibited without a variance. The Board of Appeals, after consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing and after viewing the property makes the following findings of fact: 1. The property in question is the site of six residential units, four of which are in the building designated as 301 Lafayette Street. 2. The property is a .large structure which is easily adaptable to a law office. 3. The continued use of the property for only residential units presents an economic hardship on the Petitioners. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Board of Appeal. concludes as follows: (1) The property in question is unique because of its size and configuration and because of its unique ability to accommodate a substantial number of off-street parking spaces. (2) The conditions described above especially affect the structure in question but do not generally affee[ the zoning district in which the building is located. (3) The conditions described above which affect the land in question, but not the zoning district generally cause financial hardship to the Petitioners. (4) The desired variance may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good because the proposed use of the property is in harmony with other non-residential uses in the area. DECISION - ROBERT D. BOWES, JR. , ET AL 301 LAFAYETTE STREET Page 2 January 20, 1982 ' — Jay 2S 3 14 PP °BZ Therefore, the Board of Zoning Appeal unanimously voted in favoftLai* granting the requested relief. The Board grants a variance to the Petitioners on the following terms and conditions: C'T-y r'LGF-!t_ MEN.MASS. 1) The first floor of :the property designated as 301 Lafayette Street may be used as a law office for not more than 4 attorneys. 2) The property may also be used for not more than three residential units. 3) Petitioners shall provide eleven parking spaces at the site as shown on the plans submitted to the Board unless this requirement is modified in accordance with paragraph 4. 4) Petitioners 'shall submit their proposed parking plan to the Salem Fire Marshall for his review. Alterations, if any, in that plan ordered by the Salem Fire Marshall shall be incorporated in and become part.of this variance. An�ony M. Feeherry, Stcretar- r' L� A COPY OF THIS DECISION AND PLANS HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND CITY CLERK - CC 0. '.c.ihU L8 Ia .0 wrtOEU FCJ .....CJ .. .__. ..._. _ 4.