Loading...
256-258 GEORGE A DAVID M - BELISE & JACOBSON, GEORGE A & DAVID M - ZBA ( I 256-258 Lafayette St. R-3 Lafayette Real Estate Tr. George a. Belise, Tr. David M. Jacobson Tr. - MM O �b 3 j % (gitg of ialem, fflasstz�lj�,se�s Pnxra of (4freal Irl, M W r m DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LAFAYETTE REAL ES1jTE TRUS4, GEORGE A. BELISLE, TR. , FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT 1ED -A VALANCE FOR 256-258 LAFAYETTE ST. , SALEM an C A hearing on this petition was held May 15, 1985 with the following Board Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Charnas, Gauthier, Luzinski and Bencal Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notice of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioners are requesting a Special Permit to convert carriage house to a four (4) unit condominium and all necessary variances in order to construct fourteen ( 1-4,1 , R e condominium units in this R-3 district. The Board of Appeal, after careful deliberation, established there was a substantial difference from the previous decision that had been denied by the Board on June 15, 1983. Substantial difference being the relocation of the carriage house from its existing position to that on Lafayette Street. Therefore, the Board of Appeal voted unanimously 5-0 to hear the petition. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is Section V B 11 , 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, ex- tension 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 Variances which have 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 petition; 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. L- DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LAFAYETTE REAL ESTATE TRUST FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT & VARIANCE FOR 256-258 LAFAYETTE ST. , SALEM page two 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 . There was some neighborhood support; 2. There was major neighborhood opposition; 3. Petitioner was unable to meet the-requirement of Chapter 40A regarding hardship. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1 . The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the Ordinance; 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not involve substantial hardship to the petitioner; 3. The requested relief will not promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal by a vote of three in favor of granting the petition, two (Mr. Hacker & Mr. Luzinski) voting to deny, denied the petitioner the relief requested. SPECIAL PERMIT & VARIANCE DENIED James B. Hacker, Chairman A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK 0 rM 1 r a r c� rn APPEAL FRO,, THIS DECISIO!i, IF AINY, SHALL BE MADE PURSUANT SECTION WOF THE GENERAL LASS, Ch'-,PiE^ 808, ?,D SHALL BE FILE^ Wi7,i!N 20 D MASS. - 4 OF THIS DEC'!S'ON IN THE Cr._-;CE OF THE CITY AFTER Tlib CA.TE OF FiJ::; PURSANT TO A_.,. CLEn"K. m - !E c, ^E L N, G.'.; CH;:PTER S^S. SEi P.i'''1 11. THl�iAP.'AF'CE tkSPECiAL F:•'S'!T GRANTED h COI, SH?tL t :E EFFECT UNTIL A C Pl , TH b r T E C r$ FICATIAT' OF iH CIT, CIER" Y:. - b '.'� OR THAT. IF SUCH A}� Hit J DAYS N?v i.-. „ h np�A .rEAL HUFF!, APP f... . o BEN F !E Ta: Fi:3 UFc - JISSOC CP "S:iCDiD. RE,E OED IY THE SOJ H ESSCi. RCaIS7RY OF Ccew A?.J I-;"EXED L!i�Efi THE NA1;E OF THE OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND NOTED ON THE DV;NER'S CEiJIFICATE OF TITLE. BOARD OF APPEAL e> I of 2IIPTit� ��1ic�55ttL lIStits Poarb of enl n DECISION ON THE PETITION LAFAYETTE REAL ESTATE=iP,UST, GEORGE BELISLE & DAVID JACOSSON, TRUSTEES FOR SPECT& PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR 256-258 LAFAYETTE ST. ;'SALEM a„ A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 1985 imd con ued until July 24 , 1985 with the following Board Members present: Janes Hac&+•, Chairman; Messrs. , Charnas, Gauthier, Luzinski and Strout. Notice of the h2giving 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. Petitioners are requesting a Special Permit to convert carriage house to four condominium units and all necessary Variances in order to construct twelve condominium units in this R-3 district. The Board of Appeal, after careful deliberation, established there was a sub- stantial difference from the petition that was denied by the Board on May 15, 19857 the difference being two less units on the property. Mr. Gauthier made a motion to hear the petition. Mr. Charnas seconded the motion. By a vote of 4 - 1 (Mr. Hacker voted in opposition) the Board of Appeal voted to hear this petition. 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 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 involy substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the 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. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LAFAYETTE PEAL ESTATE TRUST, GEORGE BELISLE & DAVID JACOBSON, TRUSTEES FOR A SPECIAL " PERMIT & VARIANCE FOR 256-258 LAFAYETTE ST. , SALEM t page two The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1 . The total of sixteen ( 16) units requested would overburden the area and a lesser amount would be satisfactory. The developer agreed to a total of ten (10) units; 2. The Carriage House will be moved to the front of the property as per plans submitted to the Board on July 24 , 1984; 3. The petition was continued from the July 17, 1985 meeting; 4 . Approximately two years ago a similar petition was denied; similar petition was denied; 5• Approximately two months ago a p , 6. The Board voted four to one that there was a substantial difference from the previous petitions; 7 . Several neighbors were opposed to this petition; 8. Few neighbors spoke in favor of this petition if the total number of units were reduced; 9. Because of the shape of the land, in all probability, it could not be used in a lesser fashion than the ten (10) units. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1 . Special conditions and circumstances exist which affect this lot and which do not affect the district; 2. The proposed use will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood; 3. Literal enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance would work a substantial hardship upon petitioners; 4 . The relief requested can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted four to one, 4-1 , (Mr. Hacker voted in opposition) to grant the Special Permit and Variance requested on condition: 1 . There be no more than ten ( 10) units total, as per plan submitted to the Board at the July 24, 1985 meeting; DECISION ON THE PETITION OF LAFAYETTE REAL ESTATE TRUST, GEORGE BELISLE & DAVID JACOBSON, TRUSTEES FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR 256-258 LAFAYETTE ST. , SALEM r. page three 2. Carriage House to be moved to the front of the property as per plans submitted to the Board on July 24 , 1985; 3. Snow must be removed from premises after each snow storm; 4 . Drainage must meet all specifications of the City Engineer; 5. A minimum of thirty three (33) parkings spaces be maintained on site, and of these thirty three (33) spaces, six (6) spaces to be used by neighbors on Laurel, Linden and Lafayette Sts. exclusively; 6. Building to proceed in strict accordance with plans submitted to the Board on July 24, 1985; 7. Plans must be approved by the City Planner, Planning Board and the Historical Commission; 8. A 'Certificate of Occupancy for each unit must be .obtained. SPECIAL PERMIT & VARIANCE GRANTED � r'r �,ms B. Hacker, Chairman A COPY OF THIS DECISIONv & PLANS HAVE BEE,.\ SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Y A Pr ES,L FR✓f,! THIS DEMIIH, 1.= ANY. SH='.LL BE fi(ADE PURSUANT TO SECTION 17 OF THE MASS: CEi;EP.AL LAWS, CHk.FTER £08. 4ND SHALL BE FILED 'NITHIN 20 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF FILING OF THIS DEC!S:Gii IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. ' TD :.'—:S. GENEF` LA':7S. CH.S°TER £0£, SECTIDN 11, THE 1'F htiCE OR S?EZI51 PER4iiT ?'ED P.E'nJa. SH-ILL Y51 TAKE EFFECT UNTIL A CCPV OF TH,E DEC!SITi. THE CERT- h"':. .'T !-% ERTFi:::.T!:.N C'= THE C;T! C_EP.`; THAT 20 DAYS H-.._ EL°.PSED AND NC APPEAL HAS EEr'; F!!ED, . 'r. TH-i. IF SO!:!: AN APPEAL HAS BEEN RLE. THAI IT HL.S 5EEN DIS::ISSED OR CE:;!ED IS RL: iR'ED Ifi THE SSUiH ESSEX RECiSTR'1 OF DEEDS AND INDEXED Pi -ER THE NA:4Z OF THE OWNETi W MEIs&1 OR IS RECORDED AND NDTED ON THE 04NER'S CERTIFICATE OF TITLE. BOARD OF APPEAL m RECEIVED Salem Historical COm�Iss� EM PLANNING DEPT. CITY HALL. SALEM. MASS. 01970 744-4580 May 15, 1985 Mr. Walter Power III Planning Board City of Salem One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Power: At its meeting of April 3, 1985, the Salem Historical Commission reviewed a preliminary site plan by Lafayette Real Estate Trust for 256-258 and 260 Lafayette Street. Based on the plan presented at that meeting, the Commission approved the relocation of the carriage house from Laurel Street to Lafayette Street with the provision :that it be set back six feet further from Lafayette Street than shown on the site plan. While the Commission approves the concept of the project as a whole, we have strong reservations about the treatment of the Gothic Cottage at 260 Lafayette Street.. Not only is this house unique in Salem, there being no other examples of its style and type surviving in the city, but it is also one of the most outstand- ing Gothic Revival dwellings in New England. Because of this extraordinary archi- tectural significance, the Commission has stated that it will not approve any exterior alterations to this structure. We are also very concerned about the pro- posed development of the cottage into five condominium's units. We feel that this many units will require extensive interior alterations which will destroy a good deal of the building's original architectural fabric. Under these circumstances, we feel that the Planning Board and the Board of Appeal have a unique opportunity to protect this very special building. The Historical Commission, therefore, hopes that as a condition of granting the variance and special permit, no more than two units will be allowed at 260 Lafayette Street. We-would also like to request that the special permit be contingent upon the His- torical Commission reviewing all exterior changes and new construction, including landscaping, at both 256-258 and 260 Lafayette Street. Si erely, l�C°� Annie C. Harris Chairman ACH/jp May 10, 1985 Chairman, Board of Appeals Salem City Hall Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Re: Application for Special Permits and Variance/ Lafayette Real Estate Trust 256-258 Lafayette Street Dear Mr. Chairman, This letter is to inform you that we are the owners of the property located at 254 Lafayette Street, and that as such we are abutters to the property which is the subject of applications being considered by the Board on May 15, 1985. We have reviewed the plans to be presented to the Board, and wish to express that we have no objections or opposition to the plans as presented. Ve'r'y truly yours, Edward Mello, Trustee MELLO REALTY TRUST