289 ESSEX STREET - FINBURY, ELAINE - ZBA 289 Essex St. 1B-51
Elaine Finbury
ck-
1
i
nti
/
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF
ELAINE B. FINBURY
TO GRANT VARIANCES FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ESSEX HOUSE
(A RESIDENCE INCLUDING 41 APARTMENT UNITS)
AT THE SITE OF THE SALEM THEATRE
289-293 ESSEX STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
Submitted to the City of Salem
Board of Appeals
April 16 , 1986
KENNETH E.LINDAU[X,YL.
1„c WV[VS • Ai[epy6[
iL L.M De•fie[[i
sn a ♦10
e[/ewe se O
INTRODUCTION
Elaine B. Finbury, hereinafter referred to as the
Applicant, has submitted an application to the City of Salem
Board of Appeals for variances regarding her proposed use of
the existing Salem Theatre site. Specifically, the Applicant
intends to demolish the existing theatre and replace it with an
apartment house (The Essex House) consisting of 41 apartment
units. The variances applied for concern set back require-
ments, density requirements and parking requirements. All of
these items will be addressed in this Memorandum and in the
presentation made this evening.
Due to the nature of the financing of this proposed apart-
ment house, twenty percent (208) of the apartments will be
rented to Salem residents with moderate income. The balance of
the apartments will be "market rate" apartments.
KENNETH E.LINOIUER.PC.
[a V•V 9 C. .T[HOMe[
e e /o.wf[el O
-2
I
HISTORY OF THE BUILDING
The Salem Theatre was originally built during the years of
1951 and 1952 by E.M. Loew' s Theatres Corporation. The
building was operated as a movie theatre by E.M. Loews until
1982, when it was sold to Salem Theatre Associates, the current
owner. The Applicant is a partner in Salem Theatre Associates.
Elaine B. Finbury and Salem Theatre Associates originally
met with Mr. Loew and representatives of his company in 1981 in
connection with the sale of the building. In connection with
the proposed sale, the Applicant attempted to obtain Federal
funds through the UDAG program to renovate the theatre and con-
vert it to a triplex and a restaurant. Despite support from
the City, the UDAG proposal was not recommended for funding.
In 1982, Salem Theatre Associates went ahead with the
purchase of the building, paid the City approximately $40 ,000
in back taxes which were owed on the property and invested an
additional $100,000 in renovations to the theatre. The
renovated theatre included a new stereo sound system, a new
screen, repaired projection system and seats, new lighting
system, new electrical system (in parts) , repaired heating and
air conditioning systems, new painting , new concession stand
and a completely rewired and rebulbed marquee. The renovated
theatre became somewhat successful at the start. An attempt
was made to bring in quality family films and the operation
went well .
KENNETH E.OL IINDAUCP.PC.
iH[nUSJS Cn . [KOU6[
SALEM...01970
-3-
Shortly after reopening , the City of Salem issued •a
license to Sack Theatres, which opened a three-theatre complex
and video arcade room at the East India Mall. Faced with this
competition for a limited amount of people and faced with the
competition with Sack for quality films, the renovated Salem
Theatre started to operate at a loss.
In order to stop the financial loss and save the Theatre,
Salem Theatre Associates applied for a video arcade license.
It was believed by the applicants that an arcade would generate
sufficient income to allow the operation of the Theatre to
continue.
At a well-publicized and well-populated licensing meeting,
the City of Salem Licensing Board denied the request for a
video arcade at the •theatre site. Objections from the neigh-
. boyhood stemmed from a fear of "youths" to the realization that
the character of the neighborhood was changing to a residential,
area.
As a result of the denial of this license request and as a
result of the dwindling market, the Salem Theatre closed its
doors in September , 1983. For the record, Flashdance was the
last movie at the Theatre and approximately 8 patrons showed up
for this last performance.
In an attempt to still save the, Theatre, the owners
attempted to use the building as a live concert hall. More
renovations were made, including a new stage and new electrical
service.
_q_
I
ii
Highlights of the concert program included concerts by
Judy Collins, Bonnie Raitt, Pat Metheny, The Animals, George
Winston, B B King, and comedy performances by Henny Youngman
and Larry Glick .
Due to the economics of the live concert business, almost
all of the above shows together with the dozens of others ended
up operating at a loss.
By the fall of 1984, the Theatre was once again closed.
This time it was for good. The fate of the Salem Threatre was
typical of a nationwide problem. In the past two years alone,
the Strand Theatre in Ipswich, the Exeter Theatre in Boston and
the Surf Theatre in Swampsc6tt, have also shut down forever.
In December of 1984 , the Applicant obtained an option to
buy the Theatre from Salem Theatre Associates. Potential uses
that were explored, but later rejected, included a night club,
a church, bingo hall, flea market and so on. In February,
1985 , the Applicant began her search for a way to finance an
apartment house on the site.
An application was filed with the Massachusetts Housing
Finance Agency to construct a 52-unit building with 2 levels of
parking. The project was designated as one of 11 in a state-
wide subsidy program to assist in furnishing housing for low to
I
moderate income residents (SHARP Subsidy) .
�I
i
.w orncn j
KENNETH E.EINOAUE..PC. -5-
THE RUFUS CHOATE HOUSE
SALEM.—
M.- IR70
The site and project had been selected by the State as
having the potential to significantly contribute to the
economic development and revitalization of downtown Salem. In
September of 1985 , the Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency
(MHFA) approved the loan for the project with the proviso that
a UDAG grant be also applied for and received in order to fund
the second level of parking. Despite twice being approved as a
UDAG project, the federal government did not allocate enough
money to the UDAG program to fund this project.
A scaled down version of the project was then designed.
This is the project before the Board of Appeals today. It
calls for 41 apartment units and 30 parking spaces in one level
of parking. In addition, the Applicant has received assurances
from the Salem Parking Commission that sufficient spaces are
available in the nearby municipal parking lots to handle any
additional vehicles.
The Theatre has been vacant and boarded up since 1984 and
is an eyesore to downtown Salem. The use of the site as a
theatre is impractical. In an editorial in The Salem Evening
News in the fall of 1984 , Jim Stommen, Editor , had the
following to say:
" . . .The point to be made is that the Salem Theatre,
while the site of many memorable visits by many residents
of the City, is neither a landmark nor a commercially
i
viable structure in its present form. The moviegoing j
I
L..D.EIEEE
MENNETM E.LINDAVE",PC.
mE nUFUS C"OATE M.L.E `
I.LYNDE...Err
u
-6-
I �
I
i
i i
market has dictated the necessity to turn to another usage
for the site.
We fully understand "and share" the sentiment
involved in wishing that such theatres could continue
to exist. There ' s nothing wrong with sentimentality, but
at some point, reality comes to the fore. In this case
reality says that putting up housing on the site is more
useful than wishing a traditional move theatre could
continue to operate there. "
E
NCN NETM C.LIN"AU CP.VC.
TIC RUSUS CHOATE HOUSE
e ei Tl♦ ee plU
—7—
THE PETITION
Specifically, the petition calls for variances on three
issues.
The first concerns the set back requirement in that a
small portion of the proposed structure will be within the set
back requirement of the Salem Zoning By-Law. The building, for
the most part, is within the requirements as set forth in the
By-law; however, due to the design, there is a slight encroach-
ment.
Anthony Casendino, the Architect for the project, is here
to address the issue with you tonight.
The second issue concerns density. The site has an area
of 13 ,240 square feet, more or less. Under existing law, this
would allow for 26 designated resndential units rather than the
41 requested. As you can see from the project breakdown, the
proposal before you includes the following :
4 efficiency Units
26 One Bedroom
11 Two Bedroom
Due to the economics of the construction trade, it is not
feasible to limit construction as required by the By-law and
" still be able to furnish housing as projected. As stated
above, 10 of the above apartments will be used to house Salem
F
residents of low to moderate means and the balance to house
market rate tenants. This attempt to furnish rental housing to
I
KENNETH E.LIND.UEN.PC.
inE P'LINO[f[xE[Ov 5[ it
SeiEll�']e ego i
o
Salem residents at a time when there is a housing shortage and
at a time when condominium conversion continues unabated, is
absolutely necessary. It is also the best use of a site that
has been underutilized for years.
The third issue concerns parking. As is plainly evident ,
parking in downtown Salem is a problem that concerns all people
who both work and live in Salem. It is a city-wide concern
that must be addressed whenever new construction commences
within the City. The Applicant has refrained from applying for
this variance for at least six months due to her many efforts
in trying to comply with the existing By-law. The original
plans for the project included two levels of parking. Addi-
tional proposals included the purchase or lease of the adjacent
municipal lot to construct additional parking spaces. Due
mainly to the harsh realities of the marketplace and the lack
of funds in the federal budget to assist the City, it became
economically unfeasible to construct the necessary parking
spaces on site.
The current By-law requires 1.5 spaces per residential
unit. With 41 apartments, the project needs 62 spaces. Thirty
(30) spaces will be provided in the building itself. In .
addition, the Applicant has made a formal request to the City
Parking Commission regarding the purchase of 32 stickers for
use in one of the many City off-street parking facilities.
While the Parking Commission cannot designate 32 spaces
LAW OP.IC EE
KENNETH E.LINDAUM PC.
THE NVFV6 CIO.TE MOU6E
Se—.E•'^..T
-9-
i
in any lot, they have advised the Applicant that the stickers
are available for her use. This purchase, while not a
technical compliance with the By-law, would enable the project
to comply with the spirit of the By-law.
e
It should be noted that in close proximity to the site,
the City of Salem maintains three public lots (Riley Plaza,
YMCA and Crombie Street/Essex Street lots) . In addition, the
East India Mall garage is only 3 blocks away. None of these
lots are fully utilized at night, when it is presumed that the
tenants of the building would be home. In addition, since the
housing will be in downtown Salem, there is a strong likelihood
that not all of the tenants will own motor vehicles. In any
case, the economics of the project make it impossible to locate
more parking spaces on the site.
1
I
I
I
i
I
i
KENNETH E.EINDAU".PC.
US
THE
a.LTS.F SFISS OUSE
S bi i/i.oS.. o
_10_
CONCLUSION
The 'Applicant urges the Board of Appeals to approve the
Petition for Variance as presented. The proposed use of the
site is in conformance with the uses designated in a B-5
district.
A literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning
By-law would involve substantial hardship to the Applicant and
the desired relief would not be detrimental to the public good.
Housing is needed in downtown Salem and this project would
I ;
provide 41 rental apartments to the downtown area. This
automatically means 41 .more families to conduct their business
in downtown, 41 more families to be downtown and 41 more
families that will assist in the revitalization of downton.
The project is designated as a rental project and 10 of the
apartments will be set aside for Salem residents of low and
moderate means. Surely, this will be good for Salem.
The financial realities of the building trade require that
this project go ahead with 41 apartments. The original
proposal of 52 apartments has already been scaled down but, at
this point, the economics dictate a project of this size. Due
to the shape of the site, the building will be as you see on
the site plan and that necessitates the number of apartments as
projected.
L '
The parking problem is a city-wide problem. It is a
problem which exists in all cities, whether the city be the
KENNETH E.LINDAUER.PC.
inf RUFUS
SeLS.,R..1.10005E
I
i
f
size of New York or Salem. It is a problem which must be
addressed by the City,_ as a whole., and the burden of alleviat-
ing the problem should not fall on the shoulders of one
developer. The Applicant has worked with the City, the State
and the Federal government in an attempt to meet this problem
head on. Unfortunately, the only help available was the use of
municipal spaces nearby. This is a realistic approach to meet-
ing the spirit of the By-laws and, as an added side benefit,
will make better use of existing municipal parking lots.
In conclusion, the Applicant urgently requests that this
Board grant this variance as requested.
ELAINE B. FINBURY
By her Attorney,
I"�a,l
U w_
K NNETH E. LINDAUER
The Rufus Choate House
14 Lynde Street
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Tel: (617) 744-5861
i
LAW OFICES
I
I
KENNETH
CLIN01VER.1C.
I
I
emex Camera Skop
CAMERAS - PROJECTORS and PHOTO SUPPLIES
i
p
286 Essex Street - Salem, Massachusetts 01970
TELEPHONE 7445835 -
April 10, 1986
James Hacker, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
J. One Salam Green
Salam, MA 01970
F Dear Mr. Hacker and Board Members:
I am writing this letter in support of a proposed
project at 293 Essex Street, the site of the former
Salem Theatre.
The Developer, Elaine B. Finbury, is supplying one
level of parking under the building which should take
care of the residents' needs during daily business hours.
I don't believe there will be any problem caused by this
project and feel that it will make a significant con-
tribution to our neighborhood.
P ter Zaharis
a�
i
t
!I
'Thr Gamn=fuw2h of 'Mttssachnutts
Amate
#ttte r4ause . pos#an
SEN. FREDERICK E. BERRY �t2 QDm 4�3',iB Y�� '1 it'1 tY COMMITTEES:
SECOND ESSEX DISTRICT C"` CB [ 1410 HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (CHAIRMAN)
WAYS AND MEANS
HEALTH CARE
ENERGY
INSURANCE
April 16 , 1986
Jim Hacker
Chairman, zoning Board of Appeals
One Salem Green
Salem, MA. 01970
Dear Mr. Hacker :
Please accept this letter of support on behalf of the Essex
House project in Salem. Elaine Finbury has a strong commitment
to providing affordable housing for the City of Salem, a goal
that I myself have heartily endorsed.
As the planning stages for this project are finalized, it
is imperative for the life of these units that a variance is
obtained. I appreciate your consideration and the boards
consideration of this extremely vital project.
Thank you.
Sin .
Frederick E. Berry
Senator, 2nd Essex
FB/jh
lYIiRTY-SEVER RAKER AVENux RRVF.REv, MASSACHUSETTS
l
Oka
, I-Lt adA t �co.ol,
�? .&ILL
h�c A- � jakAt.;. ccu ,
"It,whao nee,
l
(617) 745-3538
• Dance Class
'•= :��': • •• 3 02 Essex Street
Salem, MA 01970
April 16, 1986
James Hacker, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
Dear ?sir. Hacker and Board Members:
I am writing this letter in support of the proposed project
at the site of the former Salem Theatre.
My business is located across the street from the site. I
believe the project will significantly contribute to the neighbor-
hood by bringing more business to the downtown area.
A new residential area will also enhance the aesthetics of this
end of Essex Street. I hope you seriously consider this project.
Sincerely,
Harriet Soiref
Director
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ONE CHURCH STREET _
l'Sll [' ['.4 01.970
16171 7450500
RICHARD E. DALY April 16 , 1986
KEVIN T.DALY
i
Kenneth E. Lindauer, Esquire
14 Lynde Street
Salem, MA 01970
Dear Mr. Lindauer:
I am in receipt of your letter dated March 11, 1986 relative to
the development at the site of the Salem Theatre.
Ms. Finberry appeared at the last meeting of the Parking Department
Board and set forth the plans relative to the development including
the requirement of parking spaces in order to satisfy the requirements .
At the time it was explained to her that she was at Liberty to go
to the Parking Department office and secure the necessary cards in order
to park in the East India Mall Garage. It was also explained at that
time that no particular parking spaces would be designated, that her
tenants would simply pull into the garage and take any space that is
available.
Therefore, you may present yourselves at the Parking Department
Office and secure the necessary passes at the regular fees at any time
during the business hours.
If you have any further questions relative to this matter, please
do hot hesitate to inquire.
Very truly yours ,
CHARD E. DALY
1
RED/rl
r
�-%-, 'I'II I RT V-S"'FN BAKER RRVKItLV. $IAMMACHCMKTTM
Cr,�,�tiz, 16 /
vvia-A� 06\,L W A
�' Q�
B AJE
B F B F
\ Y I 2 evs I2 evw-1 Icow� T�FI 4 ��G2 NG
= G2
1 - A
2 Ic--� A. p E ( E\ G I I rvw 1 G 12pRr1 6°cart I
2h 5 I \^ I I ppm 1 pp7J� I .
1
`0000D`:.J
G2 C C I G2 C
j{
� \ � 1 - • 4� 4 +1� 1 taF-M
CaTep FINKwG N, N G
1 LVF+••I I 1 ipRrl I LGR+1 _ � ¢ $ U
34 \ cM.To,, I g �.
p I o t \ G2 G2 C2 G2 I
I �� � I Eo1eh � enrrl I CoKM
\ V
GIlY4F eAmm roue- Y=INC4 \` d
�. PRA'(KINI�1
o I H11,
Iw \ 4TUOIO -1= I 4Ta 10
tiTuplo .i i 5Tuolo
TE
\ K—tz 'e � � O I I I 1 laN;.EtuK INFIu-s�
t I =N ! i \ MFT.9 K1Ny LF�tEifJ V1 �
PlAttnNa c,T<IP ii I —
E � i'eprvf D2 I spwi D h � Aepwt D oval D vl cam �a
\ i _
I
644 qo- -tI
iM
E55Ex r�F_F_T I
«mF acs a
first level second level third level _penthouse WAS Oo9
. W ren
Wall - Section
0 1 2
P
e
—Parking/Entry Level C Residential .Levels
__ .3o-PaRKINra 5PPl. �� 41 TOTAL UNITS CgC
O N p
O 10 50 0 10 �O 50 0
a e
A m o
a
Y m
r m �
q
H
E N g
O � �
m e
A
00
1 I I I • 1 i 1 1i 7-7, ' ' 1 I I ' I -
ng [jES
rT
A
Li0 Q I] OH30 Q . I go Q ® II II ® Q
Y o
QDEE aoe m QE U1EE- m IIcl] a H 0m 0IIm � 0 i - £ Q ® O 0 G II
-- ---- - ---
II OF Si 0 ID 3 . -_ 0 � �] ®_� �Q ,----- � II L7 _ 0 IID -
u
-- __ ' I _.
- 1110° Ft ►- r r
--- -- - -
1
Crombie St.'' Elevation
, Essex. St. Elevation , ;
i o 10 2� 40 , o-- 20 <o
4 i
1
�>;yiZOoM � = LIVING / bININC� -� LIVING / f71NI1JG t3�DfZooM
LIVIN64 MINING ?>>GpfooM [3EbKooN1
AFEZ= n
v1~ooM Q El
KITGUEN °1 00
OO ° KI
t i
MAST!` KITGINI: N
�I;DR-OOMr /I
` t i! �I —r I O V ` O f i D•
I -T1 -- • m
Unit Plan A Unit Plan B Unit Plan C , C2
Two 'NJo DEt�KooM — 10-70 -A.N Two 8Ei7RooM.— q5o .FT
UNI'( G2 -SIMILAfL W
O
I�
/ - � GzT� JWY r! B�.LcoNY ;�A�co NY w
1.4
-- — ao W
M'I LIVIN b NIN KI-t'GNI;N
1 Bt=bRooM DININCI L1�/ING � � �
�EP�OOM MINING UVIN t�
x
4 y
B Q KITGFFI;N 4 " ❑ ! �t3>712L m
-
°o 'I�, IGITGN�N sl L Q c cgc
❑ iy: ( :' O N t
+ N P
r. da p
A
L
V
Y �
m <
Unit Plan D , D2 Unit Plan E Unit Plan F x
dN F�t%v?�M - 759 �m .ft, (UNI ( b) 7�i& 4,A.1T• ONE � ooM — Co25 h4,Ft. E N F
= ` s
cn
7 13 co ff. (UNIT 92) v a v `s
A �
g u
00 —
r
t�-- -- —I Pxy WINVoY( L C42
I II I
z
{ 0
� b�flRooM LIVING / 71NINCa �! � _
LIVIN �iEtiRooM LI`�INC� / }71NIN(a /
I '
t
n n. Qp
vIwIwc oo
00
Q
!oo — r __ QO KI'(GHEN
ITc�tt N
I Al
Unit Plan G ' -4, G2 Unit Plan H Unit Plan I TYPICAL UNIT PLANS
Il
G ONE eSVszooM— (o�-aq.Ft. (UNITG) ONE bEpr�c�M— (o-Jout.Ft. Gi7UT�lo gS� tia.FrC,AI.E I/g =1-0
144A.Fr (UNIT 42)
T c�
w f
i I II
__
. .
Y
L.
III
l r
.-. _ Y � � �
I ..., \ \
U
C
� \1
fX\v,\ I
11A\\nJ \ * '..
\ � \O
Vl
i
\�
i
1