Loading...
1928-PLANNING BOARD A meeting of the Planning Board was held at City Hall on Friday, January 13, 1928, at 4.30 o 'clock P. M. All the members were present and the Chairman presided. Mr. Xilliam Pd. Osgood, Mnspector of Buildings, was also present. There was a general discussion of the question of three . ` families residing in two and one-half story houses and the suggested amendments to the building and zoning ordinances . On motion of Mr. 'Jiswall, it was voted to recommend that the Zoning Ordinance, Section 13 , be amended to empower the Inspector of Buildings and make it his duty to inspect buildings with re- gard to occupancy from time to time as occasion may require . On motion of Mr. Wiswall, it was voted to recommend that the Mayor and City Council make an appropriation sufficient to provide for this inspection. On motion of Mr. O' Donnell, it was voted to recommend an amendment to the ordinances to prohibit the installation of sinks in the third floor of a tsro and one-half story house , if, in the opinion of the Oity Solicitor, such action would be legal. On motion of Mr. Perkins , it was voted to oppose any amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which would allow the erection and use of two and one-half story houses to be occupied by three families in the General Residence Zone . The Board adjourned at six o'clock P. 11. , until Tuesday, January 17 , 1928, at 4.30 o' clock P. M. Attest:- Sectetary A meeting of the Planning Board was held at City Hall on Tuesday, January 17 , 1928, at 4.30 o ' clock P. M. Mr. Pitman and Ur. Perkins were present. Mr. Osgood, Inspector of Buildings, was also present. A quorum not being present no votes were taken but the members in attendance agreed on the following matters : That the Planning Board recommend to the Mayor and City Council that the occupancy of third floors of two and one-half story dwellings be allowed, provided such occupancy is in com- pliance with the conditions of the existing building ordinance , with the further requirement of an additional stairway, and in compliance with the provisions of the zoning ordinance; and with the further provision that alterations of existing buildings or • erection of new buildings to provide for such occupancy shall not be allowed after a certain specified time , preferably July 1, 1928. That the Board request an appropriation of $500. 00 for the year 1928. That arrangements be made with the Mayor and representatives of the City Council for a conference in regard to the above recom- mendation. The Board adjourned at 5.40 o 'clock P. M. Mr. O 'Donnell gave notice that he agreed to the above action of the Board. Attest :- • 0�%x oe Secretary A meeting of the Planning Board was held at City Hall on Monday, March 5, 1928, at 7.45 o' clock P. M. All the members were present except. Mr. O'Donnell and ',sir. Perkins and the Chairman presided. Notice was received from the City Clerk that the City Council would give a public hearing on March 8, 1928, on the petition of Arthur J. Murphy to have the zoning ordinance amended so as to allow the maintenance of a gasoline station at the corner of Highland Avenue and Danvers Road. On motion of Mr, wiswall, it was voted to appear at the hearing in opposition to the petition. It was voted to go on record as favoring the removal of the street railway tracks on Lafayette Street and a prompt trial of bus service on this street. It was voted to approve the proposed widening of. St . Peter Street between Essex Street and Brown Street, if done at a reasonable cost, with the taking of the Shapiro land for widening part of St. Peter Street as an alternative. The Board adjourned at Attest: - Secretary TELEPHONE NO6411MAIN HILL. 9OW &. ARLHOMANS- HILLOCKS,ABLcn81ABOSS.e BOSTs " N" CO UNSE LLOR S-AT-LAW - 53 STATE STREET. ROOMS 1033-1043 ARTHUR DEHON HILL. ROBERT SHAW BARLOW. ROBERT ROMANS, RICHARD H. WISWALL. , BOSTON, M_ASSACHUSETT S. FRANCIS G.GOODAL E. JAMES J. O'BRIEN. FANEUIL ADAMS. ROBERT S. SUGHRUE, {� HAVEN PARKER. March 9, 1928• J. Asbury Pitman, Esq. , State Normal School, Salem, Massachusetts. Dear Mr. Pitman : An interesting decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has just come down, Prusik v Board of Appeal of the Building Department of the City of Boston, 1928 Advance Sheets, 559.. It, to my mind, limits very materially the powers of the Board of Appeal in varying the application of the zoning ordinances. I am enclosing you a copy of a part of this decision which I should also send to the lawyer in Salem who is secretary of the Board of Appeal but whose name does not occur to me at the moment. I think it might be well to see that the Salem Board of Appeal knows of this decision. Sincerely yours, }RH19:MiSM Encl. { Prusik v Board of Appeal of the Building Department of the City of Boston, 1928 Advance Sheets, 559, at 562 . . . . . . . . . . . . "The essential parts of the decision of the respondent board are recited in the return in these words: "It appeared at the hearing that the structure in question is a single family house with four rooms and a bath. A two-car garage occupies a portion of the ground floor. The appellant desires to use the garage for battery service charging purposes and states that when he (she ) purchased the land he (she ) understood that it was in a business zone and could be so used. It turns out it is six feet away from a business zone and can not legally be so used unless the land in question is under the same ownership as that portion of it which is in the business zone. The Board, having heard the appellant and having heard testimony Both for and against the establishment of the proposed business, as well • as having viewed the premises, , is of the opinion thatthis is a special case involving unnecessary hardship in which desirable relief could be granted without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of the Act. Therefore acting under its discretionary power, the Board annuls the refusal of the Building Commissioner and orders him to grant a permit in accordance with this decision. " This is 4 somewhat amplified equivalent of saying that, because the landowner has a two- car garage in a part of the ground floor of a single family dwelling and merely "states" that when she bought the land she "understood" it was in a business and not in a residential district, a case involving "unnddessary hardship" is made out. It may be observed in passing that there is no finding by the respondent board that the landowner hoa- estly believed at the time of purchase that her land was in a business -� instead of a residence zone, or that there was any substantial reason why she, in common with all others, should not be charged with knowledge of what the public records and maps on file showed with respect to the -- II -2- zone in which the land lay. There is, however, a more fundamental difficulty. This decision does not come within the scope of the en- abling statute. It is manifest from the general purpose underlying any zoning act, as well as from the provisions of said Sec. 19, that the power to vary the application of the act is to be exercised sparingly. Exceptional circumstances alone justify relaxation in peculiar cases of the restrictions imposed by the statute. The dominant design of any zoning act is to promote the general welfare. The protection of health and the promotion of safety are salient factors. The stability of the neighborhood and the protection of property of others in the vicinity are important considerations. The financial situation or pecuniary hardship of a single owner affords no adequate ground for putting forth this extraordinary power affecting other property owners as well as the public. The only reason set out in the decision relates to the alleged disappointment of the particular landowner in finding out that her land is not available for business uses, but is just inside a residential zone. This is quite insufficient to constitute "unnecessary hardship" or to involve "practical difficulty" . The respondent board was required by said Sec. 19 to make "a ddtailed record of all its proceedings which record shall set forth the reasons for its decisions. " These words mean that there must be set forth in the record substantial facts which. rightly can move an impartial mind, acting judicially, to the definite conclusion reached. They are not satisfied by a mere repetition of the statutory words. . Minute recitals may not be necessary, but there must be definite statement of rational causes and motives, founded upon adequate findings. Bradley v. Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Boston, 255 Mass. 160, 173, 174. The governing statute has been before the court in Norcross v. Board of Appeal of the Building Depart- ment of the City of Boston, 255 Mass. 177, where its meaning and purpose were discussed at some length, and in Hammond v. Board of Appeal of the �I -3- Building Department of Springfield, 257 Mass. 446. In each of those cases, orders varying the application of a zoning act were not set. aside , although that conclusion was reached with hesitation. The case at bar falls short of what appeared even in those cases. In Bradley v. Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Boston, 255 Hass. 160, a decision of the board changing the boundaires of a district. was set aside. There would be little left of a zoning law in respect to the rights of neighbors or of the public, if a decision like that made by the respondent board in the case at bar should be permitted to stand. We are of opinion that the Legislature could not have intended that the protection afforded by said c. 488 should be so illusory. " • A meeting of the Planning Board was held at City Hall on Monday, April 2, 1928, at 7 .45 o'clock P. M. All the members were present except Mr. Perkins and Mr. Wiswall, and the Chair- man presided. There was a discussion of the question of removing the street railway tracks on Lafayette Street and introducing busses . Mr. Pitman stated that the Eastern Massachusetts Street Railway has refused to give bus service a trial. He said that the Mayor was in favor of having the Planning Board make a survey of thesituation and secure a trial of the busses . On motion of Mr. O' Donnell, it was voted to co-operate with the ;;Iayor, by making a study of the bus situation, and report recommendations to the Mayor and City Council. Arrangements were made to confer with the Mayor on Tuesday at 4.30 o'clock P. 14. The Board adjourned at 9.45 o' clock P.M. Attest:- AZ�4�� � Secretary A regular meeting of the Planning Board was held on Monday, April 9 , 1928, at 7 .45 o 'clock P. M. All the members were present except lir. Perkins and Lir. Wiswall, and the Chairman presided. On motion of "sir. O'Donnell, it was voted that the Board ex- tend a vote of thanks to Mr. Hemeon for providing a demonstration trip in his bus. Ur. Pitman reported reported on the demonstration. It was voted to send the following letter to the 1ayor: Hon. George J. Bates , tiayor, Salem, Mass. Dear Sir: In accordance with your request that bus service as a means of transportation be studied by the Salem Planning Board, we beg leave to report as follows: The Board has looked into the matter, and have formed the opinion that it wculd be of benefit to the city if a trial of bhs service on the tiarblehead-Salem line of the Eastern Masa achusetts Street Railway Company through South Salem was made . Vie find in our study that bus service has long passed an experimental stage and that busses of a high class are rapidly displacing rail transportation in many sections of the country. We find that first class bus service is maintained extensively in such cities as Richmond, Philadelphia, Newark, Pittsburgh and liinneapolis; that our two largest New England Railroad systems, the Boston & Laine , and the New York, New Haven & Hartford, are maintaining bus service in increasing proportions over such routes as the Boston-Portland and the Boston-New York; that the latter company, through its subsidiary company, known as the New Lngland Transportation Company, has transported in the last ten years a steadily increasing number of passengers which amounted to ten millions last year, and their officers report that this has been done without a single fatality. Busses of a high class have also displaced to a considerable extent the street railway service between Boston and `;Vorcester. We also find that the Eastern P.iassachusetts Street Railway Company, the company that has been requested by you to give a trial of bus service on the route referred to, also owns and operated a considerable number of busses which have displaced street car service on some of its short lines. We also find that the Boston Elevated has for several years operated an increasing number of busses; that they are extending their service and are improving the quality of service through the purchase of a superior type bus ; that they have recently experimented with a bus of modern construction which you, together with a representative of the Planning Board and representatives of the Chamber of Commerce, have had the privi- lege of inspecting and have found to be highly satisfactory. In the course of this investigation, we have found the officers of the Boston Elevated to be in agreement with the Public Utilities Commission that the cost of operation is sub- stantially less than that of operating street cars. The bus mile costs between 30 and 35 cents, while a car mile , according to their statements, costs at least 45 cents. The State Highway Commission favors the removal of street cars from main highways as far as possible, in the interests of public safety and the improvement of traffic conditions . In evidence of which, it seems likely that if cars are removed from Lafayette Street, they will contribute yp50,000 toward the expense of reconstruction, but not otherwise . Although the Board is not committed to the removal of the car tracks, we believe that our findings are such as to warrant a thorough test of bus service between Salem and Marblehead before the city is committed to relaying the tracks in connec- tion with the reconstruction of Lafayette Street. • We therefore respectfully suggest that if you are in agreement with our findings you endorse the same and request favorable action by the City Council, looking toward a trial of bus service by the Eastern Ylassa.chusetts Street Railway Company. Respectfully submitted, Salem Planning nig B oard On motion of Mr. Webber, it was voted to go on record in favor of the widening of St. Peter Street. The Board adjourned at 10 o 'clock P. M. Attest:- 4X Secretary J A meeting of the Planning Board was held.3cn Wednesday, June 6, 1928. All the members were present except Mr. Wiswall and Mr. Webber, and the Chairman presided. Mayor Bates and City Engineer Morse were also present. Mr. Morse gesented plans to eliminate certain grade crossings which were prepared as the result of the action of the joint meeting held with the Chamber of Commerce Committee. Mr. Morse explained the plans for changing the grade on Wash- ington Street between Town House Square and the present Rail- road station, and on Mill Hill, and placing the station just south of the Mill Street crossing. This plan represented the . minimum of expense to the City, only three buildings being affected. Washington Street would have to be graded and re- • paved and a bridge erected at the Mill Street crossing. This plan, involving,-.-depression of tracks and establishment of different grades would also affect the North Street crossing. It was suggested that the cost might be $3,000,000.00 of which the City would be willing to pay ten percent . It was decided that Mr. Pitman would report progress to the Chamber of Commerce Committee, with an active campaign to Laegin in September, and that the City Engineer would look up the original Harriman plan and be prepared to make a report on it. On motion of Mr. Perkins, the Board adjourned at 10 o 'clock P. M. Attest :- �Yh2G/ Secretary A meeting of the Planning Board, with the Mayor, the City Engineer, the Committee of Traffic Rules of the City Council and the Committee on Traffic of the Chamber of Commerce was held at City Hall on October 18, 1928, at 7.45 o 'clock P. Li. The Mayor presided. City Engineer Morse explained the plan of eliminating the Norman Street crossing, the plan providing for a depression of the tracks to a level of -6. He stated that he thought it advisable to submit the old Harriman, Boston & Plaine plan, pro- viding for a depression to 0, to the Railroad officials. There was considerable discussion of the matter. On motion of Lir. Friend, it was voted that the Mayor be given full authority to confer with the President of the • Boston & Maine Railroad and arrange for a conference of the Committees and the Railroad officials for the elimination of grade crossings and the removal of the station. The meeting adjourned at 9.30 o 'clock P. M. Attest:- Secrgtary • A meeting of the Planning Board was held on Monday, December 3 , 1928, at 7.45 o 'clock P. 11. All the members were present and the Chairman presided. There was some discussion of the question of rezoning the general residence district south of East Collins Street on Collins Cove for industry. There was a discussion of the matter of reprinting the zoning ordinance and map. On motion of Mr. Wiswall, it was trbt2d that Ttr. Pitman and the clerk look up the cost of publishing a map in colors . On motion of Mr. Wiswall, it was voted that the Mayor be requested to transfer $350.00 from the Planning Board appro- priation to a special appropriation for reprinting the zoning • ordinance and map. On motion of Mr. O'Donnell, it was voted that the salary of the clerk, Miss Curtis , be established at x}100.00 per year. On motion of Mr. Perkins , the Board adjourned at 9.15 o 'clock P. M[. Attest:- Secretary I • A meeting of the Planning Board was held on Monday , December 31, 1928, at seven o ' clock P. M. All the members were present except Mr. IViswall and Mr. O'.Donnell and the Chairman presided. Mr. Pitman reported on the conference which had been held with President Hannauer of the B. & Pvi. R. R. in regard to grade crossings. Mr. Hannauer said that the Railroad is at present without resources to Ebolish grade crossings. He thought it better for Salem to have the tracks overhead rather than depressed. In New York, the law allows the state to loan credit to railroads to abolish grade crossings . There is need for similar legislation in Massachusetts. The Boston & Maine is now paying $9,300.00 Pert'year for the pro- • tection of the Norman Street crossing. Th; railroad officials believe it advisable to install signal lights. Bdayor Bates joined the Board and the grade crossing situ- ation was discussed. The Board also discussed the matter of a parking space near the Market. The question was raised whether public senti- ment would be opposed to the removal of the Town Hall. The 11ayor suggested that the Board take the proposition under consideration during the coming_ year. The Board adjourned at 8.45 o 'clock P. M. Attest :- oYYszQ�iC. Secretary