Loading...
1942-PLANNING BOARD A meeting of the Planning Board was held at the Hawthorne Hotel onTuesday, January 20kh, 1942, at twelve o ' clock noon. All the members were present and Mr. Butler presided. The Board proceeded to the election of officers . Mr. O'Ddnnell placed the following in nomination: Chairman - Warren H. Butler Vice-Chairman- Louis E. Baker Secretary- Henry J! O'Donnell Mr. Mann seconded the nominations and the officers were unanimously elected. On motion of IaIr. O'Donnell, it was voted to appoint Miss E. Mabel Curtis to continue in the position of acting clerk. Notice wau received from the City Council of a proposed amendment •` to the zoning ordinance providing for the creation of funeral home zones and creating a. specific funeral home zone at the easterly side of Flint Street from the corner of Federal Street to the business zone on Bridge Street. On motion of Mr. Merrill, it was voted that a hearing be held on Thursday, January 29, 1942, at eight o' clock P . M. The meeting adjourned at 1.45 P . M. Respectfully submitted, Secretary A meeting of the Planning Board was held in the Council Chamber on Thursday, January 29, 1942, at eight o ' clock P .' M. All the members were present except Mr. O'Donnell, and Mr. Baker presided. A hearing was held on a proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance providing. for the creation of funeral home zones and creatine a specific funeral h6me zone at the easterly side of Flint Street from the corner of Federal Street to the business zone on Bridge Street. Mr. Baker explained that Mr. O'Donnell had been given permission to withdraw from the meeting. Mr. Baker asked Mr. Rafter and Mr. Viswall, attorneys respectively for the proponents and the opponents of the proposed ordinance, to agree to consider both provisions of tkze ordinance at the same time, and they so agreed. Mr. Francis E. Rafter appeared in favor and reviewed the case. An identical .ordinance .had preivousiby been adopted by the City Council without first having been referred to the Planning Board for recommenda- tions . He said that there were already Funeral homes in the other Catholic parishes of the city but none in this parish. The proposed location is opposite a church with 3000 communicants. The side door of the building (on Flint Street) would be used for all deliveries and re- movals. In closing, Mr. Rafter stated that he was appearing as unpaid counsel at this hearing because of his present position as a City Councillor. Mr. Francis J. Murphy appeared in favor: Mr. walker Cahill stated that he was opposed to the zoning law in general and recommended consideration of a recent report of the Board •- of Appeal on Funeral Hbmes: The following were recorded in favor: Arthur J. Brop#y, . 418 Essex St. Frances M. Creedon, 432 Esse€ St. Mrs . John Shuer, 16 Highland Ave. Mrs. John C. Donahue, 27 Boston St. Mrs . James R. Brophy, 2 Dalton Pkwy. Mr. Richard H. wiswall appeared in opposition, representing Mrs. Dora J. Carroll. He stated that the adoption by the City Council of the pr&vious identical ordinance was illegal and the neighbors had taken steps to test its validity. He said the proposed amendment was a glaring example of special privilege and constituted "spot" m ning. He reviewed the history oftthe ordinance as follows : On Feb. 11, 1941 Francis J. Murphy applied for a permit for a funeral home at Federal and Flint Streets. The Building Inspector refused to issue a permit . On March 27th, an ordinance delegating power over funeral homes to the Board of Appeal was presented to the City Council and referred to the Planning Board, who held a hearing and made an unfavorable report to the City Council. The Council held a hearing and on July 24th referred the ordinance to the Committee on Ordinances . The Committee reported an ordinance providing for the rezoning of upper Essex Street. The Council voted not to adopted this substitute ordinance, but, on reconsideration, referred it back to the Committee on Ordinances. On September 25th, the Committee on Ordinances reported the ordinance identical to the one now under consideration and on November 13th the Council adopted the ordinance, which had never been referred to the Planning Board. A building permit for the corner of Flint and Federal Stre.ets was issued. The opponents petitioned the Board of Appeal to set aside the permit and the petition was denied. The present ordinance ,%,as then introduced into the City Council and referred to the Planning Board. • For a year all action in this case had been by Mr. Murphy and for his own benefit. The proposed zone is in substance I.Sr. Murphy' s lot . � J The proposed zone is extended down Flint St, to join the business zone on Bridge St. to satisfy the Court rulings on "spot" a ning. These rulings specify that there shall be no change for pecuniary benefit of one owner, and the city countil may change the ordinance only when the general character of the zone has changed. There has been no new business in this vicinity. The Planning Board has in the past tried to preserve the unity of the zoning ordinance and the Ie titioner trusts that they will continue to do so in this case. The following were recorded in opposition: Mrs . J. Newton Smith, 138 Federal St. Mrs. Edward G. Parrot, 140 Federal St. Mrs. Richard H. Wiswall, 14 Broad St. Mr. Rafter, in rebuttal, stated that the , demand for a funeral home is not made by Mr. Murphy alone but by many others in the district. He stated that Mrs. Carroll runs a gift shop and alodging house, and there are apartment houses and business establishments in the vicinity. There have been many economic and social changes since 1925 when the zoning ordinance was drafted. The Planning Board should -recommend changes when necessary. Mr. Wiswall said that he agreed that the Planning Board might well review the zoning ordinance from time to time, but changes should be considered in an orderly and comprehensive way and not exceptions here and there . Mr. Butler asked Mr. Wiswall if he was in agreement with the general provisions for funeral home zones In Sections 1 and 2 df the proposed ordinance . Mr. Wiswall replied he had considered case as a single instance and had not made a study if special zones are needed. Mr. Murphy stated that at an informal meeting with the City Council Mr. Wiswall was willing to agree to the amendment provided certain concessions were, all of which he was ready to comply with, except that he should have an entrance door for all people attending funerals located on Flint Street. Mr.. Walker Cahill spoke again on his opposition to the zoning ordinance in general. The hearing was closed. The meeting adjourned at 9.45 o ' clock P . M. Respectfully submitted, See etary CQRti� r TELEPHONE LAFAYETTE 1690 CABLE ADDRESS"HILLOCKS HILL, BARLOW, GOODALE & WISWALL ARTHUR DEHON HILL (FORMERLY, HILL, BARLOW & HOMANS) jdKERT SHAW BARLOW ARD H.WISWALL COUNSELLORS-AT-LAW FRANCIS G.GOODALE FANEUIL ADAMS 53 STATE STREET CHARLES Y.WADSWORTH JAMES J.O'BRIEN BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS WILLIS A.NEAL - - GERALD T.O'HARA DUNBAR HOLMES January 300 1942 EUGENE G. KRAETZER,JR. . ASSOCIATE Louis E. Baker, Esq. 2142 Essex Street Salem, Massachusetts Dear Mr. Baker:: It occurred to me after the hearing last night on the funeral home petition that I did not state the names of the persons whom I represented, and that you should have that information for the records of the Planning Board. My clients are J. Newton Smith, 138 Federal Street, Louise Be Gifford, 41 Flint Street, Jessie S. Tolman, 136 Federal Street, Mary Co Parrot, 140 Federal Street, Dora J. Carroll, 142 Federal Street, Alice S. Bourgoin, 134 Federal Street, and Philip H. Smith who owns a one-half interest in the house at 134 Federal Street and who is now living in Wenham. Very truly yours RHW:H Copy to Francis E. Rafter, Esq. 73 Washington St. Salem A meeting of -the.- Planning Board was held at the Hawthorne �4 Hotel on Monday, February 2, 1942, at 12.15 o ' clock P . M. All the members were present and Mr. Butler presided. The ordinance relative to funeral homes was considered. On motion of Mr. Baker, it was voted that the following favorable recommendation be sent to the City Council: To the honorable City Council, Salem, Massa Gentlemens An ordinance in amendment of the coning Ordinance; relating to Funeral Homes,iaas referred by the City Council to the Planning Board for public heariig, and approval or disapproval. The Planning Board held such public hearing in the Council Chamber on January 29th, and after full con- sideration herewith return the proposed ordinance to the Council with the reco:mnendation that it be passed. An earlier proposed ordinance on this subject was submitted by 417�' the Council to the Board, who returned it to the Council with a recommends- tion of disapproval. Our disapproval was based upon the fact that the pro- posed ordinance gave special authority to the Appeal Board which we con- sidered unjustifiable,_ and not consistent with the general purposes of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed ordinance rhich we now return with our approval does not have this defect. It contains three sections which we have separately considered. The first and second sections authorize the creation of a neer type of zoning district to be called a Rineral Home District. Such dis- tricts can be created only by amendment to the ordinance through the regu- lar procedure that applied to any rezoning. . %Is believe that the creation of such a Fundrnl Home District is fully justified by a change in the manner of life of .this and similar. communities: We refer to the excellent state- ment of such need made by the Board of Appeal. The need is occasioned by the increased use of restricted living raarters by a large portion of the connunity. The third section of the proposed ordinance rezones the easterly side of Flint Street between FedereJ. and Bridge Streets as a Funeral Rome District, and adds specific restrictions limiting the use of the property abutting on Federal Street. The new district is immediately across Flint Street from St. James Church. Federal Street is a fine residential dis- trict, Bridge Street is a commercial and industrial street and the portion of Flint Street rezoned is of indeterminate characters A Fundral Home has two aspects; it is on the one hand the business of an undertaker who oper- ates it for private gain; it has on the other hand a religious connotation. i _2_ But it is the communityts need, not the undertaker' s profit, that is to be taken into consideration in relation to redistricting. The public can-nnot .fairly be asked to. go to a coivnercisl or industrial district to A use the services of a funeral home. The proposed home will serve pri- marily rimarily the parish- of St. James Church, to ih ich it is immediately adjacent. While in our opinion there are residential districts from uhieh Funeral Homes should be excluded and neighborhood objections should in all cases be studied and judicially considered, ' we find no objection v.hich we think serious or valid to the proposed location.. The restrictions provide in offect. that the .Federal Street property shall be used only as entrance and exit for those attending services. The public can attend similar services at the church next door, mid any private home can be used similarly for EL private funeral. The Flint Street side of the .new district is not a high class residential dRstrict such as Federal Street. . Objection has been made to the new district on the grcund that it is too small to stand as a separate district. The objection is analogous to that relating to "spot" zoning. We do not consider that this is an instance of "spot" zoning. Ptirthermore, we believe that the- ground for objection of this type carried less- weight'' in relation. to, a Funeral-Home District than in relation to' a business or an industrial district, cbecause in the nature of the business it does not visualize a group of establishmmnts. } Respectfully submitted, Sal.eE, Planning .Board L I r y, On motion, of,.MrBeker,�it=.,wasf voted- to, send to the`,Gity Council . the. following recomme-ndatioil.-relative .-to adver-ti sing 618ns�- in general residence .zones . , In g'._l: _l - • r. � - ..- _ To the Honordble City �?nlem,_. Mass': _ >, Gortlemen: Me Planning Board respectfully roaommends that the City 9 si i Council ��,ive sue cons.�c,crra:Y...ou to the passe of a suitable amend= ment to the Zoning Ordinance, regulating and restricting the erection, uses size, locatiom,allid-lighting of signs on private property and on public gays in all distb ets other than co=oreial and industrial districts, Respectfully submitted, Salem Planning Board Secretary The meeting adjourned at 2.15 P . M. ' Respectfully submitted, Secretary ALX 1 � February log 1992 Cdr. George E.. Henson, Fres., Chestnut Street Assoeiation, 51 Summer Streot, Salem, Mass. Dear Sirs The Salem 'Planning Board is making a study of tho problem of utilizing large reeid4nces without changing their external structure or causing any deterioration of the nUgh- borhood. If your organization has any suggostions along this line, the Board would be eery glad to reaelve thea. Very truly yours, Se cro tar.y 4 May 15� 1042 To the Board of linpeal, Salem, Masse Gentlemen. The Planning Board wishes to record its opposition to the petition of Loring motors Inc. .for parmission to use the property at 215 Highland Avenue for the storage and saleoof automobiles. The Planning Board has on previous occasions recommended that the zoning of Highland Avenue be continued as residential, in the hope that there might be a housing develop- ment in this part of the city. Wituh an increasing need for homes ` for defense -7;or'kors in this vi.ctiity, the Plmining Board does not consider this a proper time to mtaiie any changes in one of the few sectionsef Salem that can be developed for residential purposes Flzrthermore, this Board would respectfully call your attention to the fact that such a petition as this does in fact provide for a change of zone and amendment to the zoning ordinance, and should, therefore, be directed to the City Council, instead of to the Board. of Appeal, Hespeotfully submitted, Salem Planning Board By Secretary J Nwd Facts Inuneral Home Issue The recent decree of Judge Jesse W. Morton in superior civil court here in which he declared null and void the permit issued to Francis J., Murphy for the transforming of his Federal street residence into a fu- neral home, contains a number of material facts. The funeral home case brought forth the following no- tations in the Judge's report and or- der for decree; "All the facts set, forth therein (the appeal) were admitted by the respondents to be true, except the allegation or allegations that the amendment to the ordinance in issue was invalid and the reasons,given by the appellants for their appeal . The petition taken in his (Murphy) behalf finally resulted in the adop- tion of an ordinance to amend an ordinance relating to zoning and es- tablishing, a funeral home district taking in the premises of said Mur- phy and the lot in the rear thereof. The depth of this new funeral home district so established was 67 feet, which is practically co-extensive with the depth of the Murphy lot, whichswas actually 66 feet and one inch in depth from Flint street. "I find as a fact that the funeral home district, so established was largely, if not wholly, for the sole benefi t of said Murphy. I find how- Nit it would be of more or less nience to a large number of ii tants in the upper, or northern part of the city of Salem, .' in that in the event of the death of a person they could more con- veniently resort to the funeral home if it were conducted by said Mur- phy on his premises aforesaid than to resort to the present funeral home conducted by said Murphy on Haw- thorne boulevard. I find that there Is a Growing Trend for people other than immediate members of the family of a deceased or intimate friends thereof not to resort to t'uneral homes on the morning of the funeral, but to go di- rectly to the church where the fu- neral services are to be held. I men- tion this fact as an indication that it would not be a substantial traf- fic change in conditions of traffic as now obtained over what would be traffic conditions in the event that the funeral home were conducted at the corner of Flint and Federal streets, So far as it is a question of fact, I find that such convenience to large numbers of people residing In the upper part, so called, of the city Of Salem is not the convenience of the inhabitants referred to in the zoning act, so called. Section 25 thereof. "I find as a fact that the rest- dence district in which the Mur- phy property is located is a fine resi- dential district and has not changed in any substantial particular front Its character when the district was zoned as a general residence district Inx9 "Ex for the convenience t0 substaYM1 number of persons as above above referred to, i find that the es- tablishment of thefuneral home dis- trict in question would be largely for the Economic Benefit and Convenience of said Murphy. "I find that the establishment of the funeral home district in ques- tion would not promote the public healthAftorals, safety, welfare and conve a of the inhabitants of the 003Wf Salem; that it would not result in the uniformity of regula- tions and restrictions for zones, dis- tricts or streets having substantially the same character, and that the effect of the amendment is to single out one lot located with what is es- sentially a residential district and impose restrictions upon this lot that are less onerous than those imposed upon the remaining portions of what Is really the same zoning district. My findings next hereinbefore set forth being,taken from the case of Leahy against Inspjector of Buildings of New Bedford, 308 Mass., 128,which in my opinion is largely is not wholly applicable to the situation disclosed, in the instant case. "In view of the foregoing, a decree may be entered annuling or declaring null and void, as the case may be, the decisions of the board of appeal of the city of Salem entered respec- tively May 21, 1942, and Jan. 28, 1942' and declaring the permits is- suedby the building inspector re- spectively on Dec. 24, 1941, and April 27, 1942, to be invalid." 7 Two-Fam*Dw 1 Plymouth St. 13 Barr St. WILLIAM F. REAL ESTATE A Salem to-operati Tel. 1703 SIXTEEN A 1/4 Gallon Ga Fine 8-room home, steam heat Good neighborhood. Extra good or land development. Near A fine value at $7 DAVID FR Frye Building, 265 Essex St. LOANS- $20 to You can Beta luau at Household quickly and 3 to 12 months to repay.Special quick seri Paymenuon loansof S300or lam includecharl on thatpart of a balance notexceeding$If10,a A34338 Ch....a monthly poymenl pion 3 4 9 11 You ,mh Daymtt poYmtt paymtt paym .51 $13.29 $9.08 $6.27.01 26 58 18.15 2.55 $9.7 .43 39.79 27.16 US 14.- .80 52.97 36 .92 19.3 4.53 79.26 54. .21 28.8 1.69 129.72 87.7 9.80 458 3.38 359.44 175.53 119.61 91. SALEM:Second Floor,214'A Essex A.C.Chandler,Manager,L LYNN:Third FL,Central National Bank Ralph Lawrence,Manager,Lice BROKERS AND DEALERS in Listed and Unlisted Stocks and Bonds g MaMaeae Boarox SToca E2mNN011 T MANN AND GOULD 70 Washington Street -SALEM t 0 FOR SALE-REAL ESTATE 7 $8750 New, beautiful 6-room cottage at Clif. ton; has all brick front, to ving room, fireplace, rose dinh tom, blue tiled kitchen and bat asy terms. $750 down. No more a be built until after the war. t LY.. 3-6340 J. EDWIN BURDETT b FOR SALE OR TO LET-An all-the-year 4-room cottage (now empty), overlooking P Bartholomew Pond, garage, land, s and 17,256 sq. ft. land, at 18 Oak ave. h off Bartholomew st. South Peabody. Call it here or write Mr. Farrar. Price $1800. b ELDERLYOWNER'9 ce1on19,L home- F steed offers unusual value for iedfats 2 sale. 230 Asbury St.. Hamilton. Ham- ilton 454, or see your broke:.- 9 FOR BALE-Near North Beverly depot, new 4-room house, tile bath, automatic hot water, air conditioning, 2 fireplaces.. One-car garage. Ready for occupancy. H. Guy Lyman, Beverly. FOR SALE-Nearly new cottage, near U. S. M. C. Built for owner. Latest Im- provements. Garage. Grand view of countryside. Price right for quick sale, Cell Beverly 259 or 1120. HAPPINESS AND CONTENTMENT Buy an Old Colonial Home. Prices $2500 to $10.000. The Barker Agency, Ipswich. (Established 1906.) FOR BALE-In Ward 3, practically new 3-family house, excellent income. all rented. Priced low for quick sale. all Stillman, IV5 Mail St. Tel. 4723. ATTRACTIVE HOUSE, 8 rooms, 2 baths, insulated, good heating, garden, for rent or sale, in Ipswich. Also comfortable wing of large house for rent, or would consider free rental In exchange for few caretaking services: Please reply immediately. Ji. e., Box,,310. Salem. FOR SALE-On bus line, 3-family house i and ,tore. Beet offer takes if. For par- ticulars write to K. S., Box 310, Salem. , MISCELLANE Commonwealth of Massachusetts Essex, ss. Superior Court In Equity (6847) J. Newton Smith, Louise B. Gifford, Jessie S. Tolman, Mary G. Parrot, Dora J. Carroll, Alice S. Bourgoin and Philip H. Smith VS. William F. Abbott, J. Arthur Marchand, James H. Boulger, James E. Lynch, John M. Gray, as they are the members of the Board of Appeals of the City of Salem, John J. O'Rourke, Inspector of Buildings of the City of Salem, and Francis J. Murphy. FINAL DECREE This case came on to b heard and was argued by counsel and thereupon, on consideration thereof, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the amendment to the zoning ordinance of the City of Salem establishing a Funeral Home Zone at Flint and Federal Streets in said Salem passed by the City Council on Novemberl3, 1941 and approved by the Mayor on November 152 1941 is invalid, that the decision of the Board of Appeal entered January 28, 1942 affirming the issuance to Francis J. Murphy on December 24, 1941 of a permit by the Inspector of Buildings of Salem was beyond the authority of said Board, and such decision of said Board is hereby annulled; and that said permit issued to the said Francis J. Murphy is hereby declared to be invalid. It, is further ORDERED) ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Clerk of Court , within thirty days after the entry of final decree, send an attested copy thereof to the Board of Appeal, to the Inspector of Buildings, and to the City Clerk of the City of Salem. By the Court, (Horton, T. ) Hollis L. Cameron, Asst. Clerk Entered: June 22, 1942. The foregoing is a true copy: Attest: Charles H. Metcalf Asst. Clerk 1 EDWARD L. PEIRSON, M.D. ( 11 1 374 ESSEX STREET } �� 1(\)V�\•/ASI, SALEM.MASS. Qf �x July 14, 1942 Mr. Warren Butler 35 Chestnut Street Salem, Massachusetts Dear Mr. Butler* To say the least, I was discouraged to read in the News .that the Funeral Home problem is to come up again before the Planning Board. Inasfar as I can determine , it is essentially the same proposition which was pre- sented a year and one half ago. Although I no longer have the personal interest in the matter, which I had at that time , I still feel very strongly that it is of the utmost importance to preserve the restricted residential areas in the city. Although no doubt the city depends to a great extent on the surrounding country, it seems to me obvious that it is to the advantage of everybody who lives and makes a living in this city, not only to preserve the residential dis - trict, but to do what they can to improve and develop *em as a residential city. It is also obvious , I nk, that anything that is done to relax the zoning laws to allow the establishment of Funeral Homes or other businesses in residential districts will tend more and more to accelerate the moving of the better class of residents in this city to other parts of the country. Due to the present difficulties in transportation, it seems to me that the golden opportunity has arisen to induce people to move back into Salem and make the city their permanent home. This proposed change in the ordinance is particularly bad insofar as it sacrifices the good of the entire city for the financial gain of one individual , or at the most a small group of indi- viduals. Hoping that you will oppose this change in the zoning laws , I am Sincerely, Edward L. Peirson RK A meeting of the Planning Board qas held on Wednesday, July 22, 1942, at 6.30 P . M. All the members were present and Mr. Butler presided. - Mr. Butler reported that he had met with the Chestnut Street Association in regard to the disposition of the Witch House in the widening of North Street between Essex and Federal Streets. He said that a suggestion had been made to move the Osgood House (now located just westerly of the Witch House on Essex Street) and then move the Witch House up Essex. Street. Mr. Romo,.,, suggested that the Board consider what recommendations could be made as to the disposition of the Emmerton House on Essex Street. An ordinance to amend the zoning ordinance by granting to the Board of -Appeal the authority to locate.funeral homes in general residence districts was received from the City Council and it was decided to hold a hearing on Monday, August 3, 1942, at eight o' clock P. M. Mr . O'Donnell stated that he wished to withdraw from any proceedings on funeral homes. There was some discussion on advertising signs on private land in general residence zones. The meeting adjourned at nine o ' clock P. M. Attest:- Secretary ♦�LpN plty p Ctg of tt1em, H�s$ttrljitsE#ts 9 d Office of the TitV (fuixncil r yt ��piE opNr (Vtv pall Touruillars-at-' rge Philip `TCi.fflorenq Parb tdaunrillnrs 1942-1943 Presibmt 1942-1943 Vhilip !J.,Vurhin � t�M]"ira C . o4n(6-(Carson ,lFtephen M. Arancis (9itq Clerh Arthur A. (Crashg Wilfreb 1. Vaitrus �f.Arancis Palau Araneis F. Pifter dames elleher Art1jur T. Ferguson ,William 0. jbaffartl - THU Messenger Vhilip X. AiRarenq 12 'Aaam A'Stefanshi August 3, 1942 "An ORDINANCE toamendan Ordinance relating to zoning: Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem as follows:- SECTION 1. The zoning ordinance is hereby amended by grant- ing to the Board of Appeal the authority to grant a permit in general residence districts for funeral homes, including services incident thereto. SECTION2. This ordinance shall take effect as provided by the City Uharter." Referred to the Planning Board by the City Council in meeting on July 9 , 1942. ATTEST:- Asst City Clerk A meeting of the Planning Board was held in the Council • Chamber on Monday, August 3, 1942, at eight o ' clock P . M. Mr. Baker, Mr. Mann and Mr. Merrill were present and Mr. Baker presided. Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Butler was out of town and unable to attend, and that 11r. O'Donnell had asked to be excused from acting on any funeral home cases. The clerk read the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance Itgranting to the Board of Appeal the authority to grant a permit in general residence districts for funeral homes, including services incident thereto. " Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Francis E. Rafter, counsel in favor of the proposed amendment, was unable to appear. The clerk read a communication from Mr. Rafter attached hereto and to be considered • a part of this record. Mr. Francis J. Murphy appeared in favor. Mr. Daniel J. Wholley, (President of the Y. M. C. T. S. ) appearing as a resident of Ward 4, appeared in favor and stated that a funeral home was needed in yard 4. Mr. Thomas U. Griffen appeared in favor and stated that he considered the proposed amendment to the ordinance a progressive move. The following were recorded in favor: Roderick Berube, 1 Harrison Ave . , and Marie Creedon, 434 Essex St. Mr. Michael J. Reardon appeared in opposition on behalf of . various residents. He stated that the Board had already considered a previous identical amendment wahich was introduced for the sole purpose of giving Mr. Murphy a funeral home location and consti- tuted 'spot zoning". This amendment is for the same purpose. An ordinance providing for a funeral home zone on Flint Street at the corner of Federal Street has been found invalid by the Superior Court. There is no reason why the City Council, elected to enact zoning laws, chould delegate its power to an appointive body. It has been claimed that the fo nn of this amendment has been upheld by the Superior Court, but there would be a question as to .the validity of this particular amendment when the whole history of the case is considered. Mr. Reardon called attention to the fact that there is a Massachusetts Statute which provides that any zoning amendment which has been acted on unfavorably by a City Council cannot be reconsidered for a period of two years. This haw has never been accepted by the City of Salem and therefore is not effective here, but it :h ows the policy recommended by the Legisla- ture in such cases. Mr. Reardon said further that in Mr. Murphys testimony before the Superiod Court, it had been brought out that the majority of the people attending a funeral no longer go to the home of the deceased or to a funeral home, but to the services at the Church. This defeats any argument that a funeral home is needed in any specific part of the City. Mr. Philip H. Smith, representing the property at 134 Federal Street, spoke in opposition. He said he felt that all present were fortunate to be able to appear at a public hearing and express their opinions freely, as citizens ofso many other countries would not be allowed to do so . He said that zoning protects homes. and home owners. To change zoning laws and thereby encroach on the rights and comforts of home owners is treading on dangerous ground. This is no question of any particular funeral home business or its proprietor, but the neighbors wish to avoid a constant reminder of sorrow and grief. It I is easy to break down the zoning law but not so easy to restore it. �. Mrs. Clarence C. Phipps spoke in opposition. She said she had no wish to avoid reminders of the sorrows of others. She said she was interested in the power that the proposed amendment invested in a small, politically appointed Board and the possibility that per- sonalities would enter in, in the granting of permits. As a resi- dent of Salem Willows, she feared the passage of this ordinance would prove an opening wedge that would allow other businesses to creep into that part of the City. The residents of Salem Willows now fear that their homes may be taken by the Federal Government. They are worried by the proximity of the business area to the resi- dential area. At present the only businesses in the Willows resi- dential section are boarding houses and two small summer hotelwhich antedate the zoning ordinance. There is the possibiklity that the location of a funeral home at Salem Willows might be the entering wedge for the extension of the business area. She said that she feels that the City Government has no right to make vital changes in the City when so many men are away at war. Mr. Arthur B. - Sullivan, 46 Chestnut Street, spoke in opposition on the ground that a funeral home is a. business and would cause a depreciation of residential property. Mr. Henry P. Benson spoke in opposition, saying that he con- sidered that this amendment was one step in the anullmdnt of the whole zoning law. The following persons were present and were recorded in oppo- sition: Edmumd G. Sullivan, 1 Naples Rd. Mary P. Bacall, 131 Federal St. Channing Bacall, 131 Federal St. Mary S. Northey, 23 Chestnut St. I Eleanns S. Rantoul, 19 Chestnut St. Dr. Walter G. Phippen, 31 ChestnutSt. Barbara Phippen, 31 Chestnut St. Sylvia P . Benson, 14 Chestnut St. George E. Benson, 31 Summer St. Wallis B. Caldwell, 421 Essex St. Howard D. Beechey, 42 Warren St. John Robinson, 18 Summer St. Philip Horton Smith, representing Alice S. Bourgoin, owners of 134 Federal St. Joseph E. Fellows, 87 Federal St. Lowell S. Nicholson, 9 Fairmount St. John Pickering, 18 Broad St. Arthur P. Sullivan, 46 Chestnut St Ernest A. Comer, 17 Mt . Vernon St. Mrs. Henry U. Rice, 80 Federal St. Barbara P . T#ompson, 26 Chestnut St. Marion L. Peirson, 374 Essex St. Rebecca B. Haskell, 3582 Essdx St. Asphodel N. Phipps, 97 Columbus Ave Harriet R. Pingree, 7 Orne Sq. W. L. Abbot, 4 Andover St. E. D. Abbot, 4 Andover St. L. C. S. Smith, 138 Federal St. Elisabeth W. Coggin, 7 Chestnut St. Linda S. Tuckerman, 395 Essex St. Leverett S. Tuckerman, 395 Essex St. I.Irs. F. S. Chick, 7 CIM stnut St. Ellen B. Laight, 41 Chestnut St. Harriet C. Rantoul, 17 Winter St. Rebecca A. Benson, 7 Hamilton St. Henry P. Benson, 7 Hamilton St. Roger F. Nichols, 153 Federal St. Edward E. Buxton, 18 Pickman Rd. Richard W. Johnson, 257 Washington St. Mrs. Charles Carroll, 142 Federal Frank P. Fabens, 1 Chestnut St. Elizabeth Balch, 1 Lynn St. Hilda G. Clark, 2 Oliver St. (Note: The above names were secured, with the approval of Mr. Mupphy, by circulating a paper for the signing of names and addresses . ) Mr. Francis J. Murphy appeared in favor of the amendment. He said • that it provides for the City Council to delegate to the Appeal Board a power that it does not have itself. There is no question of politics in the Board of Appeal. The Planning Board, - the Board of Appeal and the City Council have all agreed that Flint Street is a good location for a funeral home, but the Superior Court decided that the City Council cannot pick out certain places for funeral homes. He said he had no wish that anyone Should vote for the ordinance just because of him. The "two year" law cited by Mr. Reardon was left to the discretion of individual cities and had not been accepted by Salem. He said his testimony regarding attendance at funerals before the Superiod Court was referred to by Mr. Reardon. He said this testimony was given in connection with the question of traffic problems in connection with a funeral cortege, iahich always moves slowly. He called. attention to the fact that I,.r. Philip H. Smith is a residentof Wenham. He thought theordinance should be passed because it it needed and because and because there should be sufficient confidence in the Board of I Appeal to act in the best interests of the City. �. Mr. Francis P. Duffy, Mr. Edward J. Riley and Mr. William A. LeBlanc were recorded in favor. Mr. Murphy said that he would appreciate a prompt decision by the Board. Mr. Baker stated that a recommendation would be sent to the next rpeeting of the City Council. The meeting adjourned at nine o' clock P . M. Attest:- Acting Clerk �p a (Xel.CC �canoir4 Qf itg of *alem, flAxssarhuoe##s Planning +;narb �ttrrett �H. �ixtler, (llllsirmttn ?Henrg �J_ f®'�nnnell, Ferre#ttrg imxis 3E. 3ittker Jnhn it. 394i#mnre �ir#tttrk �. �isfntt#L Poem D 28.S-&35.21f. ODNDRq 9.4 O' BP rr CITY OF SALEM. ��O�MIH 00�' InCity Council.................................................................19........... Ordered : - - - .� , FV w At ORDEO • •. In City Council._.......... .............____ ...19........ Adopted Clerk City of Salem ..................................................19....... Presented to the Mayor for approval ................. ..- .... ..-__- 19_ City Clerk Approvedon ...............................................19........ By..... _......_ ......................:..._. ........_ __ .. ............... Mayor Pocm D 28.3-8.33.2M. J 00"D11 � O Or eef, i } 1. r a o CITY OF SALEM. �OOImm oo�� InCity Council.................................................................19........... Ordered : --- art r ORDEV In City Council .......__._.__......19........ Adopted Clerk City of Salem .................._..:_.......__..........._....19...._. Presented to the Mayor for approval .....................................................19........ City Clerk Approvedon ..............................................19........ By... . ... ...........b.......................................... Mayor "VV e e poxoRg4.4., ( itv of ttteztt, x sttrC#�t a##s �e�x,x oo" �Ixnnin� �IIxr� Warren �H. ?3utler, Thairmun enrg �. 6,Vanuell, �errrtnrti �uuis }Ts. 'alter John cE Whitmore ichartl . Wisfuall � s �y A .. 1 r � 0 `�Ooxoir4(Qi e� °s ' CIIi#M of Salem, fflasoar4uOrtts A � ' Tannin((� naris �MIx OOt, ]Manning. �ttxren �. �utler, (llhttixmttn �enxg �. t�'�nnnell, �exre#ttrg '�'inuis 1�. �ttker Jnhn Y3[• �hitmnre 3CZ#r11ttrD �. �isfnttll TELEPHONE SALEM. 216 r ` FRANCIS E. RAFTER ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 73 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM. MASS, j August 3, 1942 Salem Planning Board - City Hall Salem, Massachusetts Gentlemen: On Friday, July 31, 1942, arrangements were made for me to see a governmental official in Burlington, Vermont at 7:00 P.M. Monday, August 3rd. It was the only available appointment that I could make. The matter is urgent and consequently I had to leave this noontime for Burlington. Ordinarily, I would ask for a postponement but I know that your Board working under the provisions of Law_ are required to advertise well in advance of the hearing. _ The question as to whether you have a right to continue the hearing without re-advertis- ing is sufficiently doubtful to prevent me from making such a re- quest. Also it would probably discommode many people. As a matter of fact, I have to think back a long time to find another occasion when I had to leave the city for a distance so far away. That only demonstrates again that I am just a country lawyer. As for the merits of the problem before you, you know it well. This proposed ordinance was before you over a year ago; and attixe time when the people o£ Salem had not had the advantage of a complete, comprehensive; detailed discussion of the merits F� of the matter. This matter was rejected by you at that time but I am confident that on a reconsideration and a restudy of the entire matter that you will reach a different conclusion. -1- TELEPHONE SALEM 216 FRANCIS E. RAFTER . ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 73 WASHINGTON STREET _ SALEM. MASS. Salem Planning Board -2- August 3, 1942 Let me review briefly the facts that are of importance in the determination of this matter. After your rejection of this proposed amendment it went, under the rules, to the City Council and a public meeting was held at the Bowditch School Hall. There it was suggested that Essex Street from North to Boston Streets, the westerly side thereof, to permit the funeral homes to be located in this district. Later before the City Council, a com- mittee of the Council recommended the rezoning of the Essex Street on the westerly side thereof from,blonroe to Boston Streets. The vote was in favors.- of it six to five but as nine votes were nec- essary it failed of enactment. Reconsideration was obtained and at a following meeting Flint Street from Bridge to Federal to a depth of seventy-five feet was rezoned as a Funeral Home District. Appeals were taken to the Appeal Board and then to the Superior Court. The Superior Court ruled that the action of the City Council was invalid because it violated what is generally referred to as Spot Zoning. The case is on its way to the Supreme Court now as an appeal has been taken by the City of Salem. Of course, no one can tell what their decision will ultimately be; and the time con- sumed in the matter is difficult to estimate. d There is one thing that is certain, that the ordinance now before you has been held by the Supreme Court to be a valid exercise of power by the Planning Boards and City Councils in matters of this nature. TELEPHONE SALEM 216 - FRANCIS E. RAFTER ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 73 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM. MASS. Salem Planning Board -3- August 3, 1942 What does adoption of this proposed ordinance mean by your Board in this City? It means that you place 'in the hands of an Appeal,Board the right to locate a Funeral Home Distr3.ct in any General Residence District in Salem. That suggests the next con- sideration, namely, what could people reasonably expect from the Appeal Board if this power was given? In the first place, the demands for its exercise is exceedingly limited. Most of .the men engaged in this business are already located and as far as can be • seen, no reasonable person would argue that there is to be a great influx of undertakers into this city. The members of the Appeal Board are men of substance and maturo-judgment and have a deep sense of civic responsibility. They would take no action that would have any damaging effect upon any section of Salem. Men who serve on unpaid municipal boards to my mind represent a high civic attitude and have an equally high civic responsibility. Men of this nature are firmly attached only to what theyconsider the best for the people they serve. The upper part of the City has been forsaken and for- gotten as far as the convenience and welfare of people desiring to attend funerals in funeral homes are concerned: The Societies of the Young Men, St. Thomas' Catholic Club, the A. 0. H., the • Guild of St. Teresa, the Women's Auxillary of the A. 0. H. and the members of the Clergy, hundreds of people not connected with these societies, of all raises and creeds, are demanding, as much TELEPHONE SALEM 216 FRANCIS E. RAFTER ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 73 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM. MASS, Salem Planning Board -4- August 3, 1942 as individuals can demand, that some enactment of Law be effected to meet this situation. The way has been pointed out and the way is the adpption of the suggested ordinance which has received the approval of the Supreme Judicial Court. There are many people who, I say, were deliberately aroused by some opponents to this suggested ordinance and in words of graphic! horror they were told of manifold and detrimental legacies that would follow its passage. Everyone who has given the matter the slightest con- sideration knows that the exercise of this power by the Appeal Board is limited and may be called into play only once in a generation. I say this,: is, borne out by the fact, as suggested above, that most of the gentlemen engaged in this business are already situated; and in residential districts. Your Board has already in apt, accurate, and in judicial language recognized that the establishment of funeral homes belong in residential and not in business districts. Even the opponents are now forced to this concession. I respectfully ask that your Board adopt this suggested ordinance. • Very truly yours, FER:EHR A meeting of the Planning Board was held on Monday, August 10, 1942, at twelve o' clock noon. All the members were present except Mr. Merrill and Mr. Butler presided. The matter of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance granting the Board of Appeal the authority to grant permits for funeral homes in general residence zones was taken up. Mr . O'Donnell withdrew. On motion of Mr. Baker, it was voted to send the following communication to the City Council: I Au{3ust 12, 1942 To the Honorable City Councilor Salem, Pass. Gentlemen. The Planning Board, to whom was referred an ordinance amending the Zoning, ardinanoe 'by grantir43 to tine Board of Appeal the sssathority to grant permits in general residence ?onea for funeral homes., with services incident thereto, has held a public hearing as required by law and has given the matter due consideration. The proposed amenc}anent is In the same foam as that rahich was returned to the Cite Council with the recommendation that the ssme be not passed, under date of May 26, 1941. Tlai.s amendment seeks to transfer to the ,ipreel. Bound tine authority to grant rormits ;Cor funeral homes In residential distbicts> We deem such an- cmend ment opposed to the general public interest,. We have enacted in our ordinances zoning i suss which seek 'GO direct the development of our city along lines to ch permit for a health growth of the comwurs.%ty at -ii age, and a t the came t9moprovide safeguards to protect the general public interest. faur ordinances have adequate and arise pro- visions for changes in our coning lawsa The p,roeddxzre calls for a public hearing before the Planning Board, the sub-mission of a report by the said Board to thr City Council? hien a further s:zlalic hearing before the Council and a three-fourths majority vote in said Council. . This sue fool is a wise procedure in that it allows for eharjges in our zoni% laws vftere conditions and circumstances warrant such changes and at the sane time protracts existing residential districts from undesirable encroachments.. We do not in any sense question the sincerity of the pro- ponents o^ the proposed amendment in their contentions. we feel, however, that we dhould not change the procedure set Forth in our present zoning ordinanee. We feel that no change khould be made .in this procedure 'by creating an exception in this cash of funeral horses, or any other specialized type of commercial development. We therefore do not recommend favorable action on the proposed amendment. �- Respectfully submitted, Chairman Salem Planning Board There was some discussion of the matter of the appropriation recommended to the City Council by the Mayor for the purpose of acquiring land In the triangle at State Highway, Tedesco Road acid Loring Avenue for an ordamental park. This appropriation was in accordance with a recommendation of the Planning Board to the City Council on August 11, 1941. The meeting adjourned at 1.30 o ' clock P . M. Respectfully submitted, Secretary I City of Salem City Clerk' s Office, October 24, 1942 To the Planning Board: At a meeting of the City Council held on October 22nd, the following report was accepted and recommendation adopted: The Committee on Finance to whom was referred the order that the sum of $7,000. be appropriated and that the Mayor be authorized to purchase land owned by Hayes, Leavitt etl. at Vinnin Sq. for street widening and park purposes, has considered said matter and would recommend: inexpedient at this time, and would further recommend the matter be referred back to the Planning Board. For the Committee, H. Francis Dolan Chairman Attest:- � row-,,, City Clerk