4 CROSS AVENUE - ZBA 4 CROSS AVENDE
JAMES ATWOOD
J"
l
v �.J
M �
Legal Notice
CITY OF SALEM
BOARD OF APPEAL
745-9595 Ext.361
Will hold a public hearing for all
persons interested in the petition sub-
mitted by JAMES ATWOOD request-
ing a Variance from frontage, side
yard,rear yard,maximum lot area
per dwelling,lot coverage,number
of stories to reconstruct a single
family house and detached garage _
for property located at 4 CROSS AVE-
UNE, Rl. Said hearing to be held
WEDNESDAY,FEBRUARY 20,2002
AT 6:30 P.M., 120 WASHINGTON
STREET,3rd floor,room 313.
Nina Cohen
Chairman
(2/6,13)
�o CITY OF SALEM Cyr MASSACHUSETTS S�ER� SA�EN
� $ BOARD OF APPEAL S OFF q
m
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR ICE
Fy
o SALEM, MA 01970
TEL. (978) 745-9595
STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. FAX (978) 740-9846
MAYOR
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES ATWOOD REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4 CROSS AVENUE R-1
A hearing on this petition was held February 20, 2002 with the following Board Members
present: Nina Cohen, Nicholas Helides, Bonnie Belair and Stephen Harris. Notice of the
hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly
published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws
Chapter 40A.
The petitioner is requesting a Variance from frontage, side yard, rear yard, maximum lot
area per dwelling and number of stories to reconstruct single family dwelling for the
property located at 4 Cross Avenue located in an R-1 zone.
The Variances, which have been requested, may be granted upon a finding by this
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
structure involve.
b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioners.
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 of the
purpose of the Ordinance.
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. Petitioner desires to reconstruct an existing single family dwelling to remediate
structural problems arising from dry rot. The proposed reconstruction was shown on
architectural plans submitted by petitioner, drawn by Maynard A. Davis of 26
Southern Ave. in Essex. The site was shown on a plot plan by CEC Land Surveyors
Inc of Peabody dated 12/3/01.
2. As support for this petition, Mr. Atwood described the lot. The upper portion slopes
steeply from a rise on Cross Ave. to a lower portion on the Chevel Ave. property line.
Building a home on the slope would be prohibitively expensive, and any structure
built on the central portion of the lot would tend to block ocean views of abutters both
on Cross Ave and Chevel Ave
CIIy �F-
�
CL ER ,S ALEN• NA
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JAMES ATWOOD REQUESTING A VARIANCE ICE
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4 CROSS AVENUE R-1
page two 1691
MAR -5 P
3. Several neighbors and abutters appeared and spoke in support of the proposed 2. 30
house plans. There were Bill Scott, 3 Cross Ave, Gregory Green, 8 Cheval Ave.,
Mike & Lisa Morency, 2 Star Ave, Ken Green, 2 Star Ave, Ed Wolf, 95 Bay View
Ave., and Paul Koloseus, 2 Cross Ave. With respect to the hardship requirement,
these neighbors provided evidence in support of petitioner's claim.
4. The Awtoods also submitted a request for a variance from lot coverage limitations to
erect a detached 20 x 20 two-car garage along the Cheval Ave. property line,This
proposal was opposed by the Greens, who argued that their line of view to the ocean
would be detrimentally affected. Petitioners then agreed to withdraw the portion of
their petitions concerning the proposed garage without prejudice to their right to
resubmit that plan or a revised plan at a latter date.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on, the evidence presented at the
hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeal concludes as follows
1. Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property but not the
district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief can 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.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 4-0, to grant the Variances requested,
subject to the following conditions;
1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes and
regulations.
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted and
approved by the Building Commissioner.
3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall
be strictly adhered to.
4. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
5. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction.
6. Petitioner shall submit revised sit plan without the garage.
Variance Granted
February 20, 2002
Nina Cohen, Chairman
i
CITY OF SALEM MA
CLERK'S OFFICE
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND
THE CITY CLERK
1001 PAR
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the P 2` 3u0
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the
date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 11. The Variance or Special
Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the
certificate of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed,
or that, if such appeal has been filed, that is has been dismissed or denied is
recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the
owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
Board of Appeals Meeting
Jim & Wendy Atwood - Variance
Cross Avenue
Comments to Variance
1.) Home - NONE
2.) Garage-
• Currently, no structure at site.
• Officially, unaware of the magnitude of project until
notice by Board of Appeals letter received on/about
13-14 Feb. 2002.
• Sunday, 17 Feb. 2002 Contacted by Wendy Atwood
to come and review blueprints and sign petition
agreeing to Scope of work.
• Reviewed plans and I was informed by Mr. Atwood
that the garage would not affect 8 Cheval Avenue
line of site to Ocean (Ocean Views). He indicated
blueprint, as detailed, was incorrect and a double
garage 19 wide and 12' long with 12' high pitched
roof (not 16' 6" pitched high roof).
• The Green's asked for a 12' pole to be put up so we
could try and understand garage height and what
affect it would have on our existing Ocean View. We
_feel that this view adds to the value of our dwelling
as a home (and investment) and if the purposed
garage would eliminate and/or hinder current view,
what type of cost impact it will have on our home
(investment).
• On Monday (2/18), late in the afternoon, a pole was
put up and Mr. Atwood was invited to our home to
view proposed 12' garage height. He thought the
height allowed adequate view. We remained
somewhat skeptical.
• On Tuesday night, I met with Jim Atwood and told
him that my wife and I thought that a 10' flat top
garage would be in our best interest. We felt like we
were being fair and not appearing closed minded.
l�3
• A lengthy discussion ensued.
Summary:
a) We are trying to be open minded about the garage
portion of the project
b),The Green's Counter purposed a 10' high flat top garage
in lieu of current 16' 6" structure detailed on blueprint
(as of 17 Feb. 2002 viewing) or the 12' high garage
later mentioned by Mr. Atwood with some type of legal
stipulation that whatever was finally agreed upon, the
proposed structure would remain at said height and
could not be increased in height by Mr. Atwood or any
future owner. (place on the deed??)
c) Our Fear is we agree to the structure and loss any say
on future height requirements thus potentially
decreasing our property worth.
d) If we had been notified in a timely manner with a
chance to view and review purposed garage, an open
dialogue could have been used to better understand
each parties position and concerns.
e) Since, the Green's were only given approximately four
(4) days notice to understand and comprehend the
work scope, we are somewhat ignorant to this Board
and the process in which it works. That being said, we
do not understand what, if any legal rights, we have.
f) If it is Mr. Atwood's legal right to build a garage as he
sees fit, then so be it. It just seems the neighborly
thing to do would have been to state his purposes
openly and in a timely fashion. Whether he had our
concerns in mind, I do not truly know because we were
not given the time to respond intelligently. We are
reacting to the situation present to us several days ago.
g) Finally, because I am somewhat naive here, I would like
to know there is a way to allow the Atwood's to move
forth with their house and hold off on the garage, if in
fact, they really are open to their neighbors concerns.
Zl3
h) We all know that the Willows is a beautiful area with
postage stamp parcels of land. When someone builds
or adds on to an existing structure, people have
concerns. It seems that a little more planning may
have prevented some of the issues and concerns being
discussed at this meeting tonight.
a o
313
;
F xs
w:t I
1 E
tY p31
t'
_.r t
s n
ni
s n.4, zx}u •�� :i; •z E #i z3ez.
H
z Y
1 �
t
3 y.
."J{ Ef � �a r - .:• : }: r rqYf i i 11 d3 t3 i9 xi z7 z� �
t� ,a �. #.; 3• ='�5(� ^ni h Wzi :�33# �y �. }�; z
1 4kiA� f� - :� ° � •zi?}�s��. y .3 1' z .`s of z :z < "
:PPP}jjj���
itii14
tit.v,1 111. L•3�} .iyi},ys�'sP�'};;Eijsnl�#s�f�f:i�z3 fr3A ax'.
N{t � � t � ; �
q � q
{
b.{ � v. . ..
71 k c
wli .
! !.�.
t1
!� r K
;.y� '�a � n.'.
3d"" Rt
a�� . ''
S }�!t 4�
1e i�' �; _
x.
..i. � syr ..
l
� �raM �'` ;�,
,n,�, m
� w ��
+r.^. ".r
..,`vs' ` ,:.� .'
a
o� C � G�ne�0.� ��>
�\ N\'~-�
Ail
�i
i
P �
dPci e
n e a w
tt2 i°
m r' ry
Taw--,-
r ti sits �.K rfi � 42,x„, r�
AR
CKs € r
x% � § � � � ��.��,„ r9+ ' �� �, ."'*�' � +� j� eszs,..&-xY3rR.za ixtie wzid t»aat3 *•,
2 1141'M„ 1 *Lsay.d 42�ettr.&+t raID; ° att t,t„�.ID4b xe ,�a.”
� ; •&j'� xy ry? �" .,r, ."t-„/riss.;�..":. +.x�{�jt .acrx � e: e �' ig twtra4.., akslrGs'e.«4 +��e't-ac
,� a 3 § r � ,� '1 b'>F�#4`zr y��z. , �➢ F iP t2 r fit+ A✓i'9 � + 4 + �
�«++„R°” "� �• rv �y��.T��.�1 .�..:�� �"us��Ag��n,K, 5'�'�i7c..�tp x+ r� i�tt��;i�i�?e�. $r,ti� t�,*.i�� �a i a r
f
s "'aC'r m,. ..yy � �i��� `�" i'l 1+ei '& p S F $ � ♦. a r '!
g z � ,? a+ '+ s•; '# a ,gM,s
IR 1p + x
Y
�-
I��R�"++ :t ..SYbV.K."�'�"-+.•'�rv�..r W � {�w�'�• r it�� `�b� 3��
N
�Aat
^21W '. ��ii " T3� �V+,, V 9 3 1 � .7•CF 'a uTi d-
c
y �
3 2 x '✓." y " ssi .a.w �a � w��
z
1
a S "
Tkd�S�" T"".r'P {
t 24 9 x"I .�e tL' � iiia 4. P 'i 5 xAT z
• i
Jim & Wendy Atwood 1-Feb-02
4 Cross Ave
Salem, MA. 01970
Support Sheet
I am in support of the house reconstruction project at 4 Cross Ave.
Name Address
z99
Gars --
, ;
% .
Ir I
� IqJ�
w
Thank You For Your Help