74 ENDICOTT STREET - ZBA 7�E
- --
Legal Notice
CITY OF SALEM
BOARD OF APPEAL
978-745-9595 X5641
Will hold a public hearing for all per- j
sons interested in the petition submitted
_ by MICHAEL MCNIFF,seeking vari-
ances from lot size,lot width,front and
rear yard setbacks to construct a single
family house for the property located at {{
74 ENDICOTT STREET R-2. Said 1
hearing will be held on WEDNESDAY,
JULY 18,2007 at 6:30 p.m.;3rd floor
- 120 Washington Street.Room 313.
July 4&11,2007
SN—7/4,7/11/07
cL `FX`! cS OFFIc=
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
ESSEX, SS. SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT
DOCKET NO.
MICHAEL McNIFF, )
Plaintiff )
V. )
ROBIN STEIN,REBECCA CURRAN, BETH DEBSKI,
RICHARD DIONNE and ANNIE HARRIS, )
as they are members of the City of Salem Board of Appeals, )
Defendants )
NOTICE OF APPFAT
TO: City Clerk
City of Salem
93 Washington Street
Salem MA 01970
In accordance with M.G.L. c 40A, § 17, please be advised that the above-captioned
action has been filed on August 20, 2007 in the Superior Court Department of the Trial Court,
appealing a decision of the Board of Appeals of the City of Salem, in which the Board voted to
deny the Plaintiff s petition for an administrative appeal.
A copy of said Complaint is enclosed.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael McNiff, _
rc Se,
AP
ichae 1VIcNi f `
39 Old Planters Road
Nua'10 Beverly, MA 01915
Boz 0
i8A030,�1iN�7;0Ins Fj0 AHI 80-q
I nej H.1 NI
oocKETNO.(S) Trial Court of Massachusetts
CIVIL ACTION Superior Court Department
COVER SHEET County: Essex
PLAINTIFF(S) DEFENDANT(S) _
Michael McNiff City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
ATTORNEY,FIRM NAME,ADDRESS-AND TELEPHONE . - 'ATTORNEY (if known)'
Board of Bar Overseers number:
Origin code and track designation
Place an x in one box only: ❑ 4.F04 District Court Appeal c.231, s. 97 &104 (After
N1 1. 1701 Original Complaint trial) (X)
❑ 2. F02 Removal to Sup.Ct.C.231,s.104 ❑ 5. F05 Reactivated after rescript; relief from
(Before trial) (F) judgment/Order (Mass.R.Civ.P.60)(X)
❑ 3. F03 Retransfer to Sup.Ct. C.231,s.102C (X) ❑ 6. E10 Summary Process Appeal(X)
TYPE.OF ACTION AND TRACK DESIGNATION (See reverse side)
CODE NO. TYPE OF ACTION (specify) TRACK IS THIS A JURY CASE?
CO2 Zoning Appeal ( F ) ( )Yes (% )No
The"following is a full, itemized and detailed statement of the facts on which plaintiff relies to determine
money damages. For this form, disregard double or treble damage claims; indicate single damages only.
TORT CLAIMS -
(Attach additional sheets as necessary)
A. Documented medical expenses to.date:
1. Total hospital expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Total Doctor expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . $. . .. . . . . . : . . .
3. Total chiropractic expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4. Total physical therapy expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5. Total other expenses (describe) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . .
Subtotal$. . . . . . . . . . . . .
B. Documented lost wages and compensation to date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . : . $ . . . . . . . . . . . .
C. Documented property damages to date ... . . . . . $ ....... . . . . .,..__ _
D. Reasonably anticipated future medical and hospital.expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E. Reasonably anticipated lost wages . . . . .. M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 $ _ . . . . . . . . . .
F. Other documented items of damages (describe)
$ . . . . . . . : . . . . .
G. Brief description of plaintiff's injury, including nature and extent of injury(describe)
$. . . ... . . . . . . . .
TOTAL $.... . . . . . . . . . .
CONT T C
(Attach adld� n s cessary)
Provide a detailed description of claim(s): fN�H SUPERIOR COURT
FOR THE COUNTY OF ESSEX
AUG 2 0 2007
TOTAL $. . . . . . . . . . . .
PLEASE IDENTIFY, BY CASE NUMBER, NAME AND COUNT Y,l-W RELATED ACTION PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR
COURT DEPARTMENT
"I hereby certify that I have complied with the requirements of Rule 5 of the Supreme Judicial Court Uniform Rules on
Dispute Resolution (SJC Rule 1:18)requiring that t provide my clients with information about court-connected dispute
resolution services and discuss with them the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods:'
Signature of Attorney of Record DATE: 8/20/07
r
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
ESSEX, SS. SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT
DOCKET NO.
MICHAEL McNIFF, )
PlaintiffV. FOLED
)
THE SUPERIOR COURT
I° THE COUNTY OF ESSEX
ROBIN STEIN, REBECCA CURRAN, BETH DEBSKI,
RICHARD DIONNE and ANNIE HARRIS,
j AUG 2 0 2007
as they are members of the City of Salem Board of Appeals,
Defendantsu
COMPLAINT AND APPEAL PI JR 91JANTTl
M 1.- CHAPTER 40A, SFC TTON 17
TNTR OOT iCTTON
1. This is an appeal from the August 1, 2007 decision of the City of
Salem Board of Appeals granting Plaintiff, Michael McNiff s, application for a variance
appeal pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A § 10 and 17, as amended.
TT 1RTSDTCTT0N
2. Jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action is conferred upon this Court by M.G.L.
Chapter 40A, Section 17.
3. The Plaintiff, Michael McNiff, has under contract the property at 74 Endicott Street in
Salem, Massachusetts.
1
r
4. The Defendants
Robin Stein, of 141 Fort Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts
Rebecca Curran, of 14 Clifton Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts
Beth Debski, of 43 Calumet Street, Salem, Massachusetts
Richard Dionne, of 23 Gardner Street, Salem, Massachusetts
Annie Harris, of 28 Chestnut Street, Salem, Massachusetts
constitute the Salem Board of Appeals of the City of Salem (hereafter"the Board")
sitting and acting as the permit granting authority pursuant to the provisions of M.G.L.
Chapter 40A.
CTF.NRR A T. A T LEG A TI ONS
5. On or about July 2007, the Plaintiff filed a request for issuance of a Variance to construct
a single-family home at 74 Endicott Street.
6. On July 18, 2007, a public hearing was held by the Board who rendered a decision
granting Plaintiff's variance to construct a single-family house with a condition that a
detached garage not be constructed on the site..
7. On August 1, 2007, the Board filed its decision with the Salem City Clerk; a certified
copy of that decision is attached hereto as Exhibit"A."
8. The lot had a house that was destroyed by a fire. The garage is an essential part of the
rebuild.
9. The Board's decisions exceeds its authority as a matter of law and fact and is arbitrary,
capricious and an abuse of discretion.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands that this Court:
1. Rule that the Board's decision is arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion.
2
2. Enter an order annulling said decision of the Board.
3. Grant such other relief as the Court may deem proper and just.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael McNiff,
Pro Se,
Michael McNiff
39 Old Planters Road
Beverly, MA 01915
3
OONDIrggo C9TY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
.a C� SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS O 1970
TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595
FAx: 978-740-9846
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL -
MAYOR
ri
August 1, 2007
Decision
Petition of Michael McNiff Requesting a Variance
for the Property at 74 Endicott Street
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A public hearing on the above petition was opened on July 18, 2007 pursuant to
Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 40A, §§ 10 and 11 and the City of Salem Zoning
Ordinance. The following members of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals ("Zoning
Board of Appeals") were present: Elizabeth Debski (Acting Chairperson), Rebecca
Curran, Richard Dionne and Annie Harris.
The petitioner, Michael McNiff("petitioner"), sought a variance from lot size, lot width,
front and rear yard setback to the real property located at 74 Endicott Street, Salem,
located within a two-family residential (R-2) zoning district.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition submitted, submits the following
findings of fact:
1. _ _Petitioner's property is located within a two-family residence district. _
2. Petitioner sought a variance from: a) minimum lot area of 15,000
square feet required under the existing zoning ordinance to 3,605
square feet; b) minimum lot width of 100 feet under the
existing zoning ordinance to 67.93 feet; c) minimum depth of front yard
of 15 feet required under the existing zoning ordinance to 3 feet; and
d) minimum depth of rear yard of 30 feet required under the existing .
zoning ordinance to 4.4 feet.
3. The variances is being sought to enable the construction of
single family home. Further, the front of the single family—
contain a 4' x 6' porch and the rear of the home will conta-
deck.
4. Dorothy Morneau, 72 Endicott Street, spoke in opposition
parking at 74 Endicott Street, concerned that the proposed
close to her property line.
5. Maggie Brobeck and Alex Foustoukos, 76 Endicott Street,
over the proposed structure for 74 Endicott Street.
6. Robert Griffin, a professional engineer representing the p(_—
to remove the proposed detached garage from the plans fo-
74 Endicott Street and to widen the curb cut.
7. Councillor Jean M. Pelletier(Ward Three) raised several c_
regarding the parking for 74 Endicott Street and in suppor-7
Ms. Morneau asked that the vehicles for 74 Endicott Stree=-
behind the other for the proposed driveway.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, including all evidence present
hearing, including,but not limited to the Petition, the Zoning Board of A:j
as follows:
The petitioner's request fora variance does not constitute
detriment to the public good as residential uses are permit—
district. Also, the petitioner's request for a variance does -
substantially derogate from the intent or purpose of the zor
as residential dwellings are a permitted use in the R-2 dist
2. A literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would creat
hardship to.the petitioner due to the size of the lot.
3. In permitting such change, the Zoning Board of Appeals r
appropriate conditions and safeguards as noted below.
In consideration of the above, four (4) members (Curran, Debski, Dionne
the Salem "Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant the petitioner's reque .
and zero (0) members voted to deny the petitioner's request for a variant
following terms, conditions, and safeguards:
1. Petitioner shall comply with all City and State statutes, oi--
and regulations.
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimem
r
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. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any
construction.
5. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained.
6. Petitioner.shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem_
Assessor's Office and shall display said number as to be visible from the
street.
7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission
having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board.
8. The petitioner shall amend his petition for 74 Endicott Street to reflect the
removal of the proposed 12' x 22' detached garage.
9. The four foot area between 74 Endicott Street and 72 Endicott shall be
landscaped by the petitioner with evergreens to provide a proper buffer.
10. The proposed driveway shall be constructed of a pervious surface.
-A - J -
Elizabeth Debski n
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days 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 it has been dismissed or denied and 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.
A
1 �4,RUErCpPr
Owly CLERK
SALEM, MASS.
CITY OR SALEM. MASSACHUSICTTS
OOARO OF APPEAL S, �c( . M`
120 WASNINOTON STR[IiT, 240 BOORr`n IF c
SALEM, MASSACNYS&TrS OIS7O
TELE�MONEI S7r74i�SSS!
FARC 576.74O.20"
2001 Jit -13 1A
TO THE BOARD OR APPEAL:
The Undersigned represent that hdshe istam the owners of a certainI of land and located at:
4 F.ndi rntY Street ;Z011ing District: R-2
and said parcel is affected by Secdon(s) 6-1 a of the Salem_ Zoning Ordinance.
Plans describing the work proposed have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in accordance with
Section D(A.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Application for Permit was denied by the Inspector of Buildings for the following resson(s): s..
Direct Appeal
The Undersigned hereby petitions the Board of Appeal to vary the terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance
and allow the project to be constructed as per the plans submitted,as the enforcement of said Zoning By.
Laws would involve practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the Undersigned and relief may be
granted without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance for the
following reason(s):
See Attached Sheet.
(PLEASE PRINT)
Owner_Bernard J. Mulliean Petitioner: Michael McNiff
c/o Griffin Engineering Group, LLC
Address:II Franklin Street Address: P.O.Box 7061 Beverly, MA 01915
Salem, MA 01970
Telephone: Telephone: 78-927,-51
By:
(Signature) P
Date: 2
This original application must be filed with the City Clerk. A certified copy of this petition will be returned
to petitioner at the time of filing with the City Clerk,to then be filed with the-Secretary of the Board of
Appeal, four(4) weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeal.
A TRUE
ATTEST
CITY CLERK
n/aa �9
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Essex County Superior Court
Superior Court House
34 Federal Street
Salem, MA 01970
(978) 744-5500
CIVIL DOCKET# ESCV2007-01529
Michael McNiff
vs.
Robin Stein,
Rebecca Cuppan,
Beth Debski,
Richard Dionne,
Annie Harris
CERTIFICATE OF LAST ENTRY/JUDGMENT
In the above entitled action brought by Complaint filed on 08/20/2007 the
following entries have been made on the docket as of May 19, 2009 (11:27am)):
On 10/28/2008 Notice of voluntary dismissal (41 a.l:i)
(seal)
Dated at Salem, Massachusetts this 19th day of May, 2009.
Thomas H. Driscoll Jr.,
ffCllle�erk of the Courts
By:........ -�,U .............
/ Clerk
RCNI ®
MAY
�p 2, 0 p200f09
cvdcerjud_1.wpd 819827 nocvolds hinchion OEN.r.Gi=PLAWP,iNNG&
CO's-0f'�fUNITY DEVELOPMENT
co A.qO CITY OF SALIEM, MASSACHUSETTS
- --.--BO.A.R.D-OF-APPEAL--
120
F-AP- PEAL-__120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595
FAX: 978-740-9846
KIMBERLEY ORISCOLL
MAYOR
C>
August 1, 2007
Decision
Petition of Michael McNiff Requesting a Variance
for the Property at 74 Endicott Street
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A public hearing on the above petition was opened on July 18, 2007 pursuant to
Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 40A, §§ 10 and 11 and the City of Salem Zoning
Ordinance. The following members of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals ("Zoning
Board of Appeals") were present: Elizabeth Debski (Acting Chairperson), Rebecca
Curran, Richard Dionne and Annie Harris.
The petitioner, Michael McNiff("petitioner"), sought a variance from lot size, lot width,
front and rear yard setback to the real property located at 74 Endicott Street, Salem,
located within a two-family residential (R-2) zoning district.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition submitted, submits the following
findings of fact:
1. Petitioner's property is located within a two-family residence district.
2. Petitioner sought a variance from: a) minimum lot area of 15,000
square feet required under the existing zoning ordinance to 3,605
square feet; b) minimum lot width of 100 feet under the
existing zoning ordinance to 67.93 feet; c) minimum depth of front yard
of 15 feet required under the existing zoning ordinance to 3 feet; and
d) minimum depth of rear yard of 30 feet required under the existing
zoning ordinance to 4.4 feet.
r
3. The variances is being sought to enable the construction of a 30' X 30'
single family home. Further, the front of the single family home will
contain a 4' x 6' porch and the rear of the home will contain a 8' x 12'
deck.
4. Dorothy Momeau, 72 Endicott Street, spoke in opposition to the proposed
parking at 74 Endicott Street, concerned that the proposed garage was to
close to her property line.
5. Maggie Brobeck and Alex Foustoukos, 76 Endicott Street, raised concerns
over the proposed structure for 74 Endicott Street.
6. Robert Griffin, a professional engineer representing the petitioner, offered
to remove the proposed detached garage from the plans for
74 Endicott Street and to widen the curb cut.
7. Councillor Jean M. Pelletier (Ward Three)raised several questions
regarding the parking for 74 Endicott Street and in support of
Ms. Momeau asked that the vehicles for 74 Endicott Street be parked one
behind the other for the proposed driveway.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, including all evidence presented at the public
hearing, including, but not limited to the Petition, the Zoning Board of Appeals concludes
as follows:
1. The petitioner's request for a variance does not constitute substantial
detriment to the public good as residential uses are permitted in the R-2
district. Also, the petitioner's request for a variance does not nullify or
substantially derogate from the intent or purpose of the zoning ordinance
as residential dwellings are a permitted use in the R-2 district.
2. A literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would create a substantial
hardship to the petitioner due to the size of the lot.
3. In permitting such change, the Zoning Board of Appeals requires certain
appropriate conditions and safeguards as noted below.
In consideration of the above, four(4) members (Curran, Debski, Dionne and Harris) of
the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant the petitioner's request for a variance,
and zero (0)members voted to deny the petitioner's request for a variance, subject to the
following terms, conditions, and safeguards:
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
f
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. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any
construction.
5. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained.
6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem
Assessor's Office and shall display said number as to be visible from the
street.
7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission
having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board.
8. The petitioner shall amend his petition for 74 Endicott Street to reflect the
removal of the proposed 12' x 22' detached garage.
9. The four foot area between 74 Endicott Street and 72 Endicott shall be
landscaped by the petitioner with evergreens to provide a proper buffer.
10. The proposed driveway shall be constructed of a pervious surface.
1019,414i
bs / v�
Uh
Elizabeth]) ki
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days 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 it has been dismissed or denied and 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.