Loading...
1 GREENWAY ROAD - ZBA I Greenway Rd. R-1 Richard & Maryann O'Shea ,� Michael Gigliotti SEP ;b (91bi of ttlem, AUSSUcliusetfs 39nara of .AU{reul DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RICHARD & MARYANN OISHEA/MICHAEL GIGLIOTTI FOR VARIANCES AT 1 GREENWAY RD. a/k/a 101 HIGHLAND AVE. (R-1 ) A hearing on this petition was held september 11 , 1991 with the following Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Joseph Correnti, Richard Febonio, Edward Luzinski, Mary Jane Stirgwolt. 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. Petitioners, owners of the property, are requesting Variances to allow a fence which is in violation of the requirements for fences in the Entrance Corridor Overlay District and visibility at intersections to remain. The property is located in an R-1 district. The Variances which have been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: 1 . Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioners. 3. Desirable relief may be granted without subsantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or 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 . The petitioner received three price estimates for the existing fence and was unaware that the fence construction required a building permit because it was less than six feet. 2. The petitioners property is a corner lot that is unlike others in the zoning district in that it is open on two sides to traffic. 3. The parcel in question requires protection both from traffic and noise from adjacent Highland Avenue and Salem Hospital. 4. The Pence replaced a group of shrubs and trees that were less attractive and the fence does not obstruct the view of traffic to significantly greater degree. 5. Several neighbors spoke in favor of this petition. 6. The petitioner's land would be severely restricted in use due to safety hazards from traffic if this petition is denied. A DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RICHARD & MARYANN O'SHEA/MICHAEL GIGLIOTTI FOR VARIANCES AT 1 GREENWAY RD. a/k/a 101 HIGHLAND AVE. , SALEM page two On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1 . Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship to the petitioners. 3. The relief requested 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 unanimously, 5-0, to grant the Variance. requested, subject to the following conditions: 1 . Petitioner is to obtain a legal building permit. 2. The section of fence adjacent to 99 Highland Ave. will be altered so as to lessen the obstruction of the view entering onto Highland Avenue. Variances Granted September 11 , 1991 Mary J Stirgwolt, I-tuber, Board of Appeal A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision,If any,shall be made pursuant to Section 17 dt the Mass.General Laws, chapter 808. and shall be filed within 20 day! after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. o,-,ted Wain shall not take eftect until a copy of the Pursuant to Mass.General Laws, Chapter ads, Section 11.the Variance cr :�'•ea J rear.d the t; tieeision, bl�rio^, .K'f•cation of the thaityt Clerk that 20 drays have elapsed and no aPPocl has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or demed is recorded in the South Essex b Registry Of Deed,�recorded and noted the name er ndIan the ownendexed rs Certificate ofhTRIG.ner of record or "'-4 _ BOARD OF APPEAL' :x D J _ ;b r, (Citn of �ttlem, ussrzcljusetts ',s` �J 33ottra of ��u}ieul ''Nq.Hm��� DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RICHARD & MARYANN O'SHEA/MICHAEL GIGLIOTTI FOR VARIANCES AT 1 GREENWAY RD. a/k/a 101 HIGHLAND AVE. (R-1 ) A hearing on this petition was held september 11 , 1991 with the following Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Joseph Correnti, Richard Febonio, Edward Luzinski, Mary Jane Stirgwolt. 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. Petitioners, owners of the property, are requesting Variances to allow a fence which is in violation of the requirements for fences in the Entrance Corridor Overlay District and visibility at intersections to remain. The property is located in an R-1 district. The Variances which have been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: 1 . Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings or structures in the same district. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioners. 3. Desirable relief may be granted without subsantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or 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 . The petitioner received three price estimates for the existing fence and was unaware that the fence construction required a building permit because it was less than six feet. 2. The petitioners property is a corner lot that is unlike others in the zoning district in that it is open on two sides to traffic. 3. The parcel in question requires protection both from traffic and noise from adjacent Highland Avenue and Salem Hospital. 4. The Pence replaced a group of shrubs and trees that were less attractive and the fence does not obstruct the view of traffic to significantly greater degree. 5. Several neighbors spoke in favor of this petition. 6. The petitioner's land would be severely restricted in use due to safety hazards from traffic if this petition is denied. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF RICHARD & MARYANN O'SHEA/MICHAEL GIGLIOTTI FOR VARIANCES AT 1 GREENWAY RD. a/k/a 101 HIGHLAND AVE. , SALEM page two On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1 . Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship to the petitioners. 3. The relief requested 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 unanimously, 5-0, to grant the Variance requested, subject to the following conditions: 1 . Petitioner is to obtain a legal building permit. 2. The section of fence adjacent to 99 Highland Ave. will be altered so as to lessen the obstruction of the view entering onto Highland Avenue. Variances Granted September 11 , 1991 Mary J Stirgwolt, Vmber, Board of Appeal A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision,if any,shall be made pursuant to section 17 dt the Mass. General Laws, Chapter 808, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the city Clerk, Variance Pursuant to Mass pGeneerd l f,-e�'shalll not 8ta0ke eftect until a copy of the or :r-,ect!i r errnit . Decision, bi,rm^, the r crtdication of the City Clerk that p days have elapsed and no appeci has been filed,or that, it such appeal has been as been dismissed or denied is recorded In the South Essex filed,that it hndexed under Is Registry recorded and not difrn the owner's Certificate of Title.ner of record or BOARD OF APPEAL' act W 2 Berrywood Lane Salem, MA 01970 September 11, 1991 City of Salem Board of Appeals One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 RE: Fence Corner of Highland Ave. $ Greenway Road Dear Sir, Athough we cannot attend tonight's meeting, we felt compelled to write this letter. As residents of the Greenway Road area, we feel that the fence is quite an improvement to the neighborhood. The fence looks great and we cannot understand what it is blocking. We feel that the trees and signs on the opposite side of Greenway Road are of more of an obstruction than the fence is. Also the trees that were taken down from this blocked more property of a view than the fence does. We have no problems exiting Greenway Road now that the fence is there. The fence looks great. Let them keep it up. Sincerely, cowz,�6\-Az *Patricia e Schr der JcqI11kne Conway - �& 0 brad Daniel Conway Conway