Loading...
103 HIGHLAND AVENUE - ZBA (5) 103 Highland Ave. R-1 William Katsapetsis _ y o-cJu.ei1/ zz z �8 � D����� (9ttUJ of Salent, f ttSsadjusPttB �narb of �ppml 81 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WILLIAM & THOMAS KATSAPETSAS FOR AN APPEAL OF THE BUILDING INSPECTORS DENIAL OF A BUILDING PERMIT OR FOR A VARIANCE FOR 103 HIGHLAND AVE . ( R-1 ) A hearing on this petition was held February 18, 1987 and continued to March 18, 1987 with the following Board Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Fleming, Strout and Associate Member Dore. 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, represented by Attorney Emmanuel Papanickolas, are appealing a denial of the Building Inspector of the City of Salem for a single family residence at 103 Highland Avenue, or in th ealternative a Variance from lot size, density and setbacks to allow the construction of a single family dwelling the that location. The property is located in an R-1 zone. The Variance vihich has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the 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 structures in the same district; b. literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involy, substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner; 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 c_ the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the fcllo.:ing findings of fact: 1 . There was substantial neighborhood oppo_ _ _=n to the petition, including Ward Three Councillor Vincent 1 -`aro; 2. There was evidence presented that there is a serious water runoff problem which would be compounded by development of the lot in question; 3. The Building Permit #375, City of Salem, dated June 3, 1986, and issued to a previous owner of the lot in question was not legally transferred to the petitioners. Furthermore, said permit was issued for construction of a building utilizing different plans than those submitted by petitioner 4. The petitioners have substantially completed work on the building without a building permit and in disregard of a Stop-Work order dated September 23, 1985; 5. The Board further finds that the lot in question does not contain 5000 square feet of land, a condition necessary for the petition to be considered under the provisions of Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A. , Section 6. In making this finding, the Board relys on the calculations � . and measurement performed for the Board by the Engineering Department r is Jap 24 3 Bo PH '99 of �ttlem, �ttssttcl�usP##s war Folz r Puxrb of ' 1"eal :ITY CL@Rv o=i : :t A•S. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WILLIAM KATSAPETSIS REGARDING AN APPEAL OF THE BUILDING INSPECTORS DENIAL OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR 103 HIGHLAND AVENUE (R-1 ) A hearing on this petition was held January 11 , 1989 with the following Board Members present: James Fleming, Chairman; Richard Bencal, Vice Chairman; John Nutting, Secretary; Edward Luzinski and Associate Member LaBrecque. The hearing was held as a result of a Court remanded decision that the Board reconsider the petitioners application for a Variance. The petitioner is appealing a denial of the Building Inspector of the City of Salem for a single family residence, or in the alternative a Variance from lot size, density and setbacks to allow construction of a single family dwelling in this R-1 zone. That Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the 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 structures in the same district; b. literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner; 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 . Substantial opposition was presented by neighbors, abutters and others. No one, other than the representative of the petitioner, spoke in favor; 2. The petitioner did not have a legal building permit to construct the dwelling; 3. The petitioner, despite fact two & direct warnings from the Building Inspector, allowed the dwelling to be placed illegally on the lot; 4. Evidence and facts presented in opposition indicated an extremely serious water runoff problem which would be further compounded by the development of the lot in question; 5. The lot in question was filled by the petitioner without legal permits. Said fill flowed over to abutting property causing further problems for the abutters; 6. Because of the illegal fill the abutter was caused harm to their property due to water runoff and damage which harm inlcuded, but not limited to a substantial amount of water filling their finished basement; DECISION ON THE PETITION OF WILLIAM KATSAPETSIS REGARDING AN APPEAL OF THE BUILDING INSPECTORS DENIAL OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR 103 HIGHLAND AVE. , SALEM page two 7. The lot in question has remained vacant due to it being undersized and the serious water and drainage problems associated with it; 8. Any hardship claimed by the petitioner was self created; 9• Evidence presented to the Board that the lot was filled by the petitioner in an attempt to make the lot a suitable lot for the construction of a dwelling. Yet, there was evidence presented to the Board indicating that water, soil and debris was falling onto and collecting within the property of the abutters. 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 . The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted One (1 ) in favor, (Mr. Fleming) and four (4) in opposition, (Messrs. , Bencal, Luzinski, Nutting and LaBrecque) to the granting of the requested Variance and to overrule the decision of the Building Inspector. By reason of the 1-4 vote, said Variance request is denied and the decision of the Building Inspector is upheld. 4 / 'A chard A. Bencal, Vice Chairman A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK APPEAL FROM THIS DECISION, Pr ANY, SHALL BE MADE PURSUANT TO SECTION 17 OF THE 1IACS. GENERAL LAWS, CHAPTER 808, AND SHALL BE FILED WITHIN 20. DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF FILING or THIS DECISION IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, P7RSANT TO VASS. GENERAL LAWS, CHAPTER 808, SECTION 11, THE VARIANCE OR SPECIAL PERMIT ,RAN IED HEREIN, SHALL NOT TAKE EFFECT UNTIL A COPY OF THE DECISION. BEARING THE CERT. '',;CATION CF THE CITY CLERK THAT 20 DAYS HAVE ELAPSED AND NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED, ;:R I'HAT, IF SUCH AN APPEAL HAS BEEN FILE. THAT IT HAS BEEN DISIMISSED OR DENIED IS R:C:F DED IN T41E SOUTH ESSEX REGISTRY OF DEEDS AND INDEXED UNDER THE NAME OF THE OWNER OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND NOTED ON THE O'WNER'S CERTIFICATE OF TITLE. BOARD OF APPEAL ��aNwT Citp of 6alem, Anoacbusetto Office of the (Cite Councit Citp *aU iYlIV6 WN WARD COUNCILLORS KEVIN R. HARVEY 1988 COUNCILLORS-AT-LARGE PRESIDENT 88 GEORGE A.NOWAK 19 DONALDBATES JOSEPHINE R. FUSCO KEVIN R.HARVEY CITY CLERK VINCENT J. FURFARO FRANCESJ.GRACE LEONARD F.O'LEARY NEIL J.HARRINGTON JEAN-GUY J.MARTINEAU GEORGE P. McCABE SARAH M.HAYES MARK E.BLAIR January 11, 1989 James M, Fleming, Esq. Chairman, Board of Appeal One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Chairman: I wish to register my strong opposition to the request for a variance to allow construction of a single family dwell- ing at 103 Highland Avenue . While I will be unable to attend your meeting on January 11 due to a previous commitment, I would like to make the Board aware of the fact that I support the immediate abbuters , Mr. and Mrs . Lunt, and other neighbors in requesting that the variance be denied. I read with interest in the Salem News the comments of Attorney William Sheehan (representing the petitioners) , who claims that the matter could be settled if the variance were to be granted, allowing the home to be completed and then sold. It is clear from Mr. Sheehan's comments that his clients have no intention of becoming good neighbors in the Greenway Road area, but wish to have the neighborhood and the Board bend over backwards so that they can build a home on an undersized lot and then turn around and sell it at a profit. It strikes me that another person whom Mr. Sheehan represents , Mike Stasinos, has exhibited the same attitude with regard to his project at the other end of. Highland Avenue. I do not believe it is sound public policy to accede to the demands of individuals who pur- chase property in Salem, ask for concessions, sue when they don't get what they want, and walk away with a profit -- all at the expense of , and without a care for, Salem and its people . James M. Fleming, Esq. January 11, 1989 Page Two Mr. Chairman, if you and _your fellow Board members act in support of the neighbors and vote to deny the variance , you will be sending a message that you, as a public Board, will not tol- erate this attitude. I strongly urge you to send such a message by denying the variance request for 103 Highland Avenue. Sincerely, NEIL J. H'ARRINGTON Councillor-at-Large CC: Board of Appeal November 29, 1988 6 Greenway Road Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Mr. James. Fleming Chairman of the Board of Appeals One Salem Green Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Dear Mr. Fleming: My name is John M. Lunt and I own the property at 6 Greenway Road in Salem where I reside with my family. I am writing in regard to the property located at 103 Highland 'Avenue owned by Thomas and William Katsapetsas. My property abuts this lot on two sides. Any decision made regarding its existance will drastically affect 'me and 'my family. I therefore respectfully request that you allow me to make a few points that are of grave concern to us. Construction on this property began in the summer of 1985. Mr. K. backfilled his land at this time about 20-25 feet. We believe he did this is direct violation of City Code Article VI Drainage Alteration Permits Sec. 26-170 and 171 . The city engineer has no application for a permit regarding this article on file. Mr. K. also backfilled our property about 3, 000 square feet--20 feet deep. We tried to no avail to get Mr. K. to remove this fill on his own but he refused to cooperate and legal action was-,necessary-: T' took three hearings with Mr- . Again, Mr. K. did not cooperate . . It ng ,y Grant' at the Clerk of Courts Office before an attempt was m�de .� `? Although Mr. K. was not complete with his efforts we did adc;e',pt itCD out of frustration. nr Many years ago; to our understanding, homes in this area had a ` ` major problem with flooding. Much was done to correct this,'rpro31em m including a culvert installed in 1948. The problem with flooding N had been arrested for years. Since Mr. K raised the levelaf hk land in this wetland which is protected by the Wetlands Protection Act, we have suddenly had water in our basement. We have been advised by our lawyer to investigate this situationas he believed , as we now do, that the raising of the level of the land is the direct cause of our flooding. It is also the same opinion of other professional we called upon including contractors and City employees. We are very concerned about the future of that house for this reason as well as others : including the fact that the house was put on the land without any building permit.and�that:. the land does not meet the requirements for square footage . However, we feel the above issues are very serious and need tb-.be carefully con- sidered before any decision about that problem is made . Mr. K. has clearly disregarded every rule regarding the con- struction of his house and the filling of his property. We all have to live by rules. I have worked very hard to get what is: mine and have done so by following the rules. I don' t believe that a contractor from Peabody who has violated so many rules should have such a negative impact on me and my family. Mr. K. 's only concern is to finish his house and sell it. I, a lifelong resident of Salem, will be left to suffer the consequences - if this situation is allowed to exist. I ask that you carefully consider these conditions and understand _ that the issue of land size and building permit although very serious are not, by far, the only issues. I would like to thank you for taking the .time to read my concerns and ask that you share this information with the other board members. If you have any questions, thoughts or comments concerning this matter please do not hesitate tc contact 'me or my wife . We would be . very interested in hearing from you. e em o -c L- CLD �+t Cn;r m� Sincerely, © U' y Clam r.`. fn CO John M. Lunt Marlene A. Lunt cc William Munroe , City of Salem Building Inspector cc Stanley Poirier, President Greenway Road Homeowners. Association TO: BOARD OF APPEALS, SALEM, MA JANUARY 5, 1989 RE: 103 HIGHLAND AVENUE, SALEM, MA GENTLEMEN: ATTACHED IS A PETITION SIGNED BY THE RESIDENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDING THE ABOVE PROPERTY. WE WOULD LIKE TO LET IT BE KNOWN THAT WE ARE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE ALLOWING OF THE VARIANCE FOR THIS PROPERTY SO AS TO KEEP THE HOUSE THAT WAS ILLEGALLY PUT UPON SAID PROPERTY. AS WE ARE SURE YOU KNOW FROM PAST EXPERIENCE, THIS LOT IS UNDERSIZED. THE PUTTING UP OF THIS HOUSE WAS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, LAND WAS FILLED OVER A STATE DRAIN AND WETLAND WAS FILLED WHICH HAS NOW CAUSED THE WATER TABLE TO RISE AND FLOOD THE NEIGHBORING HOME ON GREENWAY ROAD WHEN THERE IS HEAVY RAIN. THIS WAS NEVER A BUILDABLE LOT THOUGH OTHERS HAVE COME BEFORE YOUR BOARD AND WERE EITHER DENIED OR WERE ASKED TO WITHDRAW. CONSIDERING THE PROBLEM THIS HAS CAUSED FOR ITS ABUTTOR AND THE ILLEGALITY OF THE HOUSE IN THE FIRST PLACE, WE WOULD HOPE THE BOARD WILL NOT RULE IN FAVOR OF THIS PETITION FOR VARIANCE. CC: MAYOR'ANTHONY SALVO COUNCILLOR VINCENT FURFARO COUNCILLOR NEIL HARRINGTON COUNCILLOR FRANCIS GRACE COUNCILLOR GEORGE MCCABE COUNCILLOR DONALD BATES GEORGE WHITTIE WILLIAM MUNROE c a CD ocn ci rn I-rn CD -c3` m M N .v. a N c.o ti I� / 1 a � � MOW �� / �/w DDQ ,�ss G s �m r v� c�