Loading...
23 JACKSON STREET - ZBA (2) 2 3 `So�cl�Sov� 5-�-��e-� ' � �� (�� - J � � . � _` :ion at—rheseminaz Will be 1'ead by Mark 6edall t gyred as 'wows: Legal Notice bound- CrrY OF SALEM at to a BOARD OF APPEAL 795.9595 EXT.381 Lint; Will hold a public hearing for all L persons interested in the petition sub-, ke mitted by Wayne & Liz Malionik 1 requesting a Variance for relief from and rear yard setback to construct an addition for property located at 23 !ted Jackson Street.Said hearing to be nm- held Wednesday, May 16, 2001 at F 6:30 P.M., One Salem Green,2nd _ to a Moor. Nina Cohen e Chairman Ithe (5/2,9) rclal� CITY OF of "itttem, �ttssndjusetts ��ERK SaFF cE A 4 �Ruttra of �Vpeal 1001 MAY 2q P DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WAYNE &LIZ MALIONEK REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 JACKSON STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held May 16, 2001 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Stephen Buczko 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 New in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from rear yard setback to construct an addition that will be 17' from rear yard of the property located at 23 Jackson Street located in an R-2 zone. The Variances, which have been requested,upon a finding 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 this 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 is requesting a variance from rear setback requirement. The required setback is 30 ft. and the petitioner after building the proposed addition would have only 17 ft. to the rear yard setback. 2. Petitioners represented themselves at the hearing and presented plans showing the addition. 3. There was no opposition to the petition. On the basis of the above finding of fact, the evidence presented at the hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeal concludes as follows: C/r y OF C(fRK S ��A 100/ MA Y 2 9p � 49 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF WAYNE &LIZ MALIONEK REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 JACKSON STREET R-2 page two 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 petition. 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 statures, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner shall obtain building permit prior to beginning any construction.. . 5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Occupancy must be obtained. Variance Granted May 16, 2001 — " r� �°✓LLCA SSC rte) Stephen Harris Board of Appeal DECISION OF THE PETITION WAYNE & LIZ MALIONEK REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED 23 JACKSON STREET R-2 page four 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 of the 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 n =j rn CD N NN O r -1rn C-)rn3 .rr D Salem Board Of Appeals May 1, 2001 One Salem Green Salem, Massachusetts 01970 RE: 271 Jefferson Avenue Residential Housing Dear Salem Board of Appeals: I am the owner of a two family dwelling on 2 Arthur Street and an abutter of the property owner proposing to add three dwelling units to the property at 271 Jefferson Avenue. I would ask the Board to support the petitioner's request to change the use of the property from commercial to residential. As a lifelong resident and longtime property owner of the Castle Hill section of Salem I remember the location as Fontaine's Market. Now all of the businesses that thrived in the old days are all gone. Currently traffic in this area is very heavy and commercial activity is not best suited for the neighborhood. As you are aware the building is quite old but very spacious and can easily support more than the three units requested. My property value will be enhanced as well as all the other property in the neighborhood with the elimination of the commercial use and the addition of much needed residential housing. Unlike nearly all the properties in the area the petitioner has parking for all the units on the property. I hope that you will approve this petition, as it will greatly improve the neighborhood. Sincerely Daniel LeBlanc A Letter to the Salem Board OfAppeals Dear Sirs My name is Dean Boucher and I am the owner of the house on 13 Arthur Street. I received notice of this meeting by mail. I am unable to attend your meeting. Ihave been involved working in the neighborhood with trying to get the City to make Arthur Street a one way for safety's sake. Prior to the closing of the Pet Store a few years ago the intersection ofArthur Street and Jefferson Avenue was even more of disaster than it is now. Parking for the business took all the parking spaces (and many driveways)on Jefferson Avenue and the spillover ofparkingBlled up Arthur Street especially on the weekends. As the father of two young children I would ask that you not allow a business to operate on that property. It would be too dangerous withal] the coming and going. By allowing the owner to put residential units in that space it would greatly ease any parking and traffic problems at that location. There is a parkinglotin the rear that was never used when the Pet Store was open. Residential use is a far better use for the property as far as the neighbors are concerned than any business. Mr. Dean Boucher Salem Board Of Appeals One Salem Green Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Dear Board Members: As a owner and direct abutter to the rear of the property at 271 Jefferson Avenue living at 74 Lawrence Street I would like to express my opinion to you on the proposal to put residential housing in the commercial storefront on the property at 271 Jefferson Avenue. I am absolutely in favor. Anything that eliminates commercial use of the property is better for the neighborhood. When the current owner Nick Karambelas bought the property it was a real mess. It was formerly a pet store and you could smell it. When Nick bought the building 6 or 7 years ago he asked all the neighbors what he could do improve the property. We asked him not to continue the commercial use of the property and suggested that he convert it to residential use. We would like to preserve our neighborhood here on Lawrence Street. I can vouch for he fact that he is a man of his word. The property is clean unlike the past and he has spent a great deal of money to improve the property a great deal. There has been talk of a Drycleaner or a Laundromat going in there I would not like to see that happen. Please consider the benefit that housing would have over the current potential commercial uses for our neighborhood. He also has plenty of parking that many other residents don't have. Thank You William S. Bailey, 74 Lawrence Street