268 JEFFERSON AVENUE - ZBA J - - - \
f
���
1
1
�' J
� ronrnTgga CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
a 11 /j�Q SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TELEPHONE 978-745-9595
FAx 978-740-9846
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL Z008 APR _
MAYOR 71 2 A 4
,
April 2, 2008 CITY CLERK SALEtii,MgS.S
Decision
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Petition of Joshua Levesque requesting a Variance from side yard
setback and a Special Permit to modify a nonconforming structure to
construct an 8' x I V addition at 268 Jefferson Avenue (B-11.
A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on March 19, 2008 pursuant to Mass
General Law Ch. 40A, §§ 11. The public hearing was closed on March 19, 2008 with the
following Zoning Board members present: Robin Stein (Chair), Rebecca Curran,
Elizabeth Debski, Richard Dionne, Annie Harris and Bonnie Belair (Alternate).
Petitioner seeks a Variance and a Special Permit pursuant to the following sections of the
Salem Zoning Ordinance: Table l: Residential Density Regulations, and Sec. 5-30)
Extension of nonconformity.
Statements of fact:
1. The petitioner, Joshua Levesque, owns 268 Jefferson Avenue, a property located
in the Business Neighborhood (B1) Zoning District.
2. Plans accompanying the Petition include the mortgage inspection plan prepared
by Boston Survey, Inc. entitled "268 Jefferson Avenue", 3-D computer renderings
(showing the existing conditions and what is proposed), and a photograph.
3. The petitioner proposes to remove the existing 4' x 6' mudroom and rebuild an 8'
x 1 F room. The existing mudroom puts the structure 6' 6" from the side lot line,
and extends toward the rear of the property 6'. The new structure would maintain
the 6' 6" side setback but would extend I F back toward the rear or the building.
The new construction would not encroach on the rear yard requirement, but would
require a variance to maintain the same side setback.
4. The petitioner purchased the property in November of 2007. Since this time he
has made many improvements to the residence. The expanded mudroom would
allow for the creation of a large closet. The residence, which was constructed in
1889 currently has no closets.
5. Councilor, Pelletier spoke in support of the petition, saying it was a fine
renovation project.
2
6. Tom St. Pierre noted that the property has been significantly improved by the
petitioner.
7. There was no opposition to the petitioner's request.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public
hearing, and after thorough review of the plans and petition submitted, makes the
following findings:
1. The structure is of a use, age, size, and shape not generally found in this
neighborhood and zoning district.
2. A literal enforcement of the provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance
would prevent the petitioner from renovating the historic property in a manner
consistent with the neighborhood, and prevent the petition from updating the
property to make it a comfortable place to live resulting in substantial hardship,
financial or otherwise to the petitioner.
3. The variances requested are not contrary to the public interest and, owing to
special conditions desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to
the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent
or purpose of the ordinance. The proposed renovations do not encroach on the
side yard setback more than the structure currently does.
4. The enlargement proposed would not be substantially more detrimental than the
existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood.
On the basis of the above findings of fact and all evidence presented at the public hearing
including, but not limited to, the Plans, Documents and testimony, the Zoning Board of
Appeals concludes:
l. To allow for the addition, the petitioner may vary the terms of the Salem
Zoning Ordinance, specifically the requirement for side yard width, to allow
for a side yard width of 6' 6".
2. A special permit to modify a nonconforming structure is also granted to allow
for this addition.
3. In permitting such change, the Board of Appeals requires certain appropriate
conditions and safeguards as noted below.
In consideration of the above, the Salem Board of Appeals voted, five (5) in favor
(Dionne, Stein, Curran, Harris, and Debski) and none (0) opposed, to grant petitioner's
requests for variances subject to the following terms, conditions, and safeguards:
1. Petitioner shall comply with all City and State statues, ordinances, codes, and
regulations.
3
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to 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. Exterior finishes of new construction shall be in harmony with the existing
structure.
6. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board.
8. Unless this Decisions expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted
does not empower or authorize the Petitioner to demolish or reconstruct the
structure(s) located on the subject property to an extent of more than fifty percent
(50%) of its floor area or more than fifty percent (50%) of its replacement cost at
the time of destruction. if the structure is demolished by any means to an extent
of more than fifty percent (50%) of its replacement cost or more than fifty percent
(50%) of its floor area at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed
except in conformity with the provisions of the Ordinance.
(�
9'4biw' AWIA--
Robin Stein, Chair
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND Ti IE CI"rY 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 the 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 has
been filed with the Essex South Registry of Deeds.