35 JUNIPER AVENUE - ZBA (2) r� �- t
��w��
_--
\\\
�/�7�
W � L./
3 //J�
r�� �'^�
i
C-
I p legal Notice
ing
CRY OF SALEM
to- BOARD OF APPEAL
�:ial 978-745.9595 X 381
'ice Will hold a public hearing for all
I persons interested in the petition sub-
bar miffed by DANIEL SPENCER seeking y
DE a Variance from number of stories to
rial allow a roof deck and rear yard setback
to add second story bay window for the
_ic. property located at 35 JUNIPER
irp. AVENUE R.zj.Said hearing will be held
3ht: on Wednesday, October 18, 2006,
ise 6:30 P.M.,120 Washington Street,3rd
i at floor,Room,313. b
I October 4&11,2006 Nina Cohen,
I(r Chairman
SN— 10/4,10/11/06
G CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
•- oHn
BOARD OF APPEAL
• 120 WASHINGTON STREET. 3Ro FLOOR
SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TELEPHONE. 978-745-9595 r,
FAX. 978-740-9846 n�.
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL
-
MAYOR �
Ir r
O sy
_ Ol
November 22, 2006 -3
r
Decision v
Petition of Daniel Spencer requesting Variances
for the property at 35 Juniper Avenue
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A public hearing on the above petition was opened on October 18, 2006 pursuant to
Massachusetts General Law Ch. 40A, Sec. 11. The following Zoning Board members
were present: Nina Cohen, Steven Pinto,Richard Dionne,Elizabeth Debski and Robin
Stein.
The petitioner,Daniel Spencer, sought variances from the permitted number of stories (2
1/2)to construct a roof deck, and from the required rear yard setback of thirty (30)feet to
approximately zero (0) feet to allow for reconstruction of a second story bay window for
the property located at 35 Juniper Avenue, Salem,in the Single-Family Residential (R-1)
zoning district.
The Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public
hearing, and after thorough review of the Petition submitted, makes the following
findings of fact:
1. The property at 35 Juniper Avenue is within the R-1 zoning district.
2. The petitioner is requesting a variance from number of stories to construct a
(12)foot by sixteen (16) foot roof deck.
3. The petitioner is requesting a variance from rear yard setback to construct an
approximately ten and a half(10 1/2 )foot by three (3) foot second floor bay
window.
4. The petitioner presented a petition signed by three (3) of the neighbors in
support of the project.
5. Everett Dawkins of 37 Juniper Avenue spoke in favor of the petition.
6. Campbell Seamans of 22 Beach Avenue did not speak against the project,but
wanted to ask the Board to question what the implications of these variances
would be on any future projects.
7. Ward One Councilor Lucy Corchado spoke in favor of the petition.
8. No other members of the public wished to speak on this petition.
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 to for Variances does not constitute a substantial
detriment to the public good.
2. The requested relief does not nullify or substantially derogate from the intent
or purpose of the zoning ordinance.
3. A literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would create a substantial
hardship to the petitioner.
4. 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
(Cohen,Pinto,Dionne,Debski, Stein) and none (0) opposed, to grant the request for a
variance, subject to the following terms, conditions, and safeguards:
I. 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 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 the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing
structure.
6. A Certificate of Occupancy is top be obtained.
7. Unless this Decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted doe
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 of 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
Y r .
(50%)of its floor area at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed
except in conformity with the provisions of the Ordinance.
Richard Dionne
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
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 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 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.
i.
October 15, 2006
To Whom It May Concern:
-Having talked with and reviewed Mr. Spencer's
plans for renovations at 35 Juniper Ste t, we have no
objections or concerns regarding said plans.
r_
G
V Y