Loading...
14 LAUREL STREET - ZBA 14 Laurel St. R-2 Michael P. Cormier r MORTGAGE INSPECTION BAY STATE SURVEYING SERVICE INC. 234 CABOT ST., BEVERLY, MA. LOCATION S�L�(Y� mA � NOTES: SCALE : I° =ZU FT. DATE : •This is a Mortgage Inspection survey and not an REFERENCE instrument survey,therefore this plot plan is for � K'- -C��y3-• • •P6=•� -g---•-•-----. mortgage inspection purposes only. • This survey is based on survey marks of others. ....... .. .. . .. .. ..... . ... . .. ... . ... .... • Bushes, shrubs, fences and tree lines do not dC ✓✓ To necessarily indicate property lines. . E ? ..-:- __:_ ,.t.T_ . __.� _t�.._ . In my professional opinion the building(s) are not I hereby certify that I have examined the premises and that the located in the special flood hazard zone, as defined building(s) shown on this plan are located on the ground as by H.U.D. shown and that they conformed to the zoning setbacks of the • Whenever an offset is 1't or less, an instrument SIT O� S,q ........ when constructed.. survey is recommended to determine prop. lines. 2 117 f r � o �MC/= � ( GCGJ I 17 2 � � s7a oit N qoe�'4 a r0fla . •� - ori 1s R n T r o M s _ TI . LAv,��L sr. F ,° 4FQ ���rs CISf I i a� CL �D S� 6 Q FLO rrlp �T 'Q n^, W.g �co q. W� OM LL (ZS ti; CD rV DATE OF HEARING ��lllol4l� PETITIONE4�p,Z LOCATION u� MOTION: TO GRANT 22 SECOND TO DENY �� SECOND TO RE-HEAR SECOND LEAVE TO WITHDRAW SECOND 70 CONTINUE SECOND ROLL CALL PRESENT GRANT DENY WITHDRAW RE-HEAR CONTINUE RICHARD BENGAL I/ 0RICHARD FEBONIO jV FRANCIS GREALISH EDWAAD LUZINSKI STEPHEN TOUCHETTE ASSOCIATE iIEMBERS RONAD1PLi T, ARS HUS UABRE OUE CONDITI JNS: L TO: Richard A. Bencal, Chairman Board of Appeal , City of Salem FROM: Gloria B. Talbot 23 Hazel Street Salem, MA ( 508 ) 745-4736 RE: Public Hearing November 18 , 1992 Petition submitted by Michael P. Cormier 14 Laurel St. , Salem DATE: November 9 , 1992 I am not certain if a letter is an acceptable means of stating my concerns regarding the above mentioned permit, but because I am the sole care provider to a total care invalid requiring the administration of medications every two hours I am unable to attend the meeting. This is therefore the only vehicle I can take. My concerns are regarding any deck which may be constructed to the rear of 14 Laurel Street abutting my property at 23 Hazel Street. On September 16 , 1992 Mr. Cormier wrote me: "I am writing to you because I would like to update you on my plans for my backyard. we have decided against putting up the back deck like I had previously planned and that I had discussed with you before . . . I needed to get better access out of my side kitchen door, so I built a platform deck off the side of the house. As it turns out, my wife and I feel that we will enjoy that side deck more. In order to get my side deck admitted to my plot plan I will still have to go in front of the board of appeals to legalize it. ,, This letter from Mr. Cormier would indicate to me that no further construction is planned, and that the deck abutting my property is no longer under consideration. However, the notice your office sent me seems to contradict this, indicating that Mr. Cormier does desire to continue construction work. For this reason I am concerned about the size of any deck he may plan to build in his backyard. I am concerned that whenever I sell my property it will be more difficult to do so if any prospective buyer fears the noise level will interfere with the enjoyment of his/her new home. The size of the lots are just so small that any deck of reasonable size will be very close to my house. I simply have no land on that side of my property allowing for a noise buffer between new construction and my house. I am not certain about the legal distance requirements between new construction and abutting property. If Mr. Cormier ' s plan is to abide by the legal regulations I can at least tell any buyer that he is within his rights . However, if he does plan to continue construction and go beyond the allowed distance, thereby bringing new construction closer to my property than he legally can do without special permits , (which I believe is what would have to be done) , I do object to further construction being done. Again this is only if Mr. Cormier' s written notice to me is not true and he does plan to continue construction. The limited distance between the two residences makes the addition of new recreational construction uncomfortable. Thank you for bringing my concerns to the attention of the Board. Cit ofttlem, � ttssttclt �e s 'Enzcra of '��eal CITY OF DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR A VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET (R-2) A hearing on this petition was held November 18, 1992 with the following Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Richard Febonio, Francis Grealish Jr. , Edward Luzinski and Stephen Touchette. 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. Petitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a variance to allow an existing deck in this Residential Two Family District (R-2) The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this 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 and structures involved. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. 3. Desirable relief may 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. 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. There is no access to the side kitchen door. 2. There is a bedroom off of the kitchen and the side door serves as a fire exit. 3. The deck was placed on ground level and attached to the fence. 4 . There was no opposition to the side deck. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET, SALEM page two DEC 3 9 46 G ; °)- CITY OF S;�! On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the Eaigw,pc�e - --psented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1''` 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 petitioner. 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 unanimously, 5-0, to grant the variance requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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. 3. Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a legal building permit from the City of Salem Inspector of Buildings. VARIANCE GRANTED November 18, 1992 Stephen C Touchette Board of Appeal f I DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET, SALEM page three dfe : A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOAbC#ply fH 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 certification 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 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 `y (fit ofttlem, ��3Hussttcljusetts s -Sonra of CAv}�eul DECEMBER 10, 1992 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT AS OF DECEMBER 3, 1992 THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK TO GRANT THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN EXISTING DECK AT 14 LAUREL STREET. BOARD OF APPEAL BRENDA M. SUMRALL CLERK OF THE BOARD Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17, of MGL 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 MGL Chapter 40A. , Section 11, the Variance/Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification 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 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 a P of �5tzlrm 4Russttclt s -Battra of Aupeal CITY OF DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR A VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET (R-2) A hearing on this petition was held November 18, 1992 with the following Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Richard Febonio, Francis Grealish Jr. , Edward Luzinski and Stephen Touchette. 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. Petitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a variance to allow an existing deck in this Residential Two Family District (R-2) The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this 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 and structures involved. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. 3. Desirable relief may 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. 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 . There is no access to the side kitchen door. 2. There is a bedroom off of the kitchen and the side door serves as a fire exit. 3. The deck was placed on ground level and attached to the fence. 4 . There was no opposition to the side deck. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET, SALEM page two On 3 3 46 4111' CITY OF ; . F:, On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the t;�n? -it�sented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 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 petitioner. 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 unanimously, 5-0, to grant the variance requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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. 3. Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety. 4 . Petitioner shall obtain a legal building permit from the City of Salem Inspector of Buildings. VARIANCE GRANTED November 18, 1992 Stephen C Touchette Board of Appeal DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET, SALEM F�' page three U cjry of 9 4s A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOA�bC#yJP!,TA, 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 certification 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 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 y\- Ctt� of _-Salem, �4gttssuclirjp is 46 t.e Board of .'�u}zEztl CITY OF . >: DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR A VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET (R-2) A hearing on this petition was held November 18, 1992 with the following Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Richard Febonio, Francis Grealish Jr. , Edward Luzinski and Stephen Touchette. 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. Petitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a variance to allow an existing deck in this Residential Two Family District (R-2) The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this 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 and structures involved. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. 3- Desirable relief may 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. 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. There is no access to the side kitchen door. 2. There is a bedroom off of the kitchen and the side door serves as a fire exit. 3. The deck was placed on ground level and attached to the fence. 4. There was no opposition to the side deck. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET, SALEM page two DEc 3 9 46 CITY OF ;�, On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the R,�gt��4eiiC'ed iWl at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 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 petitioner. 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 unanimously, 5-0, to grant the variance requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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. 3. Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a legal building permit from the City of Salem Inspector of Buildings. VARIANCE GRANTED November 18, 1992 J4�e�v Stephen C Touchette Board of Appeal DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET, SALEM page three UFC J OF A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOA"0'',Tpg. CITY` CLERK " '".4 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 certification 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 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 of '�ttlem, �4Eazsarjjq e s 7t�0ara O{ C1peal CITYCL GF . DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR A VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET (R-2) A hearing on this petition was held November 18, 1992 with the following Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Richard Febonio, Francis Grealish Jr. , Edward Luzinski and Stephen Touchette. 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. Petitioner, owner of the property, is requesting a variance to allow an existing deck in this Residential Two Family District (R-2) The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this 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 and structures involved. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. 3. Desirable relief may 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. 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 . There is no access to the side kitchen door. 2. There is a bedroom off of the kitchen and the side door serves as a fire exit. 3. The deck was placed on ground level and attached to the fence. 4 . There was no opposition to the side deck. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET, SALEM page two DEc 3 9 46 CITY OF On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the ,pi3eft�gented at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 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 petitioner. 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 unanimously, 5-0, to grant the variance requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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. 3. Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a legal building permit from the City of Salem Inspector of Buildings. VARIANCE GRANTED November 18, 1992 Stephen C Touchette Board of Appeal y DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL P. CORMIER FOR VARIANCE AT 14 LAUREL STREET, SALEM page three vfC c7jr o 9 4s �;; A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOAR, No',THg, 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 certification 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 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 MORTGAGE INSPECTION BAY STATE SURVEYING SERVICE INC. 234 CABOT ST., BEVERLY, MA. LOCATION = SA L�rn �� �. NOTES: SCALE = I�� s 7Q FT. DATE _ --_ „/Q�( •This is a Mortgage Inspection survey and not an REFERENCEi2 . . . "" instrument survey,therefore this plot plan is for K' �y3.. . -!°6=.Y •g............ mortgage inspection purposes only. _ _._ _._____ .This survey is based on survey marks of others. ... .... .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .... . ..... .... .... a Bushes, shrubs,fences and tree lines do not / necessarily indicate property lines. To - E&7f/�/ .,w T �� K _ . In my professional opinion the building(s) are not I hereby certify that I have examined the premises and that the located in the special flood hazard zone, as defined building(s) shown on this plan are located on the ground as by H.U.D. shown and that they conformed to the zoning setbacks of the • Whenever an offset is 1't or less, an instrument ........ when constructed, survey is recommended to determine prop. lines. Low 2 54.31 c� r 141 v r\ I Y, � �cell l[ m �� 6 � �PC✓�� / [✓P�j���,it-ref ��C Uf : - ,$4.00 - • ' H����'�s n T of M 5 `\ TI , LAUREL ST � F ,° Al IAO J Q' x o uv' o O' s-- �`L ' �� ti C-1 N,. Ca C13 APPEAL CASE NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. ..... . . (9itu of Snlent, f[tt��rzrllitsetts TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: v The Under i ed reor sent that he is are the owners of a certain parcel of land located at NO. f . . . . . Street; Zoning DistricyF?r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : and said parcel is affected by Sections ) . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . of the liassacnusetts State Building Code. Plans describing the work proposed, have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in accordance with Section IX A. 1/ of the Zoning Ordinance. mo m N y. �- r om m T.. n� Z mn The Aoplication for Permit was denied by the Inspector of Buildings for the following reasons : . / The Undersigned hereby petitions the Board of Appeals to vary the terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance and/or the Building Cade and order the Inspector of Buildings to approve the application fee permit to build as filed, as the enforcement of said Zoning By-Laws and Building Code would involve practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the Undersigned and relief may be granted without substantially dero- gating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code for the following reasons: N J Q7 LU y i <i I / P 0- •� oW Owner,�6C /Ff4 ✓.{.:�/Q/ 0(��.6 :: . . .. . :. . . Addressl [ L L o ^' Telephone. .A�..10.7.; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , U Petitioner. . . . , —A"� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • . Address. . . . . . . .;.�R'ew&. . . . . .. . . . . . . ... . . . DateJ•� —. . •G • Telephone. . . . f` . . : . . Three copies of the application must be filed with the. Secretary of the Board of Appeals with a check, for advertising in the amount of . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . four weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeals. Check payable to The Evening News. MORTGAGE~ INSPECTION BAY STATE SURVEYING SERVICE INC. 234 CABOT ST., BEVERLY, MA. LOCATION + 4�m. mA � NOTES: �� ..:5... t..._.. _._ SCALE + I e ZQ FT. DATE +_ /��� •This is a Mortgage Inspection surveyand not an (�(J�1 " q instrument survey,therefore this plot laiaas Jor REFERENCE + S K'.-. .- - - .3._. . .P_6 .Yort a - - •1•......... mg _•�- _ ge inspection purposes only. ��•-+Z- 1-.�r. ... ....... • This survey is based on survey marks of others. ••• ---. • . • •. .. .•• .. .... . .... • Bushes, shrubs,fences and tree lines do not Ta necessarily indicate property lines. j"'�" • In my professional opinion the buildinglsi are not I hereby certify that I hove examined the premises and that the located in building(s) shown on this plan are located on the ground as by H.U.D. the special flood hazard zone, as defined shown and that they conformed to the zoning setbacks of the • Whenever an offset is 1't or less,an instrument ..�el T _ - •5i�1 L ........ when constructed. survey is recommended to determine prop. lines. G 0' 2 1 00 H � v I � Mr7, Vceufc I 01 '61761 T`n l�( ./• sTy wd. e m � � i `V I p� � I J t� ���✓�� yu,+7i�o,,,.trds TIiF ( �H W y T - =T TI , L AU�EL ST _ F= L y C J J E H Q H Q i ©S M W C M W n J LL 4 O tiCsb uy •� 41 ti . . d cm y ti be:.. N to _ 499 tr 't 5� N 293 N 52Yv8P0 �• (.7 O O 8.000 58fe m , fn a t 5 _ .1C 5 - >-, sa 55 � �:`�• i a80 '=- "'. '_ 'n. � ,27U S rRp� .>.m ....: +,,_'... �, -: _ , 6 :29in �sYo 0-"' 2rg 27 s=OU BrgT . 5258' 271 G..+G� 5000 56 �' SO - t^ . ` 26• 7 J tt �� _ : 6g '1 5,51c 345 S r 74 t675 BAC 5498 1; 347 600 a C4.L1 549 Me 354 *Al* Spr,C i5T4 344 o goof, Y 5 .J: o s� :311 3 s 2Q4 OD 6750 ` 35 9000 L:6f40 Y :.� g00 -g42 X825 • ..1 3�J� 85 e A . 47: 3 90 60 <,'-' !410433 0 -' .11DBg s. N it PP 600 • I IC9 & � � � . STR 7 ' -.,302 yf ' , t 1050 � �• 74 � ,F 3u �F ss (375 7c 85 Y t 355 sf �. '<i jos s?7." 2P 28 --- " _ to w 334 m 5768 327 9 �' 3 - p 7 � J f 1+ tA s3T i a 6Ys0 33 Ln - ry +4`Q bm•tr WO �` MR Petition On November 18, 1992 at the Board of Appeals in Salem, I will be seeking a variance to allow an existing deck at 14 Laurel St. The deck is located on the side of the house faceing Mrs. Blouins property. The deck was built to allow access from side door leading out to back yard. I would like to submit this petition for those who are in favor. thank you Mike Cormier Mrs. Blouin 12 Laurel St. direct abutter y Mr.and Mrs Al Lunt 22 Hazel St. v Mr and Mrs. Leanord Blouin 15 Laurel St. Mr and Mrs Paul Tessier 17 Laurel St. r !I Mr. and Mrs Johnson 20 Hazel St. r 7�L44 i1 � ��-� p� Q� Mr and Mrs. Connely 13 Laurel St. Mr. and Mrs. Bergivin 21 Hazel St. Mrs. Mary O'Leary 18 Laurel St. a ' 'CITY (1I SALEM BOARD OF APPEAL 745-9595 Ext. 881 Will hold it public hewing fnr all persons inler- ested in the PetiLian submilled by MICIIAPY. P. GUMMIER fnr a Variance from rear and sides, back ides,bucA le allow it deck of 14 LAUREL S'TISI?IS'P(IS- 21 Said haariug hi beheld WEUNILSIIA Y,NOVh',11- ISEIS 18, 1992 A'P 7:0111'.M.,ONE SALEM GIS Is IL N, • 2nd floor. RICHARD A. BENCAL, Chairman November 4, 11, 1992 SN2(i316 II rx � i U I - x _ s � ] c6 6 LO 11 N N I � I , z � a to I O IQ � o � a Q z x a .. Q 10-3179'G.11:0" CITY OF SALEM BOARD OF APPEAL 745-9595 Ext. 381 Will hold it public hearing for all persons inter- eslad in the petition submitted by MICHAEL h. CORMIER for a Variance from rear and side set- back to allow it deck at 14 LAUREL.STREET(R- 2)Said heaping to he held WEDNESDAY,NOVEM- BER 18,1992 AT 7:00 P.M.,ONE SALEM GREEN, 2nd floor. RICHARD A. BENCAL, Chairman November 4, 11, 1992 SN26210 i i i Y i i i Y i i i i i i i i Y i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ♦ i i i i i i i i i i i i i y lU-SV . CITY OF SALEM 1 BOARD OF APPEAL 745-9595 Ext. 381 Will hold a public hearing(or all persons inter- ested in the petition submitted by MICHAEL P. CORMIER for a Variance from rear and side set- back to allow a deck at 14 LAUREL STREET(R- 2)Said hearing to be held WEDNESDAY,NOVEM- BER18,1992 AT 7:09 P.M.,ONE SALEM GREEN, 2nd floor. RICHARD A. BENCAL, Chairman November 4, 11, 1992 SN26216 I . . . � Y Y i Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y i Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y t Y Y Y Y Y 10-30-92.11:07:3 - CITY OF SALEM ROARO OF APPEAL 745-9595 Ext. :181 - Will bold a public hearing for all persons inter- ested in the petition submiLLed by MICHAEL 1'. CORMIER I'or a Variance from rear and side set- back Lo allow a clock aL 14 LAUREL STREET Ot- 2)Said hearing to be held WEDNESDAY,NOVEM- BER 18,1992 AT 7:00 P.M.,ONE SALEM GREEN, 2nd Ooor. RICHARD A. BENCAL, Chairman November 4, 11, 1992 SN26216 ` Y Y Y Y � Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ii (_�+_y V Y Y Y Y Y Y� Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y �A Y Y Y Y i Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 10-30-921-11-0-7-N�26216-LEG K CITY OP SALEM BOARD Or APPEAI, 745-9595 list. 891 Will hold a public hearing for all Persons inter- ested in the petition submitted by M1C11AEL P. CORMIER for a Variance from rear and side set- back Lo allow a deck at 14 LAUREL STREET Ot- 2)Said hearing to be held WEDNESDAY,NOVEM- BER is.1992 AT 7:00 P.M.,ONE SALEM GREEN, 2nd Door. R1C1(ARD A. EENCAL, CSN26216 November 4, 11, 1992 s -� i Y M Y.Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y yl i Y Y Y Y Y YY Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 10-30-02.11:07:3626216-LEG K CITY Oh SALEM BOARD OF AI'PEAI. 745-9595 Eat. 381 Will hold a public hearing for all persons inter- et- ested in the poLilion submitted by MICDAEL 1'. CbOlkt11�1ER(„v,a�deck atl14 LAUREL S'11REE'I'and SKIC S(R' 2)Said hearing to be held W IdUN1;SDAy,NOV EM- BEIL 18,19'12 A'1'7:U01'.M.,ONE SALEM GREL:N, 2nd 11oor- RChairman ICIIARp A. BENGAL. SN26216 November 4, 11, 1992 tl Y Y Y Y M M Y i Y Y Y Y Y Y i Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y APPEAL CASE NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ofttI>rm, C4 v9f[ 3��zcl�usEtts +. 13surb Df � JP2Il TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: The Undersign d rep es nt that he is are the owners of a certain parcel of land located at N0. �. . . . . . Street; Zoning District/- _:r_ ^ `• • , , , • , • , • • . , • , . ; and said parcel is affected by Section(s ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of the Massachusetts State Building Code. Plans describing the work proposed, have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in accordance with Section IX A. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance. C= c'> r N m o cn A T om � m a � The Application for Permit was4denied by the Inspector of Buildings for the fol1'01;ing reasons : The Undersigned hereby petitions the Board of Appeals to vary the terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance and/or the Building Code and order the Inspector of Buildings to approve the application fee permit to build as filed, as the enforcement of said Zoning By-Laws and Building Code would involve practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the Undersigned and relief may be granted without substantially dero- gating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code for the following reasons: fGa6 � f p s �n ill 7 ru a� W Q CL M La� Owner.iz C) -- Address `. . . . . . . W �o Telephone. . � y — o7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m d U Petitioner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Address. . . . .. . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date.lS/�!` • • • • Telephone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . By. Three copies of the application must be filed with the Secretary of the Board of Appeals with a check, for advertising in the amount of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . four weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeals. Check payable to The Evening News. =x � . ` N0...------............... � \ ~ 1 PCTH[ON T0BOARD OFAPPEALS � |0FAT|0N . .� � w ^ / .......... .......- ...... .......---- ............ � � P[3lT|0N[R ........ ....... ... ......... ......... ADDRESS............... .................... ......... � ......................... ..................... � � � C0ND|(IONS � � � --------- ------------ � / ---- ...... ... -- ...... ---- ....... - � ................................. ......................... � ............................... ............... ................. ~^-------------------- ------------------'--' ^ M ,PETITION APPROVED.................... �~� w DENIED..................... -� r� [ � � -~^---------------1 19-'- C � ' � \ ` � � � TO: Richard A. Bencal, Chairman Board of Appeal, City of Salem FROM: Gloria B. Talbot 23 Hazel Street Salem, MA ( 508 ) 745-4736 RE: Public Hearing November 18 , 1992 Petition submitted by Michael P. Cormier 14 Laurel St. , Salem DATE: November 9, 1992 I am not certain if a letter is an acceptable means of stating my concerns regarding the above mentioned permit, but because I am the sole care provider to a total care invalid requiring the administration of medications every two hours I am unable to attend the meeting. This is therefore the only vehicle I can take. My concerns are regarding any deck which may be constructed to the rear of 14 Laurel Street abutting my property at 23 Hazel Street. On September 16 , 1992 Mr. Cormier wrote me: "I am writing to you because I .would like to update you on my plans for my backyard. We have decided against putting up the back deck like I had previously planned and that I had discussed with you before . . . I needed to get better access out of my side kitchen door, so I built a platform deck off the side of the house. As it turns out, my wife and I feel that we will enjoy that side deck more. In order to get my side deck admitted to my plot plan I will still have to go in front of the board of appeals to legalize it. ,, This letter from Mr. Cormier would indicate to me that no further construction is planned, and that the deck abutting my property is no longer under consideration. However, the notice your office sent me seems to contradict this, indicating that Mr. Cormier does desire to continue construction work. For this reason I am concerned about the size of any deck he may plan to build in his backyard. I am concerned that whenever I sell my property it will be more difficult to do so if any prospective buyer fears the noise level will interfere with the enjoyment of his/her new home. The size of the lots are just so small that any deck of reasonable size will be very close to my house. I simply have no land on that side of my property allowing for a noise buffer between new construction and my house. I am not certain about the legal distance requirements between new construction and abutting property. If Mr. Cormier' s plan is to abide by the legal regulations I can at least tell any buyer that he is within his rights . However, if he does plan to continue construction and go beyond the allowed distance, thereby bringing new construction closer to my property than he legally can do without special permits , (which I believe is what would have to be done) , I do object to further construction being done. Again this is only if Mr. Cormier ' s written notice to me .is not true and he does plan to continue construction. The limited distance between the two residences makes the addition of new recreational construction uncomfortable. Thank you for bringing my concerns to the attention of the Board. "w APPEAL CASE NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fllitn ofttlPm, Ctt�sttLusPs ,. �Rnarb of ` Mal V� TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: The Undersi ed re r sent that he is are the owners of a certain parcel of land located at N0.�. 1. �Zi� l� . . . . . . . . Street; toning District . . . . . . . and said parcel is affected by Section�sj . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of the Massachusetts State Building Code. Plans describing the work proposed, have been submitted to the Inspector of Buildings in accordance with Section IX A. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance. 0 C'> H r N m o m �N Cn r om w Ma a m Cn Cn crj � ry The Application for Permit was denied by the Inspector of Buildings for the following reasons: The Undersigned hereby petitions the Board of Appeals to vary the terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance and/or the Building Code and order the Inspector of Buildings to approve the application fee permit to build as filed, as the enforcement of said Zoning By-Laws and Building Code would involve practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the Undersigned and relief may be granted without substantially dero- gating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code for the following reasons: ti W a > CL Ownere,�./Tr7A !• ./. [ . . Lr/ . . . . . . . . . . . r w C — UJAddress l 4K ,� �� . . U . .f. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c Telephone. .7��.OP.7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M 6 UPetitioner. . . . . .�1 ff/rl� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address. . . . . . . .,�/,�!2� �r. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date.(. . . ... . . . . . . Lam- Telephone. . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . Three copies of the application must be filed with the Secretary of the Board of Appeals with a check, for advertising in the amount of. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . four weeks prior to the meeting of the Board of Appeals. Check payable to The Evening News. Ih NO..........._....................... PETIT[ON 10 BOARD OF APPEALS LOCATION ............. P171 I II ON P R..... ... .... ...... ADDRESS........... ... ...... CONDI I IONS .......................... ....... .... ....................... ............ ......................... ........................ ......-. .................... ..................... ........................... ............................ .................. ................. .....................................-........................ PETITION APPROVED.................... ❑ DENIED......................... 4. ...... ...................................... 19......... Cl! BOARD OF ASSESSORS CITY HALL PAGE . A I A?ZF R 7=, ...... • 28V 2 2 X E 'A LYST 3 TERS,, RTIF-YID', •3 4 SUBJECT PROPERTY: MAP: 33 LOT : 0302 BUFF. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 0014 LAUREL SI-REET 70 OWNER' R. 7 t 9 CORMIER MARY 6' CORMIER MICHAEL 9 to MAP—L-OT—SUFF PRePERT-Y--"V —ASSS-SSED—OWNER MARL—I-NG—ADDRESS13 0 11 14 0 12 :33 0302 0014 LAUREL STREET- CORMIER ROOERT 14 LAUREL ST ✓ 5 16 13 SAL-.+_-M—MA-0+94-G-- T7 • 4 133 0301 0023 HAZEL, STREET TALBOT' GLORIA 0 23 HAZEL 61' is SALEM MA 01970 002i MAZE't STREEI' GE- -1-N—RA. .... G I 21—HA-21-4 21 :7 DLf.)RO1HY D SALEM MA 0197022 a 33 0307 0008 LINDEN STREET REARDON ROBERT R 8 LINVEN STREE.r. 23 . -Idfmt—v—, ,1 4 ..... 7-1711777 25 .......... ... . . 20 <33 ..... .. ................ j"�sl ........ BLOWN-' LUCKcE L EI � 1 5�2' "LAOR'�: �Q3 ............... . ..... . .... ......%........ B L o U j:im, L,,%m,, EL 0 B L'O U I N R,14' 'SA L'E P I PYA 0-1 27 • 21 .......... 22 8(. .* 29 23 MELLO EDWARD E. NEL LO PHYLLIS N TRS PEABODY MA 0196CL) z 3010 24 33 0305 0012 LINDEN STREET MARBLEE HAD REALTY TRUST' 6 CUSHING RD 31 32 ......... ....... ....... RLR6&-14G 25 33 26 .... ..................... '�%­'T'T,LAUREL, ST 34 5 ............ SALtpl MA a (FA) 3 27 . . ......... % 36 28 E133 16 f3f3l5"E "S;FfR!.E:F 14 ...... S,_T_,R 37 2 ANN M SALEA NA 0-1970 38 30 19 SARGEINT 39 33 0107 0024 HAZEL STREET KERSKE.R MICHAEL M STJ ' .1 BE­VE4kL_"l A 1-11 M �Lo ST 41 31 -73 0.108 00 2'2' HAZEL s- BE'E'T' LUNT ALBERT C 2'2 HAZEL 32 420 GLADYS W SALEM MA 0-1970 43 33 44 34 45 35 4 .670 36 48 37 ................. .......... 49 ......... 38 50 ............ ....... . ..... 51 ............ ...... ...... .......... 52 39 40 53 • 54 41 550 1 42 56 43 .......... 58 0 44 ...... 51 • ............... 45 Go 46 61 0 47 6263 31 48 4 41 65 ........... .......... 50 66 ....... 67 51 .......... 68 52 69 53 70 71 54 72 55 -------- PETER---M.........R................... 73 . CAO 74 56 7 CHI EF, AS 75 7 1� 5 NW fL 1 9�_' 7� '� 5 ,O R E. E ;'' 0 o o r CD V y1 1 �9g r eon pn3 e �♦ N cr CD 1 ' P 6000 5828cc I -'„`� tfJ ' .AC'. ✓�n;i ;—�`� [' %77 e2�t j,5G�✓ 5;-` � a 274 2gz Zee 2?2 I ' 1��' . ` , 1+ Z77 v °'00 - 1 1 -4187 415 _ 5258 SOOA .e lJ sCIS 270 `i t�J 64 d Y • �C 1 1�t . arct 5 i. a T, VMS 7°`'� se I g 0 ! -eo 34C. . Il. „ � uu n W 348 -. -�47 > " t n,a75 314 S13 6374 .344 ~ z93 315 gas r 5075 °p 2Q4 �s7sA` 350 ;yoo �, 9000 VV � .� • E82b Y e �� �pg5 900o �.4 r - ._ =o �� 352 � - • N ` c - I;f V 3. i ` �N 4i5A Z o 41 17tx, y � �.. ;,�q�C) x a: � � • gym+ ' @ A o .a1 s 303 fioo ^� •;q6, � .. 13, 3 e _ � � -",�-- � , ,050 9 55 , t 4S2 �2 4 - 2 8 373 n\ r o t= .�3� op 01S9g0 W I 7/�cQ.Z.e � G`i. �Z°i�e�iC/U/7/�"� � 0 �r��� . � tea_� �e�-, c� � ��S ��� r� _, ,A r DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MARC AND RITA BOUCHARD FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AT 55 TREMONT STREET, SALEM page two C17YC= � . C: c"kl I On the basis of the bove findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board Appeal concludes as follows: 1. The Special Permit req ted can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good d without ifying or substantially derogating from the intent of t di ict or the purpose of the Ordinance. 2. The granting of t pecial Permit re ested will promote the public health, safety, co enience and welfare of t City's inhabitants and may be granted harmony with the neighborhood. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the c�^' erequested, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. A legal building permit is to be obtained. t i fin es the o er s be 'n har n wi ex' ti t rAc u e fic a of cc pan is to oti ne y p t tio. SPNTED A IL_