Loading...
112 LORING AVENUE - ZBA I I Lo, ,,/L-s Aoe , r v %ac urr. CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS O1970 TELEPHONE 978-745-9595 �nre� FAX 978-740-9846 1 KIMBERLEY ORISCOLL C..: :-,.i -U 'A MAYOR May4, 2011 Decision City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals Petition of CHARLIE RICKER requesting a Variance from number of stories and a Special Permit to extend a nonconforming structure in order to construct a third floor porch on the property located at 112 LORING AVE (R-1). A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on April 20, 2011, pursuant to Mass General Law Ch. 40A, § 11. The hearing was closed on that date with the following Zoning Board of Appeals members present: Rebecca Curran, Elizabeth Debski,Richard Dionne, Annie Harris,Jamie Metsch,and Jimmy Tsitsinos (alternate). Petitioner seeks a Special Permit pursuant to Section 3.3.5 and Variances pursuant to Section 4.1.1 of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinances. Statements of fact: 1. In a petition date-stamped March 30, 2011,the petitioner requested a Special Permit and Variances to add a third-story porch and porch rail system to the three-family house located at 112 Loring Avenue, 2. The petitioner represented himself at the hearing. 3. At the hearing,the abutter at 6 Sumner Road spoke in opposition to the project, expressing concern that adding the third-floor porch would impinge upon her privacy. The petitioner, abutter and Board members discussed various options for landscaping and screening, and the petitioner agreed to work with the abutter to come to a mutuallyagreeable solution. 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. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and «-ithout nulliftiing or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose Of the zoning ordinance. 2. In permitting such change, the Board of Appeals requires certain appropriate conditions and afeguards as noted below. 2 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: 1. A Special Permit under Sec. 3.3.5 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance is granted. 2. A Variance from number of stories is granted. In consideration of the above, the Salem Board of Appeals voted, five (5) in favor (Debski, Harris, Curran, Dionne and Metch in favor) and none (0) opposed, to grant petitioner's request for a Special Permit and a Variance,subject to the following terms,conditions, and safeguards: 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 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 constriction. 5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure. 6. A Certificate of Inspection 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 Decision 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. Landscaping and screening Mill be agreed upon with neighbors. mY< Rebecca Curran, Chair Salem Board of Appeals i= 3 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 has been filed with the Essex South Registry of Deeds. 4/20/11 To whom it may concern, My husband and I are here this evening regarding the property located at 112 Loring Ave which is designated as (R-1). We are here to request that the petition be denied. Mr.Charlie Ricker has requested that a third story porch be added to the back of the house. First let me say that we appreciate the fact that Mr. Ricker is in the process of renovating and improving the property. Jerry and I have been living in our home for the past 5 1/2 years. During that time we have seen the condition of the existing porches deteriorated significantly. The reason for our presence tonight is to help you understand why we have concerns about a third story porch. Our home, on 6 Sumner Rd is directly behind 112 Loring Avenue. It was built in 1954 on a hill/ ledge, and consequently our main floor is in line with Mr. Ricker's third story. An extended porch would have a direct view into our kitchen through our back window. We feel it would impact our level of privacy, as there are no large trees in that specific area to block the view. One other concern that we have is there is no way of knowing,at this time, how many people would be living there. Do not get me wrong we do not object to children playing in the yard, or to occasional yard parties and family gatherings, as we at times use our yard for such gatherings. We are just a bit concern that an additional family may provide more opportunities for disturbances. Prior to the fire at 112, there were families with only young children who were always supervised when in the yard. We came tonight to have our say and hope that Mr. Ricker is not allowed to add a third porch, but if he is, that he will do whatever is in his power to make sure that our concerns as his neighbors are respected. Thank you for the opportunity to have our say in the matter. Jerry and Joanne Judge 6 Sumner Rd. 978-744-0683