Loading...
96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD - ZBA 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD JHRMYN FAMILY TRUST V 1 ��coxwr CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL } " 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR 1 ��a SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. - MAYOR o C7"i ti frT1� C �C) r � N cn 3 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JERMYN FAMILY REQUESTING A cr1 0�_ VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD A hearing on this petition was held July 17, 2002 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair and Nicholas o v Helides Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the heaIr ng were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts s General Laws'Chapter 40A. The petitioner is requesting a Variance from lot width and lot size to construct a single for the property located at 96 Marlborough Road The Variances, which have been requested, may be granted upon a finding by this 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 the 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.The petitioner, the Jermyn Family Trust, purchased the property at 96 Marlborough Road from the City of Salem in 1956. 2. The deed from the City of the petitioner indicated that the property contained 5,000 square feet of land. 3. A 1997 survey of the property submitted to the Board shows that the property contains only 4,924 square feet of land and is only 50 feet width (frontage). 4.The property did originally consist of 5,000 square feet when it was initially subdivided, however, a taking by the City of Salem of a narrow strip of land along the front of the property for the purpose of laying out Marlborough Road diminished the size of the lot by 76 square feet. The basis of hardship is the taking by the City with no consideration. 1 DECISION OF THE PETITION OF THE JERMYN FAMILY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD page two 5. If the taking had not occurred, the property would have been protected as a buildable lot by virtue of the provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 6 6. There are numerous other lots in the neighborhood with houses that are less than 5,000 sq. ft 7.Construction of a house upon the property will not result in any loss of visibility of oncoming traffic on Marlborough Road. 8. A letter from the owner of 92 Marlborough Road, Donna Gautreau was read into the record. Donna Gautreau was in attendance at the meeting and voiced her objection to development of the subject lot on the basis of traffic and visibility issues. 9. A petition signed by 7 neighbors in favor, was received and read into the record. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on, the evidence presented at the hearing, the Zoning 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 5-0 to grant the Variances 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 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. ti 5. Petitioner is to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. "y 6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors 1\ office ad shall display said number so as to be visible from the street. cl <c � nn' DECISION OF THE PETITION ON JERMYN FAMILY TRUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD page three 7. Removal of ledge to be conducted between hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in compliance with the Cit Ordinance VARIANCE GRANTED July 17, 2002 Nicholas Helides Board of Appeal 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 ti 9 C, r �o 0 Cn J D "n ni O nZ L n We, being property owners in the neighborhood of 96 Marlborough Road, have no objection to the construction of a single family home on that property. We believe that a single family home on that lot would be compatible with the other homes in the neighborhood. Therefore, we support the petition to of the Board of Appeals of John and Gloria Jermyn for a variance. Y' w a3 l June 17, 2002 Board Of Appeal 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Jermyn Family Trust Request for Variances At 96 Marlborough Load Hearing Dear Sir/Madam: I,Donna Gautreau, owner of the property at 92 Marlborough Road, Salem, Ma 01970, am unable to attend the public hearing on Wednesday, June 19,2002 due to my son's graduation. However, I would like to submit my objection to this variance in writing. The petition for a variance from the property at 96 Marlborough Road was rejected back in 1997/1998. 1 would like to know what has changed since that decision. Mr. Daniel Dandreo, Contractor, represented me at that hearing with all the facts and information regarding the property at 96 Marlborough Road. He can be reached at 781-599-7643. The petition at that time was denied. When my husband, James Gautreau, and I purchased the land at 92 Marlborough Road, we were assured according to the city zoning laws that a house could not be built on the lot next to us. This was a major factor in our decision to purchase the land at 92 Marlborough Road. This road has become extremely hazardous over the years and building a house on a lot that is less than 5,000 sq. ft. will obstruct the view of the oncoming traffic. Other residents on Marlborough Road have petitioned for variances with double the amount of land than that of the property at 96 Marlborough Road and have been refused. The history of the owners of the land at 96 Marlborough Road has been to purchase lots at very low costs and then apply for variances. I am against the request for variances from lot width and lot size to construct a single family dwelling for the property located at 96 Marlborough Road, Salem, Ma. i erely, i�����"""" Donna Gautreau 92 Marlborough Road Salem, MA 01970 978-740-6950 CC: Attorney Doreen M. Zankowski :,I b L I Hinckey, Allen & Snyder LLP nt,siR74 U, , , Q (situ of a�ttlem, � HttssttrllusPtts 9 'Q °�r�ilEZ ` qW Fii '97 C, 1Y : 'Hass r" e; � r DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOHN J. JERMYN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD (R-1 ) A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 1997 with the following Board Members present: Gary Barrett, Chairman, Nina Cohen, Albert Hill, Richard Dionne and Paul Valaskatgis. 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 requests a Variance on lot area 6 lot width to build a single family home for the property located at 96 Marlborough Rd. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the 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 or structures in the same district. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship,financial or otherwise, to the Petitioner. c• 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, makes the following findings of facts: I . The petition was presented by John J. Jermyn, trustee to the Property. Relief from lot size was asked for size being only 4924 Square feet, and relief from frontage was another issue, only 50 feet exists. 2 . Several abutters appeared and spoke in opposition to the Petition. They were; Arthur Bates, 4 Vista Ave. , Thomas Ciereno, 4 1/2 Vista Ave. , James Cautreau, 92 Marlborough Road, and Dan Dandreo of Rock Ave. Swampscott cousin of James Gautreau. On thz basic of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence preserited at the hearings, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1 . No special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property as opposed to the district in general. 2 • Li teral enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance would not involve substantial hardship to the petitioner. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN J. JERMYN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD R-1 page two 3 . Desirable relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Board of Appeal voted 2 in favor and 3 in opposition to the motion to grant the Variance, having failed to garner the required votes to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. Variance Denied December 17, 1997 Paul Valaskagis, Member Board of Appeal 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 11 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 of Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that20 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 Regis try 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 i ' CHU of , $Nlvm, ffln5ndlilgPtts Pnur�eZpggW PPi 197 C, ! Y ::r '�;,!_r �. U A S S DECISION ON THE PETITION OF JOHN J. JERMYf1�REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD (R-1 ) A hearing on this petition was held December 17, 1997 with the following Board Members present: Gary Barrett, Chairman, Nina Cohen, Albert Hill , Richard Dionne and Paul Valaskatgis. 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 requests a Variance on lot area & lot width to build a single family home for the property located at 96 Marlborough Rd. The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding Of the 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 or structures in the same district. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship,financial or otherwise, to the Petitioner. C. 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, makes the following findings of facts: 1 . The petition was presented by John J. Jermyn, trustee to the Property. Relief from lot size was asked for size being only 4924 square feet, and relief from frontage was another issue, only 50 feet exists . 2 . Several abutters appeared and spoke in opposition to the Pia-ti- tion. They were; Arthur Bates, 4 Vista Ave. , Thomas Ciereno, 4 1/2 Vista Ave. , James Gautreau, 92 Marlborough Road, and Dan Dandreo of Rock Ave. Swampscott cousin of James Gautreau. On they basic of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence preserited at the hearings, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: I . No special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property as opposed to the district in general . 2 . Li teral enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance would not involve substantial hardship to the petitioner. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF JOHN J. JERMYN REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 96 MARLBOROUGH ROAD R-1 page two 3 . Desirable relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. Therefore, the Board of Appeal voted 2 in favor and 3 in opposition to the motion to grant the Variance, having failed to garner the required votes to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. Variance Denied December 17, 1997 Paul Valaskagis, Member Board of Appeal 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 of Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that20 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