11 MASON STREET - ZBA n
I
I
Legal Notice
J . I
CITY OF SALEM
BOARD OF APPEAL a
will hold a public hearing for all per- 'rr
sons interested in the petition submit- 1
led by ATTORNEY DIANE McGLYNN
seeking a Variance to'corrvert single-
family dwelling to a two-family for the
property located at 11,Mason Street
B-1. Said hearing will be held on
Wednesday, December 20, 2006,
6:30 p.m.,3rd floor, 120 Washington
Street,Room 313.
Dec.7&13,2006
Nina Cohen,Chairman i
SN—12l7,12113/O6
b
e
r
ONDIT CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3Ro FLOOR
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595
FAX: 978-740-9846
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL �-
MAYOR
r
January 9, 2007 - -
Decision
Petition of Luis and Maria Rosero requesting a Variance
for the property at 11 Mason Street
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A public hearing on the above petition was opened on December 20, 2006 pursuant to
Massachusetts General Law Ch. 40A, Sec. 11. The following Zoning Board members
were present: Nina Cohen, Bonnie Belair, Steven Pinto,Elizabeth Debski and Robin
Stein.
The petitioners, Luis and Maria Rosero, sought a variance a Variance to convert a single-
family dwelling to a two-family dwelling for the property located at 11 Mason Street,
Salem, in the Business Neighborhood (B-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. 11 Mason Street is located in the B-I zoning district.
2. The petitioner is requesting a variance to convert a single-family dwelling to a
two-family dwelling.
3. The subject property is a duplex attached to 11 I/2 Mason Street, which
structure petitioner indicates is used as a multi-family. (This decision makes
no findings regarding the use of 11 I/z Mason Street).
4. A 1982 special permit allowed the subject property to be used as a two-family
with the condition to the effect that the Special Permit for I Mason Street
shall terminate if the property is no longer owner-occupied, or is transferred.
The petitioner wants to resolve confusion created by this condition and now
seeks a variance to convert the property into a legal two-family.
5. The current owners believed that they had purchased a legal two-family and
have been using the property as such.
6. One member of the public spoke opposed to the petition.
7. One member of the public spoke in favor of the petition.
8. Granting the requested relief will not change the current actual use of the
property.
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 a Variance does not constitute substantial
detriment to the public good as the use of the dwelling is currently residential
and an additional unit will not cause a substantial impact on the neighboring
community.
2. The requested relief does not nullify or substantially derogate from the intent
or purpose of the zoning ordinance as the nature of the Business
Neighborhood District allows for a residential component in the Special
Permit section and by its nature allows incorporation of residential uses with
business uses.
3. A literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would create a substantial
hardship to the petitioner by unfairly restricting the usage of their property
when multi-family uses are permitted in the district with a Special Permit.
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, four(4) in favor
(Cohen, Pinto, Debski, Stein) and one (1) opposed (Belair), to grant the request for 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 construction.
5. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
6. Petitioner shall obtain street numbering from the City of Salem Assessor's Office
and shall display said number so as to be visible from the street.
=r .
7. Unless this decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted does
not empower or authorize Petitioner to demolish or reconstruct the structures(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.
8. One of the two units at I I Mason Street shall remain owner occupied.
Robin Stein
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.