7 VICTORY ROAD - ZBA (2) V �C �� b�I
' /
�`�
��1
�U
I Legal Notice) 1,
` da
CITY OF SALEM tht
BOARD OF APPEAL Ci
978.74"595,Ext 361 iii
will hold a public hearing for all per- thl
sons interested in the petition submit- W,
ted by DENNIS&GAIL FLYNN seek- isd
ing an Administrative Appeal of the
Building Inspectors'decision for the I
property located at 7 VICTORY ROAD ty
the
R-2. Said hearing will be held on der'
WEDNESDAY,DECEMBER 15,2004, ciall
at 6:30 P.M., 120 WASHINGTON A
STREET,3rd FLOOR,ROOM 313,
Nina Cohen A dt
Chairman
(12/1,6) (1..
i
I __
J
CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS CITY OF SALEM. MA
r • BOARD OF APPEAL CLERK'S OFFICE
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 1'
STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 ',lOOU DEC 2O P I2' I M
MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DENNIS&GAIL FLYNN REQUESTING AN - — --
ADMINISTRATIVE RULING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 VICTORY
ROAD R-1
A hearing on this petition was held on December 15,2004 with the following Board
Members present:Nina Cohen Chairman, Richard Dionne, Bonnie Belair,, Edward
Moriarty and Nicholas Helides Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and
notices of the hearing were published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner is requesting an Administrative Appeal of the Building Inspectors decision for
the property located at 7 Victory Road.
The Board of Appeal, after carefid consideration of the evidence and after reviewing the
plans at the hearing, makes the following findings of fact:
1. Attorney James Flemming presented the appeal.
2. Reference was made to the petition that was granted in June of 2004 for increase
in the size of the dwelling from 4.5 to 7.5 rooms.
3. Attorney Flemming stated that the home continues to be a single family use with
one doorbell and I mail box meeting the definitions under the code for single
family.
4. Attorney Flemming made reference to plans submitted in June of 2004 being
sketchy with little interior detail and being unrepresentative of the work that was
actually performed.
5. Attorney Flemming stated that the Building Inspector had made the rough
inspection and observed the counter level electrical outlets, and did not stop the
work or note an issue.
6. Board member Attorney Moriarty reviewed definitions of both single and multi
family dwellings and noted that the zoning code must be viewed in the entirety
and therefore the subject is defined as a multi-family based on that definition.
7. Board member Bonnie Belair inquired if the work was completed as per the plane.
Discussion requiring the labeling of the room that has been completed as a
kitchen labeled in the plans as a"great room". Additional discussion concerning
the verbal exchange at the June of 2004 meeting when it as alleged that the
petitioner represented that there would only be one kitchen in the dwelling. The
allegation was disputed. The June meeting was recorded.
8. Building Commissioner Thomas St. Pierre presented his findings as follows:
a. He has viewed the situation in its totality.
b. The plans submitted at the June of 2004 petition did not show a kitchen.
J
CITY OF SALEX,MA
CLERK'S OFFICE
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DENNIS &GAIL FLYNN REQUJP?A A P 12: 14
ADMINISTRATIVE RULING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 VICTORY
ROAD R-1
page two
Submission of plans without identifying kitchen areas is in violation of state
building code.
c. Newly created separate egresses exist.
d. Two separate housekeeping units have been created through the additional
kitchen and separate egresses.
9. Albert and Ruby Hill of 4 Larkin Lane spoke in opposition to the creation of a
two-family property in an R-I zone and did not want a precedent set by allowing
it to remain in place.
10. Property owner Dennis Flynn presented the following:
a. Original plans showed a"great room"because they did not know at the
time how they wished to use the space.
b. The exterior appearance remains the same as a single family.
C. Building Inspector did not mention the issue at the rough inspection.
d. Building Inspector saw the counter level electrical outlets.
11. Building Inspector St. Pierre stated that his notes from the rough inspection noted
the issued and he in fact did bring the issue up at the time advising the owner
that a second kitchen would be an issue.
12.Abutter David Reardon of 5 Victory Road stated his support for the owner.
13.Neighbor Mr. Willets of 3 Victory Road stated his support for the owner.
14. City Councillor Joseph O'Keefe stated his support for the owners and further
identified the need to clarify the ordinance.
15. Owners of 5,6,12 & 11 Victory Road stated their support for their neighbor.
16. City Councillor Corchado noted that the only opposition that has reached his is
from Mr. &Mrs. Hill. She state her belief that we should abide by the Zoning
Ordinance as it stands now.
17. Attorney Quinn suggested that conditions be considered to accommodate the
situation given all the support from the neighbors.
18. Owner of the subject property, Robert Pelletier stated that his is in favor of a lien
or other conditions that would accommodate the situation.
19. Board Member Moriarty stated that the definitions in the code clearly identify the
subject in its present condition to be a multi-family dwelling.
i
CITY Or SFl -MA
CLERK S aE
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DENNIS& GAIL FLYNN REQUESTING AN
ADMINISTRATIVE RULING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 VI TTOpyIr I
ROAD R-1 10% DEC U
page three
Therefore, base on the fact and on evidence presented,the Board make a motion to
uphold Building Commissioners' Thomas St. Pierre decision for the premises at 7
Victory Road with a vote of 1 in favor and 4 to deny the petitioners appeal.
ADMINISTRATIVE RULING
DENIED
December 15,2004 / p
Nicholas Helides,Member
Board of Appeal J
A COPYOF 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 unit a copy of the decision bearing the Certificate of the City Clerk
that 20 days have elapsed an 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.