70 WEBB STREET - ZBA 70 WEBB STREET C
1
wruch damaged nearby homes.Sev-Rix
at
Legal Notice b
w
CITY OF SALEM S
BOARD OF APPEAL t
978.745-9595,Ext.361
Will hold a public hearing for all
persons interested in the petition sub-
mitted by FERNANDO GOMES t
requesting a Variance from front, side I
and rear setbacks to construct a new
30x35,2-famlly structure for property
at 70 WEBB STREET R-2.Said hear- I
ing will be held on Wednesday, E;
December 17,2003,at 6:30 p.m,120
Washington Street, 3rd floor, Room
313.
Nina Cohen,Chairman
(12/3,10) sr
V.
i
o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTIFITY OF �
BOARD OF APPEAL
s
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
SALEM, MA 01970
TEL. (978) 745-9595
FAX (978) 740-9848 ]) I1 qq
STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. - . P -IF 3
MAYOR
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF FERNANDO GOMES REQUESTING A VARIANCE
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 70 WEBB STREET R-2
A hearing on this petition was held on December 17, 2003, with the following Board
Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Stephen Harris, Richard Dionne, Bonnie
Beliar and Joseph Barbeau. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and other and
notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in
accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
The petitioner is requesting a Variance from side, front and rear setback to construct a
new 2 family structure for the property located at 70 Webb Street located in an R-2
zone.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board
that:
a. Special conditions and circumstances exit 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 and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1. Petitioner owner the property at 70 Webb Street in an R-2 district, consisting of a
one-story structure. In past years this property was used as Pete's Barber Shop.
Upon information and belief, the nonconforming use was discontinued more than
2 years ago and had expired.
2. The Petitioner seeks to build a 2-unit townhouse for residential use on the
existing nonconforming lot of 3,485 sf. Variances sought use from, front, side and
rear setback and lot area requirements, the proposed dwelling will be 30 `x 35'
and will not exceed the lot coverage requirement of the Zoning Ordinance.
Frontage on Webb Street is 46.4' will two curb cuts currently in place.
3. Substantial opposition to the proposed plan was expressed. Neighbors stated
that because of the small size of the lot, the added density would detract from
their property value and create parking difficulty on a street where parking is
1
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF FERNANDO GOMES REQUESTING A VARIANCE
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 70 WEBB STREET R-2
page two
already at a premium. In addition, the proposed off-street parking was described
as dangerously difficult, since the lot size does not allow vehicles to turn around to
exit onto Webb Street.
4. Attending to speak in opposition were Lenn Doherty, 35 Briggs St., Fred.French,
28 Briggs St., Robert Seamans, 73 Webb St. Mike Bucoo of 72-74 Webb St. .
Also in opposition was Ward 2 City Councillor Regina Flynn, who said she
received phone calls in opposition to the project. Counciller-elect Mike
Sosnowkski, who also got phone calls from neighbors in opposition to the
proposal, Ward 7 City Councillor Joseph O'Keefe who opposed adding to the
density of this already dense city neighborhood, and via letter, from David Lieh,
an architect and neighbor.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearing,
the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and not
the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not result in
unnecessary hardship to the petitioner.
3. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public
good or without nullifying and substantially hardship derogating from the intent of the
district or purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted 0 in favor and,5 in opposition to grant the
requested variances. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass,
the motion is defeated and the petition is denied.
VARIANCE DENIED
DECEMBER 17, 2003 ✓ /`' ��,\
Nina Cohen, Chairman
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 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 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 passed 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 owners Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
k
DEC-16-03 TUE 13 :21 LIEBSTETt07$ 9787459541 P. 01
v -
A
i
!!' 14 December 2003
V
City of Salem
Board of Appeal
120 Washington Street
r Salem, MA 01970
I: RE: Public Hearing for variance Request at
Ct 70 Webb Street R-2
s
Members of the Board of Appeal:
In response to a petition submitted by the Owner of property at 70 Webb Street whereby they
have requested variance from front,side and rear setbacks to construct a new 30x35 two family
structure, 1 must submit my opposition to such request as a resident with direct views of the lot.
The existing structure on the lot at 70 Webb Street is a 1-st0ry,00mmelcial use building,having
k. been used as a barber shop prior to my moving onto Webb Street. From my conversations with
other abutters,in the last 75 years there has never been a residential use on that lot and the 1-
story structure has allowed unobstructed ocean views and sunlight to what has become an
extremely active vehicular and pedestrian route.
My opposition to the petitioner's request falls on several issues:
r
1. Parking—with the onslaught of condominium conversions available parking is In great
tidemand for residents, not to mention guests of residents.The lot at 70 Webb appears too
r small to accommodate on-site parking,with the proposed size of petitioners building,and
the neighborhood cannot support additional on-street or side street parking demand.The
recent snow blizzard the weekend of December 7,2003 reinforced the parking
congestion that already exists in the neighborhood,resulting in cars being towed from
side Streets where residents were supposed to park in times of snow emergency, not to
mention that Webb Street remained treacherous for 2 days before equipment from the
y power plant was dispatched to dear the busy vehicular access Street.The neighborhood
cannot support 2-6 new vehicles and guest vehicles for that lot.
2. Ocean views and sunlight—ocean views are important to residents on Webb Street,
1 whether they are direct views of the cove or small pieces of view.These same ocean
views were the reason many residents,such as myself, purchased property on Webb
k. Sheet.These ocean views support the property values in the neighborhood contributing
to the taxes we pay and le-sale value should we leave the neighborhood, not to mention
our quality of life.Additional density in an SIMady congested residential district is not
warranted, nor is there precedent on the lot at 70 Webb Street to support petitioner's
request.
3. Variance from setbacks—setbacks are an essential zoning need to ensure proper
separation of structures,ample open space and greenery on building lots,and necessary
off-street parking.
While I respect the petitioner's request for variance from the zoning-by-laws, I cannot support this
request and ask the Board of Appeal to vote against the petition.
i'
Rly
f
Darihael ' .AIA,
s
77 Webb Street
u,
77 Webb Street o Salem, Massachusetts 01070 o WWW,Iieb$tUdIOS.com
k 978.746.9641 studio 1 978.407.6637 cellular I david@liebstudios.com
li'
CT`1 of S .QLVI 5�%09)
7¢
4 I \
' li i 1 u r
�II 1, i Z8,+7' I
I
,
I
AREA = 3, 440 * SF
10.4-f 26's-, — ; 8.39 -
II
b Q I I 4 I /.75 '
U
�• -)(15T/NF ti
ry�
� J �i � DWELLINF I I
2
z I I k (7-0 AS E
b) b I !zE/'70VED)
I 0-
No . 70
i
r ¢09
1 -�(— �— — - ]-�8. 3 9
5.ots
4C_9o' 90-5" 0� `9P
Bf3 STREET
C:; g
ce+r. ,< y Plot Plan Of Land
70 Webb Street
ib
Salem, Ma
X Prepared For:
Fernando Gomes
Proposed Lot Coverage: 31% +/- Scale : V = 10' December 2003
Fernando S. Gomes
6 King St.
Peabody, MA 01960
December 13,2003
Dear Gentlepersons:
Subject: 70 Webb St.
I wish to inform you that I am seeking a variance on an undersized building lot at 70 Webb St. The
proposal is to build a 2 family residence to replace the commercial building currently on the property,
which would better suit the neighborhood and would only benefit the area.
The surrounding buildings do not meet current frontage or side line requirements and the proposed
building will be more in common with neighboring properties and will be more in keeping with the R-2
Zoning.
Please sign below to indicate your acceptance of this variance and that you have seen the proposed
plans.
Respectfully yours,
Fernando S. Gomes
4r4l Z,66 7/ 600 b6 S-77