13 PUTMAN STREET - ZBA i3 �� �
� - - � -\
�1
3
�.
' dal
" ,p �
v
J
r `�
�;,
Ati-
7978-745-90595
egal Notice
re's
i 11- TY OF SALEM
ageRD OF APPEAL
M x5641isk, public hearing for all per-
;in- ed in the petNon submit-
yRY BOUCHER seeking
meVariances from lot size, density, front
ga and,side Setbacks to construct single
family dwelling for the property located
ger at 13 PUTMAN STREET R-1. Said.
jse- hearing will be held on WEDNESDAY,
JUNE 20,2007 at 6:30 p.m., 3rd Floor
Jri- conference room 120 WASHINGTON
IF STREET ROOM 313.
{_ SN—6/6,6/13107
y GONDITAgo CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
2 n
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01 970
Do�P TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595
FAX: 978-740-9846
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL -
c
MAYOR
CD
O
July 10, 2007 N r
C)
Decision
Petition of Henry Boucher Requesting a Variance
for the Property at 13 Putnam Street
City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A public hearing on the above petition was opened on June 20, 2007 pursuant to
Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 40A, §§ 10 and 11 and the City of Salem Zoning
Ordinance. The following members of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals ("Zoning
Board of Appeals") were present: Robin Stein (Chairperson), Elizabeth Debski, Richard
Dionne and Steve Pinto.
The petitioner, Henry Boucher("petitioner"), sought a variance from lot size, density,
front and side yard setback to the real property located at 13 Putnam Street, Salem,
located within a single-family residential (R-1) zoning district.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
public hearing, and after thorough review of the petition submitted, submits the following
findings of fact:
i. Petitioner's property is located within a single-family residence district.
2. Petitioner sought a variance from: a) minimum lot area of 15,000
square feet required under the existing zoning ordinance to 2,220
square feet; b) maximum lot coverage of 30 percent required under the
existing zoning ordinance to 37 percent; c) minimum depth of front yard
of 15 feet required under the existing zoning ordinance to 1 foot; and
d) minimum width of side yard of 10 feet required under the existing
zoning ordinance to 1 foot.
3. The variances is being sought to enable the construction of a 36 X 24
single family home.
4. There was no opposition to the variances.
,i
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 for a variance does not constitute substantial
detriment to the public good as residential uses are permitted in the R-1
district. Also, the petitioner's request for a variance does not nullify or
substantially derogate from the intent or purpose of the zoning ordinance
as residential dwellings are a permitted use in the R-1 district.
2. A literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would create a substantial
hardship to the petitioner due to the small size of the lot.
3. In permitting such change, the Zoning Board of Appeals requires certain
appropriate conditions and safeguards as noted below.
In consideration of the above, four(4) members (Stein, Debski, Dionne and Pinto) of the
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant the petitioner's request for a variance, and
zero (0) members voted to deny the petitioner's 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
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 pen-nit prior to beginning any
construction.
5. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained.
6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem
Assessor's Office and shall display said number as to be visible from the
street.
7. Petitioners are to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission
having jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Planning Board.
8. All construction shall be completed within nine (9) months from when the
building permit is issued.
Y '
it
Robin Stein
Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH 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 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.
We, the undersigned call upon the Zoning Board of the City of Salem Massachusetts
to allow Henry and Dean Boucher to build a single family home on the comer of Putnam
Street and Varney Street in the City of Salem, Massachusetts 01970.
Na Address:
zs Pi tfj G m LT
024 K/ r
C ,�✓� W A�O�r
�
- z' S% ✓
ILL �o
N
{
• \ ! r ° (f I
i
5 IS
Of
r
' • � stns a D easy-
� 3esePlt G +bsly
t �
�
f, • 2,220 OAJI
Jl:i Y . 6Zober� Gi[�ely {
VAR Ne f STr� �� t^
�6MEa:" E^• �o^Fe��
Ca-spas^ Fd..vvCf'4- �:I�'O,l4peRwy,
, o
Hearing - July 29, 1974
�1 BI( 6 1 1 1 PG 2 I I NILLI.M F. Nplt
rf,F �1
IV qg of Salcm, cfflassadpAsetts O [fN.I. DOYL{
d I[L ARTHUR LA.N[COY/
\ � c 2 HH '1�1 �oarb of (4peA `
/ ✓ 1 M[NY 1. T.LNCN
f1 . A NORMAN OLLCM. M. p
THE FETITION OF OMEROS GALIATSATOS TO CONSTRUCT
5A''1'4I0-FAMILY DUPLEX AT THE CORNER OF PUTNAM AND VARNEY STREETS
(13 VARNEY STREET) .
is an appeal from the ruling of the Building Inspector, who refused
�3 .ito issue a permit for the construction of a two family duplex residdnce
z; on the lot at the corner of Putnam and Varney Streets in Salem. The
Building Inspector gave as his reason for refusing to issue the permit:
:."::;'This 3s an R-2 residential two family zone and the lot does not conform
to the minimum requirements in regard to lot area and setbacks on fronto . i.
+ •:side and rear." The Building Inspector further advised the applicant
of his right to appeal to the Board of Appeals. Hearing held on July 29,I97d,
Pursuant to noticed mailed postpaid to the petitioner, Board members,
,I
y1; Abuttere., Abutters to abutters and others, and advertisedents were duly
l;
published in the Salem Evening News advising of this public hearing:
•;l,:.Present were Chairman Gray and Board Members William Abbott, Donald
; Koleman, and Arthur Labrecque.
The Petitioner was represented by Philip Litman, Esquire, who presented
d the following evidence:
r . The lot in question contains 2340 square feet. Previously., there was a
` two family house standing on the lot which was damaged by fire and there-
, i . after its demolitian was ordered by the Board of Health. Other houses in
the area consist of two and three family dwellings. The lot is located
in an R-2 District and the previous house on the lot was a two family
s1, unit.. The plot plan submitted and spade a pant of this record indicates !,
+ ttat the proposed structure would have a greater setback on aide lot and
rear lot than the former building standing on the premises. Parking for
the proposed two family building is adequate.
No one appeared in opposition.
The Board, being familiar with the area in question, finds that a variance -,
wy ' may be granted for the construction of the proposed two family dwelling
` 11 derogating from the meaning and intent of the
without. substantia y g 8
_ rd finds also that many other homes in
the District ,
r.•.,- Zo,nin By Lew. The Boa •
consist of two and three family residences and that the construction of a
two family building in this two family zoning District would not be a
detriment to the neighborhood.
ll finds that there is
The Board additionally
A
B
►( 6I I I PG 2. 12
JAWS
�rw00 1*1 CYL4L
ovr I. rg of Salem, ttssttL4 { ## rtI1 u@
`{�1S
. . •Joww,r: at.v tw{C�r.
\Y. �varb of �ypv l
J •- - 1 wOrY.w wILCM, /IL '
1
Page 2 - Decision - Omeros Galiateatoe - 13 Varney St. 1,44
' hardship r due to the small size of the lot and the fact that the lot
,t
would be too small to conform to the present zoning laws and takes
into consideration. the fact that a two family building previously
stood on the lot but was removed because of fire-.
t'
4'1
VARIANCE UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED. °Ioy
,!
SAL BOARD OF APP AL'
BY
Acting Secretary r4
vv 1 rC
f n i A TRUE COP I `�
" ATTEST4--- AUGU TINE J. TO fEY
t;i . � ' �•.: - CITY CLERK
�i ESSEX SS. RECORDED l�7X�M. PAMT_1L_ ' M. TMST. �o
I
1
S
{
i
® - ®®
FFMHH FFM
®® 0000
4:
S,
FRONT ELEVATION
SCALE:I1=1'I
� - 63.0'
a II
I i
' N I
LOT "A"
' 4,550 SQ. FT.
W ESTRAYA DUEST
.JOSEPH GIBELY
h
I
I
w
F
HOUSE #15 � 5
I I a
/ I
- -- - - -77.78_ - - - - - - - �
L '
I
LOT "B"
2,220 SQ. FT. o
IN ROBERT GIBELY HOUSE #13
JOHN DRINKWATER
I
- -- - - - - - - - - - - -
I w
Mesa'
VARNEY STREET
SUBDIVISION OF LAND IN
SALEM OCCUPIED BY FOUR LOT PLAN
,.,...., .,. ,. ,.,.,. SCALE:1/16'=1'-(r