0005 SKERRY STREET COURT - ZBA ffl
O
UPC 1333 i
No. 953L-3 to
HASTINGS,MN
#��
��, �
� � < ��
� �j ° �,
x�
I&M Notice
CITY OF SALEM
BOARD OF APPEAL
745-9595 Ext.381
Will hold a public hearing for all
I persons interested in the petition sub- +
mitted by MARK PETIT requesting Ilr
Variances from lot size,frontage,
J density,front,rear and,side set- I
r backs to construct a single family I
ie dwelling for property located at 5
as SKERRY STREET COURT R-2.Said
at hearing to be held WEDNESDAY,
id AUGUST 21,2002 AT 6:30 P.M.,120
H. WASHINGTON STREET, 3RDI
he FLOOR,ROOM 313.
``-u- Nina Cohen
mt Chairman
1 (8/7,14)
or
in
,n
i
��oNom CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL -
3 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR � •'
SALEM, MA 01970
�✓,y TEL. (978) 745-9595
FAX (978) 740-9846
STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. 9 _
MAYOR 40
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MARK PETIT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 SKERRY STREET COURT R-2
A hearing on this petition was held on August 21, 2002, with the following Board
Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman„ Richard Dionne , Joan Boudreau, Stephen
Harris and Bonnie Belair. 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 Variances from lot size, frontage, density, front, rear and
side setbacks to construct a single family dwelling for the property located at 5 Skerry
Street Court 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. Attorney Stephen Lovely of 14 Story Street in Salem represented the petitioner,
Mark Petit.
2. Mr. Petit had been granted a request by the Historic Commission to tear down an
existing garage that was in deplorable condition
3. Mr. Petit purchased an additional 300+/-sq ft piece of land that would increase his
total square frontage to 2600 sq ft and also create an additional parking space for the
property.
4. Mr. Petit had previously appeared before the Zoning Board of Appeal with this same
request for a variance. He was denied.
5. Speaking in opposition to this petition was Mike O'Brien, 4 Skerry St. Court, Pat
Cahill, 1 Skerry St. Court, Ray Hodge, 6 Skerry St. Court, Cameron Clark, 4 Skerry
St. Court and Laura Jones, 4 Skerry St. Court.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MARK PETIT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5 SKERRY STREET COURT R2 ,
page two
6. Neighbors opposition included parking, drainage, snow removal and the fact the
there would be no room for a fire truck to enter close enough to the proposed
structure.
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
AUGUST 21, 2002
Joan Boudreau
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