138 NORTH STREET - BUILDING JACKET xI _ 1
� "'�13$r NORTH STREET j '
J
��.
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARDOFAPPbM*� f
120 WASHINGTON STREET♦ SALEM,MASSACH i yt
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL 11LE:978-745-9595 ♦ FAX:978-740-9 R
MAYOR .. .'[.
March 1, 2017
Decision
City of Salem Board of Appeals
Petition of THOMAS PELLETIER, seeking a Special Permit per 3.3.3 Nonconforming Structures of
the Salem Zoning Ordinance to reconstruct, extend, or structurally change the existing historic
carriage house at the property of 138 NORTH STREET (Map 27 Lot 272)(82 Zoning District)
A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on February 15, 2017 pursuant to M.G.L Ch. 40A, § 11
and closed on that date with the following Salem Board of Appeals members present: Mr. Duffy (Acting
Chair),Mr.Tsitsinos,Mr. Watkins,Mr. Hacker (alternate),Mr.Viccica (alternate).
The Petitioner seeks a Special Permit per 3.3.3 Nonconforming Stmawns of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to
reconstruct,extend, or structurally change the existing historic carriage house.
Statements of fact:
1. Thomas Pelletier,petitioner,presents the petition.
2. In the petition date-stamped December 16, 2017, the petitioner requested a Special Permit per Sec.
3.3.3 Nonconforming Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to reconstruct, extend, or
structurally change the existing historic carriage house.
3. In a decision dated June 29, 2016, the petitioner received a special permit from the Zoning Board of
Appeals to allow a dwelling unit in a historic carriage house.
4. The petitioner has started restoration of the historic carriage house and has determined that the
restoration of the roof and south facade are not possible.
5. The petitioner is proposing to restore the historic carriage house by saving as much of the original
materials as possible and will reconstruct and rebuild in-kind to be as close to the original materials,
structure,and details as possible.
6. The petitioner is proposing to construct a new roof to be rebuilt in kind as per the drawing submitted
with the second gable on the north side.
7. The petitioner is also proposing to remove and completed rebuild the south wall in kind and restore it
to as close as the original as possible.
8. The petitioner is proposing to dismantle the north wall and reuse any timber frame and sheathing that
is salvageable to be used to rebuild a new wall as per the drawing. New clapboard will be used for the
trim and any detail trim that is not salvageable will be milled to replicate existing trim.
9. The petitioner is proposing to restore the west wall using the existing structure, sheathing, and trim.
10. The petitioner is proposing to restore the east wall using the existing structure and sheathing. New
clapboard and windows will replace the existing.
11. The petitioner is proposing to install new windows to replace the existing windows.
City of Salem Board of Appeals
March 1,2017
Project: 138 North Street
Page 2 of 3
12. Lastly, the petitioner is proposing to construct a foundation and relocate the building two (2) feet
from the property line on the north side (Dearborn Street) to allow for footings and one (1) foot on
the east side (North Street) to allow for footings.
13. The petitioner is proposing to dig approximately 8' feet deep on the property to create a foundation
for the existing carriage house structure.
14. There is not currently a basement or foundation for this structure.
15. The petitioner plans to be reviewed by the Historic Commission for comments on windows.
16. The requested relief, if granted, would allow the Petitioner to reconstruct, emend, or structurally
change the existing historic carnage.
17. At the public hearing abutters expressed concerns that this project will require that a portion of an
abutting driveway would have to be removed for the installation of a foundation for the carriage
house and requested that the petitioner be liable for any property damage and replacement of the
driveway.
18. At the public hearing three (3) members of the public spoke with apprehension to the project and
asked clarifying questions about the project No (0) members of the public spoke in favor of, and one
(1) spoke in opposition to,the petition.
The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and
after thorough review of the petition, including the application narrative and plans, and the Petitioner's
presentation ,and public testimony, makes the following findings that the proposed project meets the
provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance:
Findings for Special Permit:
The Board finds that the reconstruction, extension or structural changes are not substantially more
detrimental that the existing structure to the neighborhood.
1. Social, economic and community needs served by the proposal as an additional dwelling unit would
provide housing to the community.
2. Traffic flow and safety,including parking and loading is adequate.
3. Adequacy of utilities and other public services will not be negatively impacted.
4. Impacts on the natural environment,including drainage will remain the same.
5. The proposal fits with the character of the neighborhood.
6. Potential fiscal impact,including the impact on City tax base and employment is positive.
On the basis of the above statements of facts and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted five (5)in favor
(Mr. Duffy (Acting Chair),Mr. Tsitsinos,Mr.Watkins,Mr. Hacker (alternate), and Mr. Viccica (alternate)) and
none (0) opposed, to grant a Special Permit per 3.3.3 Nonconforming Structures of the Salem Zoning Ordinance
to reconstruct, emend, or structurally change the existing historic carriage house, subject to the following
terms, conditions and safeguards:
Standard Conditions:
1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues,ordinances, codes and regulations.
2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the
Building Commissioner.
City of Salem Board of Appeals
March 1,2017
Project: 138 North Street
Page 3 of 3
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. Exterior finished of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure.
6. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
7. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained.
8. 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,if needed.
9. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but
not limited to the Planning Board.
10. Unless the Decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted does not empower or
authorize the Petitioner to demolish or reconstruct the structure(s) located on the subject property to
an extent of more than fifty percent (50%) of its floor area or more than fifty percent (501/*) 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.
Special Conditions:
1. The petitioner shall be reviewed by the City of Salem Historic Commission for approval of the plans
prior to construction.
2. The petitioner shall employ a third party professional to assess and document existing conditions of
all directly abutting properties to the construction site (138 North Street) and to return or replace in-
kind or better,if damaged. The assessment and documentation of existing conditions shall take place
prior to any construction.
Mike Chat
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,.shadl be made pursuant to Section 17 of The Massachusetts Genemllaws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed wtbin 20
days of filing of this decision in the office of the Gty Clerk. Pursuant to the Massachusetts General laws Chapter 40A,Section 11, the I/ariance or
Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk has been filed with the Essex South
Registry of Deeds.
CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
ti�croo�' 120 WASHINGTON STREET♦ S
Ai FM MnssActrosETrs o��� JUN 29 A 8� 16
KnMmERLEY DRIscoLL TELE:978-745-9595 ♦ FAX:978-740-9846
MAYOR 1 F II l
CITY
June 29, 2016 CII I
Decision
City of Salem Board of Appeals
Petition of THOMAS PELLETIER seeking a Special Permit per Sec. 3.1 Principal Uses of the Salem Zoning
Ordinance to allow a dwelling unit in a historic carriage house at the property of 138 NORTH STREET
(Map 27 Lot 272)(82 Zoning District)
A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on June 15, 2016 pursuant to M.G.L Ch. 40A, g 11 and
closed on that date with the following Salem Board of Appeals members present: Ms. Curran (Chair), Mr.
Duffy, Mr. Copelas,Mr. Tsitsinos,Mr. Watkins.
The Petitioner seeks a Special Permit per Sec. 3.1 Principal Uses of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow a
dwelling unit in a historic carriage house.
Statements of fact:
1. Thomas Pelletier,petitioner,presents the petition.
2. In the petition date-stamped May 23, 2016 the Petitioner requested a Special Permit per Sec. 3.1
Principal Uses of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow a dwelling unit in a historic carriage house.
3. The petitioner proposes to covert an existing carriage house to a single family dwelling unit.
4. The existing carriage house is used as a place for storage.
5. There is currently an existing two (2) family dwelling unit on the property,which is an allowable use in
an R2 Zoning District.
6. The petitioner plans to rehabilitate the existing historic carriage house without any dimensional
changes to the structure.
7. There are currently five (5)parking spaces on site,which is more than the required number of parking
spaces for the property.
8. The requested relief, if granted, would allow the Petitioner to convert the existing historic carriage
house into a dwelling unit.
9. At the public hearing one (1) member of the public spoke in favor of, or in opposition to, the
petition.
The Salem Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and
after thorough review of the petition, including the application narrative and plans, and the Petitioner's
presentation and public testimony, makes the following findings that the proposed project meets the
provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance:
•� f '
City of Salem Board of Appeals
June 29,2016
Project: 138 North Street
Page 2 of 3
Findings for Special Permit:
The Board finds that the carriage house is a historic structure and the change in use is not
substantially more detrimental that the existing use to the neighborhood.
1. Social, economic and community needs served by the proposal as an additional dwelling unit would
provide housing to the community.
2. Traffic flow and safety, including parking and loading is adequate as there are five (5) parking spaces,
which exceed the number of required parking spaces.
3. Adequacy of utilities and other public services will not be negatively impacted.
4. Impacts on the natural environment,including drainage will remain the same.
5. The proposal fits with the character of the neighborhood.
6. Potential fiscal impact,including the impact on City tax base and employment is positive.
On the basis of the above statements of facts and findings, the Salem Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor
(Ms. Curran (Chair), Mr. Duffy, Mr. Copelas, Mr. Tsitsinos (Alternate)) and none (0) opposed, to grant a
Special Permit per 3.1 Principal Uses of the Salem Zoning Ordinance to allow a dwelling unit in a historic
carriage house, subject to the following terms, conditions and safeguards:
Standard Conditions:
1. Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statues, 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. Exterior finished of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing structure.
6. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
7. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained.
8. 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,if needed.
9. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including,but
not limited to the Planning Board.
ate' a
City of Salem Board of Appeals
June 29,2016
Project: 138 North Street
Page 3 of 3
Special Condition:
1. The primary structure on the property shall remain a two (2) family dwelling unit.
Rebecca Curran, Chair
Board of Appeals
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
Appeal from this deanon,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 Genera!Laws Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or
Speeia! ofDeeds.granted herein shall not take ci until a ropy
Registry of Deeof the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk has been filed with the Essex South
® CITY OR SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET. 3RO FLOOR
SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - n
TELEPHONE: 976-746-9696 r-<
FAx: 976-740.9646 Ac
X �T
UN
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF THOMAS PELLETIER REQUESTING AVAI oD
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED 138 NORTH STREET- ?
2 �i*3
A Hearing on the above-referenced Petition was held on or about March 15,2006
with a further Public Hearing and proceedings held on or about May 17, 2006.
With the following Board Members present: Nona Cohen Chairman, Richard
Dionne, Edward Moriart, Robin Stein and Nicholas Helides
Petitioner requests a Special Permit to convert existing Carriage House to a
Single family dwelling for the property located at 139 North Street R-2.
1. Petitioner, Thomas Pelletier, is requesting a Special Permit to convert an
existing carriage house to a single-family dwelling for the property located
at 138 North Street in an R-2 Zoning District.
2. Petitioner's original Petition for conversion of said existing carriage house
to a single-family dwelling was continued to allow Petitioner to obtain
additional information, including the prior Zoning Board of Appeals'
decision for the premises dated August 26, 1992 and for the further
purpose of Petitioner providing site plans with adequate parking pursuant
to the applicable Zoning Ordinance. At both proceedings Petitioner
requested a Special Permit from the Board to allow use of a historic
carriage house to be used as a single-family dwelling for the property
located at 138 North Street, in an R-2 Zoning District.
I
3. The relevant provisions of the Salem Zoning Ordinance applicable to this
request for a Special Permit include the following:
Pursuant to Article V Section 5-3 (a) generally. Provided that
permission of the Hoard of Appeals is obtained in accordance with
the procedures and conditions set forth in Section 9-4 hereof,
buildings and structures may be constructed, altered, enlarged,
reconstructed, and land may be used for one or more of the
purposes set out in this section.
Pursuant to Article V Section 5-3(a) and (b)(11), 5-3(c)(5) and 5-3
(d)(8), the following are Special Permit uses in the residential, one-
family, two-family, and multi-family residential districts:
A historic carriage house for use as a single-family dwelling
as an accessory use to a principal dwelling on the same lot,
provided that parking requirements are met and upon the
condition that there shall be no change to the exterior of the
historic carriage house unless approved by the Historical
Commission. 5-3(c)(5)
Pursuant to Section 9-4 regarding Special Permits, pursuant to
9-4(a). In hearing and deciding applications for Special Permits,
the Board of Appeals shall decide such questions as are involved in
2
I
determining whether such Special Permit shall be granted, and
shall grant Special Permits with conditions and safeguards as are
appropriate under this Ordinance, and shall deny Special Permits
when not in harmony with the purposes and intent of this
Ordinance. The Board of Appeals shall not have the power to grant
any Special Permit where use of land or structure is specifically
excluded from the district.
Pursuant to Section 9-4(c), a Special Permit shall not be granted by
the Board of Appeals unless and until written application for the
Special Permit is made, stating the grounds on which such permit is
requested and public notice and hearing is held in accordance with
Chapter 40A, and unless said application complies in all other
respects with provisions of this Zoning Ordinance.
Pursuant to 9-4(d) violation of such conditions and safeguards as
are made a part of the terms under which the Special Permit is
granted shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance.
The Board of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at
said Public Hearings, and after a thorough review of the Plans and Petition
submitted herewith, and as amended, makes the following Findings of Fact:
3
1. The Petitioner, Mr. Thomas J. Pelletier, represented himself in
these proceedings as the Owner of Record of the subject premises
by Massachusetts Quitclaim Deed dated April 26, 2006. (See Exhibit
1 attached)
2. The Petitioner represented that the carriage house in question was
a historic carriage house within the meaning and definition of the
relevant Salem Zoning Ordinance insofar as the carriage house was
built on or about 1856 and was used as a carriage house or barn at
that time.
I The Salem Zoning Ordinance defines historic carriage house as, "an
accessory or out-building, originally built to house carriages,
horses, or for use as a barn, that has been in existence since 1900
at its present location." See Article II Section 2-2(b).
4. Next, Petitioner represented that the existing carriage house is in
substantial disrepair inside and out, and that the cost of repair can
only be borne by conversion of the carriage house to a single-
family, income generating, home.
4
5. Petitioner also indicated that he was made aware of the prior
Zoning Board of Appeals Decision for the premises at 138 North
Street that authorized the existing two-family structure on the
same lot to be used as a lawful, non-conforming, three-family,
provided one of the three apartments is owner-occupied.
6. Petitioner indicated a willingness to convert the existing non-
conforming three-family to a conforming two-family structure with
the single-family converted carriage house equaling the third family
unit on said premises which would continue the pre-existing lawful
non-conforming three-family use of the premises as long as one of
the three-family units (either one or two in the two-family structure
or the newly converted single-family former carriage house)
remains owner occupied. (See Exhibit 2 attached)
7. Petitioner further referenced new plans showing adequate parking
under the Salem Parking Ordinance for five motor vehicles in
conjunction with the existing two-family structure and proposed
carriage house/single-family conversion; five parking spaces being
consistent with the Salem Parking Ordinance requiring 1.5 parking
spaces per dwelling unit in an R-2 Zoning District.
5
8. Next, Petitioner represented that any and all changes to the historic
carriage house, now in substantial disrepair, would be made both
internally and externally in a good, workmanlike and building code
compliant manner, and that no change to the exterior of the
historic house will be made pursuant to 5-3(c)(5), unless and until
approved by the Historic Commission, under any and all prevailing
and governing Historic Commission and Historic District rules,
regulations, ordinances, and practices.
9. A neighbor and abutter of the Petitioner, Mr. Jim Myers of 4
Dearborn Street, appeared in opposition to the proposed
conversion of the carriage house to a single-family unit, concerned
about said conversion increasing density in the neighborhood,
altering his view of the existing premises from his adjacent
windows and doors by more parked cars, and otherwise creating
parking problems in an already congested neighborhood.
10. The Petitioner indicated a willingness to pave the five designated
parking spaces in a manner and with material that was not asphalt,
and would be more consistent with maintaining open space and
decreasing density from conversion of the carriage house to a
single-family, with adjacent off-street parking.
6
11. Petitioner also indicated a willingness to work with the Planning
Department on obtaining a cost-effective permeable pavement that
would permit off-street parking for the five required parking spaces
while promoting a more open, less urban blacktop parking space
scenario in a congested and historic neighborhood.
On the basis of the above Findings of Fad, and in consideration of the plans,
documents, and testimony presented at Public Hearing, the Board of Appeals,
pursuant to any and all applicable Zoning provisions, including those expressly
above-noted, concludes as follows:
1. The large barn-like structure at 138 North Street, in an R-2 Zoning
District, is a historic carriage house and an accessory use to the
principal dwelling, a pre-existing nonconforming three-family use in
a two-family structure as defined under the Salem Zoning
Ordinance. Article II Section 2-2 and Article V Section 5-3(c)(5).
See Petitioner's Quitclaim Deed and the prior relevant Salem Zoning
Board of Appeals Decision for the subject premises dated August
26, 1992, attached herewith as Exhibits 1 and 2.
7
2. The Board further finds that the plans submitted, as amended,
provide adequate parking for five off-street parking spaces,
pursuant to and consistent with any and all applicable Salem
Zoning Ordinance Parking Regulations in the R-2 Zoning District.
3. Petitioner has agreed that there shall be no change whatsoever to
the exterior of the carriage house unless and until authorized by
the Historic Commission.
4. The Board finds that the carriage house conversion would enhance
and not detract from the neighborhood by restoring an historic
structure to its intended architectural status and best contemporary
use as a single-family residence.
S. The Board further finds that the Special Permit use is in harmony
with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, in general,
and the Ordinance authorizing by Special Permit conversion of
certain carriage houses to single-family homes with reasonable
conditions, in particular.
6. Lastly, the Board finds that it is the express public policy of Article
II Section 1-1(b)(11) of the Salem Zoning Ordinance that historic
8
carriage houses shall be preserved whenever feasible in the City of
Salem, and that this Petition is in all respects consistent with that
important public policy determination and shall be granted
herewith.
WHEREFORE, the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals votes 5 in favor and 0 in
opposition to grant said Special Permit request, subject to the following
conditions, including the prior Salem Zoning Board of Appeals Decision of August
26, 1992, requiring one unit owner-occupancy at said premises.
9
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the Special
Permit requested subject to the following conditions:
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. Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire Department
relative to smoke and fire safety.
4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction.
5. Exterior finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing
structure.
6. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained.
7. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City's Assessors Office
and shall display said number as to be visible from the street.
8. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to the Historical Commission.
9. Unless this decision expressly provides otherwise, any zoning relief granted does
not authorize Petitioner to demolish or deconstruct any structure on the property
to an extent greater than 50% of the structure as measured by floor area or
replacement cost. If a structure on the property is demolished by any means to an
extent of more than fifty percent of its replacement cost or more than fifty percent
of its floor area at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed except in
conformity with this Ordinance.
10. Petitioner shall make every effort to work with Planning Department on obtaining
cost effective permeable pavement.
11. All parking requirements are to be met.
12. No changes to exterior unless approved by the Historic Commission.
13. Owner occupancy shall remain as stated in previous decision dated August of
1992.
Special PermitC
Granted Edward Moriatyp
Board of Appea( `,
Qlitq of Salem, �lWassadlusetts
ultra of '�kppeal
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER FOR VARIANCE AT 138
NORTH STREET. (R-2)
= A hearing on this petition was held August 26, 1992 with the following
Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Richard Febonio, Francis
_ Grealish, Edward Luzinski and Associate Ronald Plante. Notice of the
hearing was sent to abutters and others"and notices of the hearing were
(73 properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with
b Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioners, owners of the property, are requesting variance to allow an
v existing two family dwelling to be converted to a three family dwelling in
this Residential Two Family District.
The Variance vhich has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this
Board that: .
1. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the
land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting
other lands, buildings and structures involved.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
3. 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. Three letters in support of the petition and one letter in opposition
were submitted.
2. Petitioner can meet the city requirement of 1 1/2 parking spaces per
unit.
3. There are other buildings in the area with three or more units.
4. Financial hardship, with regard to the property, forces the petitioner
to seek the relief requested.
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER FOR
A VARIANCE AT 138 NORTH STREET, SALEM
page two
5. The property would be protected by a condition that the property remain
owner occupied.
6. There would be no changes to the exterior structure, all changes would
be interior.
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 exist which especially affect the subject property
but not the district in general.
2 . Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3. Desirable relief can 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.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the
variance requested, subject to the following conditions:
I . 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 by legal building permit.
3 . Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire
Department relative to smoke and fire safety.
4. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the new dwelling
unit.
5. As long as the building is used as a three family one of the apartments
must be owner occupied.
6. A minimum of five (5) legal parking spaces shall be maintained on site
in perpetuity.
VARIANCE GRANTED
August 26, 1992
Richard A. Bencal, Chairman
Board of Appeal
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER
FOR VARIANCE AT 138 NORTH STREET, SALEM
page three
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 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 until a
copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20
.lays have elapsed 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 owner's Certificate of Title.
Board of Appeal
fey
r7
t�
C= y
J
W ~U
N �j
! II 'I IIII
IIII II II Y IYI�I I III IIII I I IN�
2006042800658 805615 P9;113
104128/2006 13:36:00 DEED Pp 111
MASSACHUSETTS QUITCLAIM DEED
UWe, Thomas J. Pelletier and Cynthia L. Pelletier, f k.a Cynthia L.Overberg of
Peabody,Essex County, Massachusetts, for consideration paid of one dollar and 00/100
($1.00), grant to Thomas J.Pelletier and Cynthia L.Pelletier jointly, as tenants by the
entirety and to Kellie Overberg ,of 138 North Street, Salem,Massachusetts, as tenant in
common, said Kellie Overberg shall have one undivided third interest in this property.
With quitclaim covenants the following property in Salem,Essex County,
Massachusetts:
The land with the buildings thereon in Salem,Essex County,Massachusetts,bounded and
described as follows:
SOUTHWESTERLY by North Street,sixty-two and five tenths (62.5) feet;
NORTHWESTERLY by Dearborn Street,ninety(90)feet;
NORTHEASTERLY by land now or formerly of Symonds, sixty-two and five tenths
(62.5) feet; and
SOUTHEASTERLY by land now or formerly of Maynes,ninety(90) feet.
Meaning and intending to convey and hereby conveying the same premises conveyed to
us by deed of Keith R. Pelletier and Nicole M. Pelletier dated October 11, 2001 and
recorded with Essex South Registry of Deeds in Book 17750 Page 212.
Witness our bands and seals this 26 day of April,2006
omas J. P tier C thia L. Pelletier
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
April 26, 2006
Essex, ss:
Then personally appeared the above-named Th J. Pelletier and _
acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his fief act deed be ore me.
NoTAry Public: ry PATRICIA A.NIGRO•BELAND
My Commission Expires: Jf*4 Notary Public
CMy Co ealN of Massachusetts
My Commission Expires
Commonwealth of Massachusetts March 6,2009
Essex, ss: April 26, 2006
Then personally appeared the above-named a L. Pelletier and
acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be he free a and deed before me.
otary Public:
My Commission Expires: PATRICIA A.NIGRO•BELAND
Notary Public
Ceh of Massachusetts
My Co
My Commission Expires
March 6,2009
i ^ . «
Ctu Of16 �61
ulPm, � 2ISStItIIuSPtfB
F 33nttrd of �upeal
c� co'
DECISION-ON-THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER FOR VARIANCE AT• 138
NORTH STREET `(R--2y
A hearing on this petition was held August 26, 1992 with the following
Board Members present: Richard Bencal, Chairman; Richard Febonio, Francis
b -
Grealish, Edward Luzinski and Associate Ronald Plante. Notice of the
^� hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were
C properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
- c
Petitioners, owners of the property, are requesting variance to allow an
existing two family dwelling to be converted to a three family dwelling in
this Residential Two Family District.
The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding by this
Board that: _
1 . Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the.
land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting
other lands, buildings and structures involved.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner.
3. 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. Three letters in support of the petition and one letter in opposition
were submitted.
2. Petitioner can meet the city requirement of 1 1/2 parking spaces per
unit.
3. There are other buildings in the area with three or more units.
4. Financial hardship, with regard to the property, forces the petitioner
to seek the relief requested.
y
� v
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER FOR
A VARIANCE AT 138 NORTH STREET, SALEM
page two
5. The property would be protected by a condition that the property remain
owner occupied.
6. There would be no changes to the exterior structure, all changes would
be interior.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence p'resented
at the hearing, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows:
1. Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property
but not the district in general.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would
involve substantial hardship to the petitioner.
3 . Desirable relief can 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.
Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to grant the
variance requested, subject to the following conditions:
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 by legal building permit.
3 . Petitioner shall comply with all requirements of the Salem Fire
Department relative to smoke and fire safety.
4. Petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the new dwelling
unit.
5. As long as the building is used as a three family one of the apartments
must be owner occupied.
6. A minimum of five (5) legal parking spaces shall be maintained on site
in perpetuity.
VARIANCE GRANTED
August 26, 1992
Richard A. Bencal, Chairman
Board of Appeal
v+
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DONALD AND LESA HAEFNER
FOR VARIANCE AT 138 NORTH STREET, SALEM
page three
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 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 until a
copy of the decision bearing the certification 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 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.
Board of Appeal
C7
r
D
J
W �U
H ci
Tity of `�alEut, Mawinr4usetts
Public PrnpertU Department
Nuilbing Department
Mne ralem preen
500-745-9595 Ext. 300
Leo E. Tremblay
Director of Public Property
Inspector of Building
Zoning Enforcement Officer
April 19, 1995
RE: 138 North Street
Dear Property Owner:
It has come to the attention of this office that you have installed an
illegal chain link fence at the above mentioned property. Enclosed please
find a copy of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance pertaining to Entrance
Corridors to the City.
You must remove said fence or apply to the City of Salem Board of Appeals
for a Variance from the City of Salem Zoning Laws.
Please contact this office upon receipt of this letter to notify us as of
your intentions.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely, _
Zer
Leo E. Tremblay
Zoning Enforcement Of
LET: scm
cc: David Shea
Councillor Hayes, Ward 6
Sec. 7.19. Entrance Corridor Overlay Dis-
trict.
t
(a) Purpose. The purpose of the Entrance Cor-
ridor Overlay District is to augment underlying
zoning regulations in designated areas to:
(1) Protect and enhance the major entrance-
ways into the city; and
(2) Ensure that such areas are improved in a
manner which is in the best interest of the
city.
(b) ,Applicability.
(1) The Entrance Corridor Overlay District
shall be established along the corridors des-
ignated on the zoning map.The boundaries
of the overlay shall be interpreted as foi-
lowing the rear lot lines of properties
fronting or the core-dor or along a lire one
hundred fifty (150)feet from the centerline
of the corridor, whichever is less.
(2) Properties within such district shall be con-
trolled by the regulations of the underlying
I zoning districts, except as hereunder spec-
ified. In instances of conflicting require-
7
tf
t
.'Lrt. VII, S ; 19 SALEM ZONING ORDINANCE SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS
ments, the restrictions listed below shall requirements for such landscaoing are as
prevail. follows:
3) The requirements of this section shall not a. Landscaping shall include one (1) tree
apply to Planned Unit Development (PUD) of three and one-half-inch to four-inch
proposals, or those development proposals caliper for each three (3) parking
which are required to obtain a site plan spaces. Trees shall be planted in plant
review special permit. beds bounded by six-inch granite
curbing.
c) Dimensional and other requirements. The fol- b. No plant bed shall be less than fifteen .
lowing requirements shall apply to all properties (15) square feet, and no dimension of
in the Entrance Corridor Overlay Districts: such plant bed shall be less than three
1) Fences. In order to maintain and maximize (3) feet.
aesthetic views and sight lines, all fences c. A planting strip of no less than three
along the front and side lot lines shall 13) feet wide shall separate vehicles
comply with the following standards: parked face to face in a parking area.
Such planting strip shall include one
a. Vo fence along a front or side lot line i 1) three and one-half-inch to four-inch
shall be more than four (4) feet in caliper tree every twenty-seven(27)feet
height,as measured from the curb level (in line with striping) and other appro•
of the street, or average grade eleva- priate landscaping.
tion of the land where the fence is to be (5) Signage.
located, whichever is deemed appro•
priate. a. A sign review committee, comprised of
b. Chainlink and wire fences are prohib. the following members, shall be estab•
ited along front and side lot lines. lished for the purpose of reviewing all
C. Any fence constructed within an En• signage proposed for an Entrance Cor.
trance Corridor Overlay District shall ridor Overlay District:
require a fence permit issued by the I. Building inspector or his designee;
city building department. 2. City planner or his designee; and
)2) Curb cuts. Only one i 1)curb cut of no greater 3. Representative of the Salem Rede-
than twenty-four(24)feet shall be permitted velopment Authority.
for all residential uses. A maximum of two b. The sign review committee shall re-
'2) curb cuts no greater than twenty-four view the size,location,type of material
t24)feet each shall be Permitted for all com- and design of all signs located within
mercial uses. an Entrance Corridor Overlay District.
3) Mechanical equipment and refuse storage c• The sign review committee shall follow
areas. No refuse storage areas or mechan- the Salem Sign Ordinance, except that
the sign review committee shall be
ical equipment areas shall be located in a ns
front yard, nor within twenty-five (25) feet lowed to limit the size of all signs
of the front lot line of the side yard. Such Within an Entrance 1/2) the size
Overlay
areas shall be screened from all public ways, District done-half der the size which
p Y is allowed in the underlying zone.
parking areas, residential land uses and
open space areas. d• Approval by a simple majority of this
committee is required prior to a sign
4) Parking areas. All parking areas of more permit being granted by the city.
than twelve (12) spaces shall be arranged (6) Site plan review. All new construction over
and landscaped to properly screen vehicles two thousand(2,000)square feet in nonres-
from adjacent properties and streets. The idential uses shall be required to be re-
48
SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS SALE\S ZONING ORDINANCE
Arc. tnl, § 7-19
viewed and approved under the provisions
of site pian review by the Salem Planning
Board.
Y•
}
y.t
49
of i cm' Mussttr4usetts
Public Propertg Department
+'Building Department
(One t3slem (6reen
508-745-9595 Ext. 380
Leo E. Tremblay
Director of Public Property
Inspector of Building
Zoning Enforcement Officer
April 19, 1995
RE: 138 North Street
Dear Property Owner:
It has come to the attention of this office that you have installed an
illegal chain link fence at the above mentioned property. Enclosed please
find a copy of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance pertaining to Entrance
Corridors to the City.
You must remove said fence or apply to the City of Salem Board of Appeals
for a Variance from the City of Salem Zoning Laws.
Please contact this office upon receipt of this letter to notify us as of
your intentions.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Leo E. Tremblay
Zoning Enforcement Of cer
LET: scm
cc: David Shea
Councillor Hayes, Ward E
Ctu of #31cm, massar4usetts
Public Propertp i9epartment
Nuilbing Department
(One #ulern (4reen
508-735-9595 Ext. 380
Leo E. Tremblay
Director of Public Property
Inspector of Building
Zoning Enforcement Officer
February 14 , 1996
Don Haffner
138 North Street
Salem, Mass . 01970
RE : Malone Fence Company
Dear Mr. Haffner:
Your company installed a fence at 138 North Street .
I have checked the files in our office and found no
permits for this work. This is in violation of City
Ordinances .
It is the responsibility of the contractor to get
permits , unless specified in the contract . Your company
must remove this fence or contact this office within 24
hours upon receipt of this letter.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated
cooperation.
Sincerely,
John J . Jnnings
Local Building Inspector
JJJ : scm
k
Tito of *ttlPm, massar4usEtts
n(?'-DW
Public Prupertg Bepartment
Nuilbing Mepartment
(One #alem Green
509-735-9595 Ext. 300
Leo E. Tremblay
Director of Public Property
Inspector of Building
Zoning Enforcement Officer
April 9 , 1996
Don-Haffner
138 North Street
Salem, Mass. 01970
RE: Malone Fence Company
Dear Mr. Haffner:
On February 14, 1996 while I was away on vacation, my
Assistant Building Inspector, John J. Jennings sent a
Tetter to you concerning whose responsibility it was to
acquire a building permit. Mr. Jennings responded that it
was the responsibility of the contractor to apply for a
permit. (Letter enclosed)
It is my responsibility to make corrections when they
are needed, and therefore I correct Mr. Jennings by
stating that it is the responsibility of the owner to
apply for building permits . The contractors are only
considered agents of the owners when filling for permit
application and permits are issued to the property owners
per Article 113 . 3 of 780 CMR-fifth Addition of the
Massachusetts State Building Codes. (Copy enclosed) .
If you have any further questions, please do not
hesitate to call .
Sincerely,
Leo E. Tremblay
Inspector of Buildings
LET: scm
t
Titu of tialem, fttsoar4usetts
ublic rn ert De uri t
� � i' u p men
Nuilbing Depurttnent
(One #stem (4reen
509-743-9593 E7d. 380
Leo E. Tremblay
Director of Public Property
Inspector of Building
Zoning Enforcement Officer
February 14 , 1996
Don Haffner
138 North Street
Salem, Mass . 01970
RE : Malone Fence Company
Dear Mr. Haffner:
Your company installed a fence at 138 North Street .
I have checked the files in our office and found no
permits for this work. This is in violation of City
Ordinances .
It is the responsibility of the contractor to get
permits , unless specified in the contract . Your company
must remove this fence or contact this office within 24
hours upon receipt of this letter .
Thank you in advance for your anticipated
cooperation.
Sincerely,
John J. )Jennings
Local Building Inspector
JJJ: scm
i1
• ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
113.3 By whom application Is made: Application for a permit shall be made by
the owner of the building or structure. The full names and addresses of the owner,
applicant, and of the responsible officers, if the owner is a corporate body, shall be
stated in the application.
113.4 Description of work: The application shall contain a general description
of the proposed work, its location,the use and occupancy of all parts of the building
or structure and of all portions of the site or lot not covered by the building or
structure; and shall state whether or not fire extinguishing equipment, plumbing,
water piping, gasfitting, heating or electrical work is involved, the estimated cost of
such work including the general work, and such additional information as may be
required by the building commissioner or inspector of buildings. The building
commissioner or inspector of buildings may require the facts contained in each
application to be certified by the applicant under oath.
113.5 Plans and specifications: The application for the permit shall be
accompanied by not less than three (3) copies of specifications and of plans drawn
to scale, with sufficient clarity and detail dimensions to show the nature and
character of the work to be performed. When quality of materials is essential for
conformity to this code,specific information shall be given to establish such quality;
and this code shall not be cited or the term "legal" or its equivalent be used as a
substitute for specific information. The building official may waive the requirement
for filing plans when the work involved is of a minor nature.
When such application for a permit must comply with the provisions of Article
6 or Article 10 of this code, the building official shall cause one (1) such set of plans
and specifications received by him to be forwarded simultaneously to the head of the
fire department for his file and approval of the items specified in Section 1000.0 as
they relate to the applicable sections of Article 6 and Article 10. The head of the
fire department shall within ten (10) working days from the date of receipt by him
approve or disapprove such plans and specifications- Upon request by the head of
the fire department, the building official may grant one (1) or more extensions for
such review, providing, however, that the total review by said head of the fire
department shall not exceed thirty(30) calendar days. If such approval,disapproval
or request for an extension of time shall not be received by the building official
within.said.ten (10) working days, the building official may deem the plans and
specifications to be in full compliance with the applicable sections of Article 6 and.
Article 10 and, therefore, approved by the head of the fire department.
All plans filed with the building official shall include but not be limitedAo:
1. the accurate locations and dimension of all means of egress from fire ands
an occupancy schedule of persons for all occupiable spaces;
780 CMR - Fifth Edition 1-15
t
n
CITY OF SALEM
OLL�qE.,� U.ti.cr,5trlcc:,?2
BUILDING DEPARTMENT � * '
r CITY HALL ANNEX J
ONE SALEM GREEN 0 03 2
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970HNiETER 412154 s�
❑ MOVED-LEFT NO ADDRESS f
❑ 19 /
ATTEMPTED-NOT KNOWNV.-,",7_.L... .v
9F ❑ UNCLAIMED ❑REFUSED
i ❑ NO SUCH STREET
yy '0NO SUCH NUMBER
ho ❑ INSUFFICIENT ADDRESS I
s %FORWARDING ORDER EXPIRED '
-4 (PEEL OFF-UPDATE CUSTOMER LIST)
1 64/21/95
. — ... .�....-...._..._. .�.. ,�,�;_---- - ETURN TO SENDER
NO FORWARD ORDER ON FILE
UNABLE TO FORWARD
SENDE
-- RETURN 70 SENDER
. .r . -,.... ..4
r..-.^+ri,.+•,,•.ry.'wE.,,*.ti.mT'^+ems r1.�.^r•,^r 'yK,.:.,.n ,r ,:. w ,.q
/'r"'ra+..' .,.az+�e.R+.'rr ,.w,✓'°�,n.in,�q-�.yNvs+,e1'YM'*."gr!'tn+�'�h+'n�,,..:y;.rynsu..r.KIYK..,}
FIELD COPY
y ° CITY OF SALEM BUILDING
>7 SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 PERMIT
.A VALIDATION
44EDOwE
11.. [T DATE AUCdIlSt 2 TB� PERMIT NO. 297-93
APPLICANT Donald Haefner. .ADDRESS 138 North St. _
Iw0.1 IS iPttTI ICORI R'S .IEE Rse�
PERMIT TD Rebuild deck I_I ST ORV DWellina NUMBER OF
DWELLING UNITS 3
IT.PE 0• IMPROVENEw TI NO. VROPOSED USE)
AT ILOCAT,O41 138 North St. Ward 6 DISTnlc. R-2
I.Q.) ISTREETI -
BETWEEN ._ AND
ICROIa STREET) ICPOSS STREETI
.. . . LOT
SUBDIVISION LOT BLOCK SIZE
BUILDING ISJO BE FT. WIDE BE FT. LONG BV FT. IN HEIGHT AND SHALL CONFORM IN CONSTRUCTION
TO TYPE USE 'GROUP- BASEMENT WALLS OR FOUNDATION -
ITTP❑
RE 5:
=eb, k 7 x 24
Inspected pprove a
,AEAOR PERMIT
VOLUME ESTIMATED COST 1.000 FEE20.00
C':DIC,SQUARE FEETI
.]WNER Donald Haefner
A-DBEs$ 138 NOrth St. Salem,Ma. John J. Jennings
INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS
r
INSPECTION RECORD
DATE NOTE PROOwESs - C11mCUYs •NO RENxRIts INSPECTOR
Plans must be filed and approved by the Inspector before a permit will be granted.
No.079 7 City of Salem Ward
Is Property Located in the
Historical District? Yes_ No,)<-
K Home Phone# 7`f 1 20S6
Is Property Located in a , ,p
Conservation Area? Yes_ No_x_ ''+ •- p+' Bus. Phone# 7YO -1100 ' X•.325
APPLICATION
FOR
PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT POOq, DECK AND SHEDS
Salem, Mass.,
TO THE INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS:
The undersigned hereby applies for a permit to build according to the following specifications:
Owner's name and address a d r A S
a Architect's name
Mechanic's name and address k vx
Location of building, No.
What is the purpose of building?
Material of building? LSA e 14
If a dwelling, for how many families?
Will the building conform to the requirements of the law? SJ r
Estimated cost &0,9 7) ontractors Lic. No.
Signature of applicant - - n/
Signed Under the Penalty of Perjury
EMARKS
e
Akl - 4�� (a-djj
No 9�- / Ward K
APPLICATION FOR
PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT
SWIMMING POOL
Location / —eff
PERMIT GRANTED
19
App ve
aca B "Iding In pector
` � L
V"
1 ,
l ' s
CITY OF SALEM
3UILDING DEPARTMENT
HOMEOWNER LICENSE EXEMPTION
Please Print
DATE
UOB LOCATION A)0t P'k, ST,
NumberStreet address Section of Town
"HOMEOWNER1 e)A tr aJIrf' 7S-0 -/c1Gy32y
Name Home pnone Work pnone
PRESENT MAILING ADDRESS /37 lls /-�h 57
�S 5
City/Town nrIState LID Code
-ire current exemption of "homeowners" was extended to include owner-occupied
dwellinas of six units or less ano to allow such homeowners to enaage an in-
dividual for hire who does not possess a license, provided that the owner
acts as supervisor. !State Building Code Section 109. 1 . 1 )
DEFINITION OF HOMEOWNER:
Person(s ) who owns a parcel of land on which he/she resides or intends to re-
side, on which there is , or is intended to be, a one to six family dwelling,
attached or detached structures accessory to such use and/or farm structures.
A person who constructs more than one home in a two-year period shall not be
considered a homeowner. Such "homeowner" shall submit to the Building Official ,
on a form acceptable to the Building Official , that he/she shall be responsible
for all such work performed under the building permit. 1Section 109. 1 . 1 )
-he unaersioned "homeowner" assumes responsibility for comDiiance ::ith the State
3uildino code and other applicable codes , by- laws-
rules and reauiaiions.
The undersigned "homeowner" certifies that he/she understands the City or Salem
Building Department minimum inspection procedures and r quirements and that
he/she will comply with sai pr es and requiremen
HOMEOWNER'S SIGNATURE
APPROVAL OF BUILDING OFFICIAL
:VOTE: Three family dwellinas 35 000 cubic e or larger, ,will be required
to comply with State Building Code Section 12 .0, Construction Control .
K
HOME OWNER ' S EXEMPTION
The Code states that: "Any Home Owner performing work for which a building
permit ': s reauired shall be exempt from the provisions of this section
(Section 109. 1 . 1 - Licensing of Construction Supervisors) ; provided that is
a Home Owner engages a person(s ) for hire to do such work, that such Home
Owner shall act as supervisor. "
Many Home Owners who use this exemption are unaware that they are assuming
the responsibilities of a supervisor (see Appendix Q, Rules and Regulations
for Licensing Construction Supervisors, Section 2. 15) . This lack of aware-
ness often results in serious problems, particularly when the Home Owner
hires unlicensed persons . in this case your Board cannot proceed against
the unlicensed person as it would with licensed Supervisor. The Home Owner
actino as supervisor is ultimately responsible.
-o ensure that the Home Owner is fully aware of his/her responsibilities.
many communities reauire. as part of the permit application. that the Home
Owner ^ertifv that he/she understands the res Dons ibi1ities of a supervisor.
On the last page of this issue is a form currently used by several towns.
You may care to amend and adopt such a form/certification for use in your
community.
•
r'
�7- Q
�a ✓fie U�anrmea� c����aaaae�ivael�
NfichDukakis
G �`I�tn.eo�s Jlals .�rwl
Govea rnor
Kentaro Tsutsumt (l „{�oalow, rr�aasQottnerm 02108
Chairman
16171 7-'-3'
Charles J. Dinezic
Administrator
MEMORANDUM
TO: All Buildine Departmcrtuawate Building inspectors
FROM: Charles J. Dinezio. Administrator
DATE: October 31. 1988
SUBJECT. MGT. cJo, ti54, Added Hv e580. ti9 of the Acta of 1987
The above-mentioned statute requires that debris resulting from the demolition. renovation, rehabilitation
,ir other alteration of a budding or structure he disposed of in a property licensed soled waste disposal
IJ(3hty as defined by MGL cl I I. 5150A and that hwldine permits or licenses arc to indicate the location
of the facility at which the said debris is of he disposed. THIS REOUIREMENT DOES NOT
APPLY TO NEW CONSTRUCTTON.
In order to simatlfv, the process and tO provide unlfllrmlly. we arc allachlng a ctipv of a form which you
can either reproduce and use as it Is since the completed form will be attached W the Office Copy of building
permits or Iicens= or reproduce it on your Icticnccad.
In Case of municipal,commercial,industrial,or multi-unit housing construction.the contractor may not know
the dumpster subcontractor at the time of the budding permit application. in such curs, the attached copy
of an Affidavit can be used.
The complete law is contained in the November issue of CODEWORD which wdl be matted ro you in the
nest two weeks. If you should have anv question, please let us know.
UDfkm
1 V
In accordance with the provisions of MGL c 40, S 54, a condition of Building Permit
Number is that the debris resulting from this work shall be
disposed of in a properly licensed solid waste disposal facility as defined by MGL c 111, S
150A.
The debris will be disposed of in:
tion of Facility)
Signature of Permit Applicant
—�.
Date
PATE OF PERMIT PERMIT No, OWNER LOCATION
V
9/23/74 #299 Arthur Pariseau 138 North St.
f iY
STRUCTURE MATERIAL DIMENSIONS No.OF STORIES No.OF FAMILIES WARD I COST
DWELLING WOOD FRAME 3 3
BUILDER
10/29/92 #509-92 Demolish walls & remodel for 3rd apartement cost $5,000. fee $35.00
Install aluminum siding.
BOARD OF APPEAL: 8/26/92 - GRANTED - Variance to convert a two family dwelling into a
three family dwelling, property must be owner occupied and five legal on site parking
spaces are to be maintained in perpetuity. (Donald & Lesa Haefner, owners/petitioners)
6/1`/.93 #509-92:CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ISSUED BY JOHN J. JENNINGS
y
y (!
KEVIN T. DALY - a v a LEONARD F. FEMINO
ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR �� --. ' iT? ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
-93 WASHINGTON STREET R!rl,m,'1�r� 93 WASHINGTON STREET
AND CITY OF SALEM - MASSACHUSETTS AND
ONE CHURCH STREET MICHAEL E. O'B RIEN ONE SCHOOL STREET
SALEM, MA 01970 BEVERLY, MA 01915
93 WASHINGTON CITY SOLICITOR ST745-4311
745-0500 INGTON STREET 9211990
AND
PLEASE REPLY TO ONE CHURCH STREET 61 WASHINGTON STREET PLEASE REPLY TO ONE SCHOOL STREET
SALEM, MA 01970
745-4311
744-3363
PLEASE REPLY TO 81 WASHINGTON STREET
1
September 6 , 1988
William H. Munroe, Building Inspector
City of Salem
One Salem Green <n ?
Salem, Massachusetts 01970 = a
Re: 138 North Street, Salem
Dear Mr. Munroe : r L�
By letter dated August 22 , 1988 you requested my opinion
whether or not the use of the above entitled real 'L('�'statn
qualified for the grandfather protection of Section VIII
(E. ) of our Zoning Ordinance.
On August 24 , 1988 I responded that there was insufficient
evidence presented to me that the premises qualifies for
the aforementioned protection. However, I indicated to you
that if the dwelling was used as a two-family from August
27 , 1965 to the present, I would consider reversing my opinion.
I have subsequently been provided with an affidavit
which is in my opinion sufficient to establish the premises
as a nonconforming two-family use. I am enclosing the original
of this affidavit for your records.
Accordingly, it is now my opinion that the premises
should be afforded the protection of Section VIII (E. ) of
the aforementioned ordinance relative to nonconforming uses
and it' s current use as a two-family is permissible.
Zichae
rruly your
l E. O'Brien
City Solicitor
MEO/jp
Enclosure
AFFIDAVIT
We, Arthur H. Pariseau and Mary J. Pariseau, under oath, depose and say
that we purchased a two family home on property located at 138 North
Street, Salem, Massachusetts in 1949. Since that date it has been used as
a two family house. The first floor apartment actually has a mailing
address of 2 Dearborn Street, Salem. As of August 27, 1965 we resided
there with tenants whose names were George and Louise Busteed until
December 1984. After that date we moved into the apartment at 2 Dearborn
Street and rented the apartment known as 138 North Street to tenants as
follows: Mr. and Mrs. William Mahoney from March 1985 to March 1986, Bobbie
Furnew and Media Duff from April 1986 to September 1956, John Stangle from
October 1986 to February 1987, and James and Kathy Guay from April 1987 to
present. Therefore, the property has been used as a two family home since I
purchased same.
Signed under the pains of perjury
Arte ariseau Mary (Pariseau
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSAC SETTS
Essex, as. 1988
Then personally appeared the above named Arthur H. Pariseau and Mary J.
Pariseau and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be a true statement
of fact, before me,
Notary Public
My Commission Expires
AFFIDAVIT
We, Arthur H. Pariseau and Mary J. Pariseau, under oath, depose and say
that we purchased a two family home on property located at 138 North
Street, Salem, Massachusetts in 1949. Since that date it has been used as
a two family house. The first floor apartment actually has a mailing
address of 2 Dearborn Street, Salem. As of August 27, 1965 we resided
there with tenants whose names were George and Louise Busteed until
December 1984. After that date we moved into the apartment at 2 Dearborn
Street and rented the apartment known as 138 North Street to tenants as
follows: Mr. and Mrs. William Mahoney from March 1985 to March 1986, Bobbie
Furnew and Media Duff from April 1986 to September 1986, John Stangle from
October 1986 to February 1987, and James and Kathy Guay from April 1987 to
present. Therefore, the property has been used as a two family home since I
purchased same.
Signed under the pains of perjury
Arthul H.' ariseau Mary J./Pariseau
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Essex, as. ��.'- :..;,f'c'�.,,_' 1988
Then personally appeared the above named Arthur H. Pariseau and Mary J.
Pariseau and acknowledgbd the foregoing instrument to be a true statement
of fact, before me, i
Notary Public
My Commission Expires
CERTIFICATE ISSUED
DATE 6/1/93
CITY OF SALEM
N SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS 019170 BUILDING PERMIT
a�E CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
�a ; I
DATE Oct. d9E 19 J� P�FFMIT NO.
APPLICANT Lcnaid Hae=mr ADDRESS �'� }' SL.
INR.1 nTREEn IC�}OTM{S�Rv•[s�ucExau
:IT.TVYTrStTrytj -3 it�rmi,(.T. �^ NUMBER OE WEj
PERMIT TO 11�11''JJVYVVS0'^\11111..Y� I_1 STORY DWELLING UNITS
' I1.1( OI IUAROV[uE txl]f lTT3Ell—C—+J xO.. IVa OV03[0 VIEI �}
AT (LOCATION) 38 'UM- 11I VY�t, �� D DIISTR CT_ �-a
INO.1 ISTMEEII
BETWEEN AND
ICROSS STREET) (CROSS STREETI
LOT
SUBDIVISION LOT-BLOCK—SIZE
BUILDING IS 'O BE FT. WIOE P, IT. LONG BY FT. IN MEIGMT AND SMALL CONFORM IN CONSTPUCTION
TO TYPE USE GROUP BASEMENT WALLS OR FOUNDATION
ITIREI
REMARKS!
CXZ, :CZ; PEMUTInt
O0.CUPY ((((0000?jjj4��j5����-9SS
AREA ORiYl[4iEYu
VOLUME
I ela sa NEan
E .El
- 'r -•. swroi•rmaw s.-Nswrnrnswmwm�irswrowsAswrswlsaerrswmmro
Ow NER 3A eE 4057EO_ON PREMISES
�.`�1 : �.s SEE REVERS[49iDLCi 06f COeD31GSd9'OF CERTIFICATE
ADDRESS z�15STS'lntyP John J. Jennings
cnainri
:Tvkf ti,
KEVIN T. DALY LEONARD F. FEMINO
ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR ��q ,,,—p'� ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
93 WASHINGTON STREET 0j'^r' 93 WASHINGTON STREET
AND CITY OF SALEM - MASSACHUSETTS AND
ONE CHURCH STREET ONE SCHOOL STREET
MICHAEL E. O'B RIEN
SALEM, MA 01970 BEVERLY, MA 01915
745-4311 CITY SOLICITOR 745-4311
745.0500 93 WASHINGTON STREET 921-1990
AND
PLEASE REPLY TO ONE CHURCH STREET 81 WASHINGTON STREET PLEASE REPLY TO ONE SCHOOL STREET
SALEM, MA 01970
745-4311
744-3363
PLEASE REPLY TO BI WASHINGTON STREET L� _
Z—n
vx CD
August 24 , 1988
—i"Ti l) Cz
William H. Munroe, Building Inspector
City of Salem
One Salem Green
Salem, Massachusetts '01970
Re: 138 North Street, Salem
Dear Mr. Munroe :
You have requested my opinion whether or not the use
of the above entitled real estate qualifies for the grandfather
protection of Section VIII E of our Zoning Ordinance. Under
the aforementioned section a nonconforming use of a structure
is allowed even though it does not conform to the existing
zoning provided the use existed at the time of adoption of
the Zoning Ordinance (August 27 , 1965 ) and that use has not
been abandoned since that time to the present.
In my opinion, the information you provided me regarding
the allegation that the premises was used as a two-family
in 1955 and for four years prior thereto is insufficient
evidence that the premises qualifies for the aforementioned
protection. However, if sufficient evidence can be produced
that the dwelling was used as a two-family from 1965 to the
present, I would obviously reverse my opinion.
/ r trulyjyours,
chael E. O' Brien
City Solicitor
MEO/jp