Loading...
35 PLEASANT STREET - BUILDING INSPECTION 35 PLEASANT STREET i `am"tio �' '-_ .", of '$ttlem, �ttssnrlj��if#.$)'jiN...OF r ICE `°Q �13nttrD of �}r{tettl 12 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DEBROAH D'ALLESSANDRO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATEDeAT-35 PLEASANT STREET R-2-.-- A hearing on this petition was held on May 19, 1999, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Ronald Harrison, Stephen Buczko, Michael Ward and Richard Dionne. 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 requesting Variance to allow the continuance of the three units as they presently exist for the property located at 35 Pleasant Street. 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. The petitioner sought a variance to allow the continued usage of the three units that presently exist at the property. The property has been used as a three family for over 10 years. 2. Joseph Correnti, of Serafini, Serafini, Darling & Correnti represented the petitioner, Deborah D'Allessandro, at the hearing. 3. The property is located in an R-2 District. 4. The petitioner purchased the property with the understanding that the property had three approved units. The property had been represented as a three-unit building by the former owner. The bank provided financing to the petitioners based on three units. 5. Ellen Dixey and David Dixey spoke in favor of the petition. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DEBORAH D'ALLESSANDRO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 PLEASANT STREET R-2 page two 6. Regina Flynn, Ward Councilor, was opposed to the petition, She voiced concern About allowing a three-unit building in a two-family neighborhood. She stated that The property would not be in harmony with the other properties in the neighborhood. 7. Alicia Hart, of 47 Washington Street, and Majorie Wilkenson, of 33 Pleasant St, sent In opposition of the proposed petition. Opposition centered on the very difficult on street parking conditions around the property and neighborhood density and congestion. 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 3 in opposition and 2 in favor to ?rant the requested variances. Having failed to gamer the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. VARIANCE DENIED May 19, 1999 ez cfc,j�\ Michael Ward, Member J Board of Appeal DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DEBORAH D'ALLESSANDRO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 PLEASANT STREET 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 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 CCftp of �balemj 1aM5arbU!5ett!9 Public Propertp Mepartment 3guilbing -Mepartment One&alem Oreen (978)7459595 ext. 380 Peter Strout Director of Public Property Inspector of Buildings Zoning Enforcement Officer March 9, 1999 Deborah Dalessandro 35 Pleasant Street Salem, Ma. 01970 RE: 35 Pleasant Street Dear Ms. Dalessandro: This letter is a follow up to my letter dated January 20, 1999. Per our conversations following that letter, your husband told this department that an attempt to legitimize the third apartment would be made. To this date, this office has not received anything. Please let us know how you plan to proceed. Otherwise, we will be forced to pursue this matter in Salem District Court. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Assistant Building Inspector Cite of 4aYem, f a!5!5arbu!6ett!5 Public Propertp +Mepartment jBuilbing nepartment One batem Oreen (978) 7459595 rCxt. 380 Peter Strout Director of Public Property Inspector of Buildings Zoning Enforcement Officer January 20, 1999 Deborah A. Dalessandro 35 Pleasant Street Salem, Mass. 01970 RE: 35 Pleasant Street Dear Ms. Dalassandro: It has come to the attention of this office that you have been renting a third apartment at the above mentioned location. Our records indicate that this house is only a two family dwelling. We also need to inspect the basement of your home. Please contact this office within five (5) days upon receipt of this letter. Failure to respond will result in legal action being taken against you in Salem District Court. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Siinc�erely, Thomas St. Pierre Assistant Building Inspector cc: Councillor Flynn, Ward 2 Citp of 6alem, fdag5arbugett!6 s Public Propertp Mepartment �p Wuilbing Mepartment (One 9palem green (978)745-9595 Cxt. 380 Leo E. Tremblay Director of Public Property Inspector of Building Zoning Enforcement Officer June 29 , 1998 Deborah A. Dalessandro 35 Pleasant Street Salem, Mass . 01970 RE : 35 Pleasant Street Dear Ms . Dalessandro: Following a complaint from one of your tenants , I inspected the exit hallway on your property located at 35 Pleasant Street and found the following violations; 1 . The washer/dryer cannot be located in the hallway. 2 . The hallway cannot be used to store furniture or anything else . Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Sipcerely, Thomas St . Pierre Assistant Building Inspector TSP : scm x (f liv of 'Sttlem, tts�tttlj� ##, �Snttrb of �+ zal -2 12 T1 DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DEBROAH D'ALLESSANDRO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 PLEASANT STREET R-2 A hearing on this petition was held on May 19, 1999, with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Ronald Harrison, Stephen Buczko, Michael Ward and Richard Dionne. 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 requesting Variance to allow the continuance of the three units as they presently exist for the property located at 35 Pleasant Street. 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. The petitioner sought a variance to allow the continued usage of the three units that presently exist at the property. The property has been used as a three family for over 10 years. 2. Joseph Correnti, of Serafini, Serafini, Darling & Correnti represented the petitioner, Deborah D'Allessandro, at the hearing. 3. The property is located in an R-2 District. 4. The petitioner purchased the property with the understanding that the property had three approved units. The property had been represented as a three-unit building by the former owner. The bank provided financing to the petitioners based on three units. 5. Ellen Dixey and David Dixey spoke in favor of the petition. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DEBORAH D'ALLESSANDRO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 PLEASANT STREET R-2 page two 6. Regina Flynn, Ward Councilor, was opposed to the petition, She voiced concern About allowing a three-unit building in a two-family neighborhood. She stated that The property would not be in harmony with the other properties in the neighborhood. 7. Alicia Hart, of 47 Washington Street, and Majode Wilkenson, of 33 Pleasant St, sent In opposition of the proposed petition. Opposition centered on the very difficult on street parking conditions around the property and neighborhood density and congestion 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 3 in opposition and 2 in favor to -1rant the requested variances. Having failed to gamer the four affirmative votes requires to pass, the motion is defeated and the petition is denied. VARIANCE DENIED /� May 19, 1999 CS` r� Michael Ward, Member Board of Appeal k DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DEBORAH D'ALLESSANDRO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 35 PLEASANT STREET 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 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 ' f nq 4j 4;, 1 f1lit of �Iem, C ��nttcE�II82tts ' DMTa Df ATJ�SPZiI OCT 3 . Etrf`. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF'NILE SHIPKA & KATHLEEN_TEETSEL FOR A VARIANCE/SPECIAL PERMIT FOR`35-PLEASANT ST. A hearing on this petition was held on October 15, 1986 with the following Board Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Fleming, Luzinski, Strout and Associate Member Labrecque. Notice of -the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner is requesting a .Variance and/or Special Permit to allow existing two family dwelling to bel converted to a nine room bed and breakfast in this R-2 district. Propery is owned by Frederick Korzeniewski. At the request of the petitioner the Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0, to allow petition to be Withdrawn Without Prejudice. WITHDRAITI dames B. Hacker, Chairman A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK ftp of *aren Aag5aCbU!5rttg jublic Propertp Department \9F�/MIN6 rPN` �3uilbing Department One 6alem Oreen 745-9595 Cxt. 380 William H. Munroe Director of Public Property Inspector of Buildings Zoning Enforcement Officer August 18 , 1988 Attorney Nancy A . S . Attaya Ardiff and Morse P . C . Attorney ' s at law 10 Elm Street Danvers , MA . 01923 RE : �35 Pleasant Str_e•e:t�=�� Dear Ms . Attaya , - In your letter of August 3 , 1988 regarding property located at 35 Pleasant Street , you have requested an opinion as to whether the number of kitch.ens at the property would be a factor in deter- mining the number of dwelling units . As I am sure you are aware many ethnic families have more than one kitchen as do most families who have so called " family rooms" therefore it would be difficult to "paint every kitchen with one brush" and say any dwelling unit with two ( 2 ) kitchens must be a two ( 2) family house . The criteria use by this department and supported by Attorney Douglas Randall who acts as council for the Mass . Inspectors Association is that unless there is physical seperation , i . e . lockable doors and seperate egress , the fact that a property has more than one ( 1 ) kitchen does not make it more than a single dwelling unit . I have spoken to Mr . Santo of this department and am satisfied that the property is a two family residence . Sincerely , William H . Munroe Inspector of Buildings WHM/eaf ARDIFF & MORSE, P.C. GEORGE. . DIFF,JR. RICHARD K GEORGE E.MORSE RICHARD S. JR. MALCO LM F.MACLEAN III KATHLEENNS.KP.DWYER ATTORNEYS AT LAW ROBERT L,HOLLOWAY.JR. GARY C.BUBB ALAN L.GRENIER SAMUELJ.BENNETT 10 ELM STREET ROBERT P.YEATON SUE ELLEN ROGAL JOHN S.LEGASEY JEFFREY B.LOEB P.O.BOX 59 DAVID BAER GEORGE A.HALL.JR, DANVERS, MA 01923 ROBERT C.McCANN PHILIP B. POSNER DENISE C.S.WOODRUFF NANCY A.S.ATTAYA — MICHAEL P.McCARRON LISA STERN TAYLOR (617)774.7123 PAUL R.SCHNEIDER MARSHALL G.NEELY 111 JEAN CAREY DAVIS TELECOPIER(617)774-7164 August 3, 1988 nc> co Mr . William H. Munroe, Inspector of Buildings F-- 1 -1 Salem Green J Salem, Massachusetts 01970 P � G'O RE: 35 Pleasant Street Salem, MA Dear Mr . Munroe: My client, David Pelletier of 31 Pleasant Street, Salem, has contacted me regarding the work being done on the property located at 35 Pleasant Street . I have reviewed the application for the building permit which was issued on July 25, 1988, indicating that the building is a two-family residence . My client was informed by Jim Santo of your office that Mr . Santo had inspected the property and had found that a third kitchen has been added to the third floor of the structure . As you are aware, a third kitchen will change the structure from a two-family to a multi-family structure according to the terms of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. I would appreciate your clarifying for me whether or not there are three kitchens located within the structure at 35 Pleasant Street and if there are, I request that you issue a Notice to Mr. Richard and Mr . Caron informing then that they are in violation of the R-2 Zoning ordinance and need to seek appropriate relief from the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals . Your assistance with this matter is appreciated. Very ly your , 7 ,�a .enc S . t. .ayyaa-- NASA/jmv l/ cc: David Pelletier qLECDVED GI-LY"_uF�-&LLLI-i"i2u�_ _ J- - L74 oo—7ff ) -- - V _ 109 — — ct �e i_u�J _ .