0 RAVENNA AVENUE - BUILDING INSPECTION RAVENNAZAVENUF «"
'� . . ' til S .L:'•Y � ',J .i
ti
71
i
PEARL.McNIFF,CREAN &COOK 114Y 21
ATTORNEYS AT LAW Q
SAMUEL PEARL 30 MAIN STREETJOHN A.MNIFF 11 /��p
JOHN M.CREAN PEABODY.MASSACHUSETTS 01980 C/r Or },lBvyy 617/3911-�10
OLIVER T.COOK - ` Bd3TOIV 8�7/ Bp9-3a7A
LAWRENCE J.O'KEEFE
WILLIAM H.SHEEHAN III -
May 22, 1980
Robert E. Gauthier, Building Inspector
One Salem Green
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Re: Lot 343 Ravenna Avenue, Marlboro Realty Trust
John E. Jermyn, Trustee
Dear Bob:
As per our phone conversation of today, I forward herewith a
copy of the deed of the above lot together with a copy of the Land
Court plan 11802 E, sheet 2, showing this lot.
Also forwarded herewith is a copy of my opinion to the
trustee dated March 19, -1980 explaining, in law, why his lots
including the above numbered 343, are not subject to the present
zoning minimums.
I hope this and the enclosures is of help. ,
Thank you for your courtesy in this matter.
S inc ely yours,
h . McNiff
.JAM/cw
Encls.
March 19, 1980
John E. Jermyn, Trustee
Marlboro Realty Trust
Salem. Massachusetts
Re: Marlboro Realty Trust
Lot 345. . Rav--nna Avenue, Salem
Land Court Plan N11802E, sheet 2
Dear Mr. Jermyn:
You have referred to me for an opinion a letter from
Daniel F. Mansur, Assistant Building Inspector, dated February 25,
1980, concerning the above real estate and building permit #286
issued July 18, 1979.
Mr. Mansur in his letter states that the building permit
appears to have been issued in violation of the zoning ordinance, §VIII
B. I. , and that he would Iike to confer with you on this matter.
Examination of the zoning map discloses that the subject
lot is in an R 1 district. The minimum lot area in an R 1 district is
15. 000 square feet, and the minimum lot width is 100 feet (zoning
ordinance, §VI. table 1).
The subject lot appears to contain about 7326. 19 square
feet in area with a width of 62 feet at its front on the street, accor-
ding to the above-described land court plan. As such it is a, valid
nonconforming use. Its status as such is confirmed by the following.
The subject land is registered land shown on a subdivi-
sion plan approved by the Land Court In 1928. When the first zoning
ordinance was enacted by the City Council under then G. L. , c. 40A.
in 1955, there were no provisions in the ordinance regulating lot sizes.
Salem accepted the sub-division control law, G. L. . c. 41. 5681A-BIGG
on March 12, 1962. As I explained to you and City Solicitor Alfred
Dobbs at or about that time the Trust's lots, by G. L. , c. 41. §81FF.
as land registered in the Land Court, the subdivision plan of which
was registered and recorded in 1928 and before February 1, 1952,
were as valid as though approved under the sub-division control law.
- 2 -
John E. Jermyn, Trustee
Salem, Massachusetts March 19, 1980
In November 1962 the zoning ordinance was amended to
provide lot sizes and dimensions. By that amendment in a single
residence district, in which the Trust's lots were located, the mini-
mum lot area was 5, 000 square feet and the minimum street frontage
was 40 feet.
It is very significant that the above-described: lot 345 was
acquired by Marlboro Realty Trust by deed recorded and registered on
or about September 6, 1962, and that at such time of recording was
not held in common ownership with any adjoining land. As such, under
present G. L. , c. 40A. §6; fourth paragraph, first sentence, as long
as it has 5,000 square feet of area and 50 feet of frontage it is a valid
buildable lot. The April 20, 1979 amendment of c. 40A to which the .
February 25, 1980 memo of Mr. Mansur refers is chapter 106 of the
Acts of 1979. It inserted a new sentence after the first sentence of
§6. referred to above, and it exempts from increased area require-
ments for five years after the effective date of any such increase
occurring on or after January 1. 1976, certain lots on a recorded or
endorsed plan which were held in common ownership with adjoining
land and conformed as of January 1, 1976 to then existing zoning
requirements and contained at least 7500 square feet of area and 75
feet of frontage. Lot 345 is a lot which on January 1, 1976, con-
formed to the then existing zoning ordinance (1965 ordinance, min-
imum area 7000 square feet, minimum width 60 feet) but it was not
held in common ownership with adjoining land at that time, did not
have 7500 square feet of area and did not have 75feet of frontage.
This 1979 amendment has no application to lot 345.
Lot 345 is a nonconforming lot which as I pointed out
above comes within the provisions of the first sentence of the fourth
paragraph of §6. Careful study of §6 will disclose that the first sen-
tence of the fourth paragraph went into effect June 30, 1978, in place
of former c. 40A, §5A which provided:
"Any lot lawfully laid out by plan or deed duly recorded
- - - which complies at the time of such recording or such endorse-
ment. whichever is earlier, with the minimum area, frontage, width,
and depth requirements, if any, of the zoning ordinance - - - in effect
- - - may thereafter be built upon for residential use if - - - such
John E. Jermyn, Trustee
Salem, Massachusetts
March 19, 1980
lot was held in ownership separate from that of adjoining land - -
and - - - such lot has an area of five thousand square feet or more
and a frontage of fifty feet or more - - -
n
Former §5A is a necessary consideration in the construc-
tion of the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of the present 56.
It explains the absence from §6 of the words "deed" and "plan" in
the first sentence of the fourth paragraph thereof. Construed In the
light of its predecessor, the words "recording" and "endorsement"
in the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of §6 necessarily and
logically refer to the deed or plan of the lot.
The
of
ordinance Of alem (1977)are Section paraphras the current
eof §6,f fourth paragrani ph.
first sentence, and, accordingly, the within analysis of the latter
applies to the former.
In closing I should call to your attention that Mr. Mansur
addressed his letter to you and pot to the owner of the property, the
Marlboro Realty Trust. Under well established principles of law
trust is a legal entity just as a corporation or a natural person a
w
The corporate entity acts through an officer, a natural person acts
personally, and a trust acts through the trustee. This should be
called to Mr. Mansur's attention in order that there will be no con-
fusion as to the correct identity of the owner of lot 345. I believe that
adjoining lots 344 and 346 were or are owned by Dundee Realty Trust
and were acquired by that entity by deed recorded on or about
September 6, 1962. The trustee of record of Dundee Realty Trust
Is your wife Gloria J. Jermy
alty n. Any contention that adjoining lots
of Dundee ReTrust and Marlboro Realty Trust are held in common
ownership is error because of the principles of law concerning entities
and ownership I have endeavored to set forth above.
In
ummary
July 18, 1979 9 as proper and valid, in my view building permit 11286 issued on
Sinc rely,
JAMcN/cw ohn A. McNiff
SALEM, MA - FEBRUARY 25, 1980
NON-CONFORMING LOTS
Changes in the Salem Zoning Ordinance on May 5, 1977 and legislative changes
in the Zoning Act (Chap 40A) in April 20, 1979 have created some confusion in regard to
non-conforming residential lots. It is hoped the following outline will help in under-
standing the language of Section VIII B of the ordinance and provide assistance for
determining if such lot or lots may be built upon.
Clear understanding of any regulation is contingent on knowing the meanings of the
! ;terms or words used. Therefore let us define some of them.
a. "Non-conforming" (in this context) means that the piece of land in
question does not meet the minimum lot dimension at the street or does
in
not have the necessary number of square feet with/its boundaries as required
by the Ordinance.
b. "Time of recording or endorsement" is that date on which the lot or lots were
created. "Recording" refers to the date on which a plan showing the lot
was filed with the Essex County Registry of Deeds. This date is generally
shown on the original document. "Endorsement" refers to the date the Salem
Planning Board signatures of approval are written on the plan. If the lot
was created prior to 1953 there will be no endorsement.
Now putting Section VIII B.1 into language the average person can understand the
Ordinance says:
A lot does not have to meet the present requirements for frontage or area if it
was created prior to May 5, 1977; now contains at least 5,000 square feet; and
has 50 or more feet. of frontage. Further the owner of the lot on the date that
it was created cannot have owned any of the adjoining lots. Separate ownership as
of today has no bearing on an exemption.
If there was common ownership with adjoining lots on the date which the lot was
created the present regulations do not apply if the lot was created prior to
May 5, 1977; it has at least 7,500 square feet of land; and a minimum of 75 foot
frontage. No more than three such adjoining lots may be developed. This common
ownership exemption shall apply only until May 5, 1982.
Even if your lot had received prior "endorsement" by the Salem planning Board it
must meet these new requirements.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to satisfy the Building Inspector as to
ownership on the date the lot or lots were created. Generally a copy of the plan can
be obtained from the Registry of Deeds on Federal Street in Salem. This plan should
indicate date of recording and the adjoining land owners. If your lot was created by
sub-dividing a large area of land it is almost sure to have been held in common owner-
ship with adjoining lots. There may also be certain instances where a lot was created by
deed. In this case it is suggested you contact your attorney to aid in supplying the
required proof.
If your property does not meet:any of the above conditions it will be necessary to
go before the Board of Appeals for a variance to build upon your lot. Applications may
be obtained from the Building Inspector at One Salem Green.
NONCONFORMITY SECTION VIII
B. Nonconforming Lot f
Where a lot or lots exist which could not be built upon for residential `
purposes under the terms of this Ordinance by reason of restrictions on
lot area or lot width, such lot or lots may be used, subject to the
following provisions:
1. Any increase in area, frontage, width, yard or depth requirements of a
zoning ordinance or by-law shall not apply to a lot for single and two-
family residential use which at the time of recording or endorsement,
whichever occurs sooner,was pot held in common ownership with any adjoin-
ing land, conformed td then existing requirements and had less than the
proposed requirement but at least five thousand square feet of area and
fifty feet of frontage.
Any increase in area, frontage, width, yard or depth requirement of a
zoning ordinance or by-law shall not apply for a period of five years
---- -?from its effective date or for five years after January first, nineteen
hundred and seventy-six, whichever is later, to a lot for single and
two family residential use, provided the plan for such lot was recorded "
or endorsed and such lot was held in common ownership with any adjoining
land and conformed to the existing zoning requirements as of January
first, nineteen hundred and seventy-six, and had less area, frontage,
width, yard or depth requirements than the newly effective zoning
requirements but contained at least seven thousand five hundred square
feet of area and seventy-five feet of frontage, and provided that
said five year period does not commence prior to January first,
nineteen hundred and.-.seventy-six, and provided further that the pro-
visions of this sentence shall not apply to more than three of such
adjoining lots held in common ownership.
The provisions of this paragraph, shall not be construed to prohibit
a lot being built upon, if at the time of the building, building upon
such lot is not prohibited by the Salem Zoning Ordinance.
F.r
I, Zoe J. Dakos, unmarried,
Peabody, Essex
xsxxxxxaxx John E. Jer.nyn, as Trustee of Marlboro
Realty Trust, under a written Declaration of Trust dated Aueust 31, 1962*
to be recorded herewith
Salem, Essex County
xe with the buildings thereon in said Salem, Essex County,
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, bounded and described as follows:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxx
FIRST PARCEL: One undivided half part in the land shown as Lot
369, eet 4, upon plan numbered 11802-E, filed with Certificate
of Title 7179, Southern Registry District of Essex County.
SECOND PARCEL: Ten (10) certainarcels of land bounded and desorib®d ,
as follows: Lots 331, 337, 339, 341, 343, 345, 362, 363, 376, 378,
Sheet 2, upon plan numbered 11802-E filed with Certificate of Title
No. 7179, Southern Registry District of Essex County.
THIRD PARCEL: Lots 111 and 112 Dundee Street, containing about
5,000 square feet of land as shown on plan filed in Essex County
South District Registry of Deeds in Plan Book 16, Plan 31. Being
the first parcel of land conveyed to me by deed of John E. Jermyn
dated July 24, 1962, and recorded with said Deeds- in Book 4953,
Page 118.
FOURTH PARCEL: Lots 445, 447 and 360 as shown on plan entitled
°Plan of West End Heights, Salem, Mass. , November 19282 recorded
with Essex South District Registry of. Deeds, Plan Book 55, Plan 41.
For my title see deed of John E. Jermyn dated July 24, 1962 and
recorded with said Deeds in Book 4953, Page 118.
FIFTH PARCEL: Lots250B Marlborough Road as shown on plan recorded
with said Deeds in Book 4761, Page 473. Being the same premises
described in deed of Elmer M. Jermyn at ux, recorded in Book 4761,
Page 473. For my title see deed of John E. Jermyn et ux dated
July 24, 1962 and recorded with said Deeds in Book 4953, Page 118.
No stamps are required by law for this conveyance.
VI IND
NIB
P Na
i
nl
45 V,
zg
U. 7
a Ii� 1 1 - wagett
fir,
VA it
ME4
It i
(d'. !jr a � k � ql�'�'J 4gfL lt. , �"�s� ��` �ik3a ^3aA� � �',. � vt, t -. $ u d k{ � ��; �� �
,ml
IN
t'�va
,ITAl
Y
,�T�V47
01
PIZ
MIS U1
.4jn,
,vv it
41
Rol
Im
tY ��,w lip
RAVI,,, ,
J"' cy �qg Off
I i� il"i
VS
�q 9
Igm�'4 66F It.
Al a I ff
May
!
�g
54
I Ell
AS PY21011 A,
NIB
Titu ttf �7IEnt, C ass r4uSPtts
�Ialuling i�uttrD
m (One �$alrm Green
Nov tS 9 39 AM '85
CERTIFICATE OF ACTION FILE#
CITY LU,:144, - V.MASS,
DATE: November 14, 1985
TO: Josephine R. Fusco, City Clerk
FROM: City of Salem Planning Board
•
RE:'�_George Baliotis, Ravenna Ave.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hereby certify that, pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, The Salem
Planning Board has taken the following action with respect to the
above—referenced subdivision:
By unanimous vote, the Planning Board approved the proposed subdivision
plan as presented with attending conditions.
Notice of the Planning Board' s action and the reasons supporting it are
more fully described in the attached copy of a letter which was sent to
the applicant by registered mail, postage prepaid, at his address stated
on the petition.
Tttu of �IPm, C �ttSMtltusr#t5
/j " ��lttnnina �nttr�
1� \y
�° ms (One gaIrm Green
November 18, 1985
NOV 15 9 39 AH �e5
FILE ;
Mr. George Baliotis g;Lgil,HA55.
12 Greenway Road , CITY �:'�''+
Salem, MA. 01970
Dear Mr. Baliotis:
The Planning Board -voted, on November 14, 1985, to approve the
proposed subdivision plan entitled, "Plan of Land belonging to George
Baliotis", dated November 12, 1985, subject to the following conditions:
1 . A covenant, which addresses the following shall be duly executed and
recorded -with the endorsed plan:
a. The extension of Ravenna Avenue shall be completed prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
b. Costs for installation of municipal services shall be shared
equally between the owner and the owners of Assessors' Map 8,
Lot 6.
C. An easement for the use of temporary turnaround on Map 8, Lot6
shall be granted to Mr. Baliotis by the owners of Lot 6. A
copy of said easement shall be submitted to the Planning
Board prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
d. Any further extension of Ravenna Avenue will require the
construction of a cul—de—sac.
2. Sewer and water installation shall be subject to the review and
approval of the City Engineer.
r
3. All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the Rules
and Regulations of the Planning Board except as specifically waived.
This endorsement shall not take effect until a copy of the decision
bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty 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 grantor
index under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on
the owner's certificate of title. The fee for recording or registering
shall be paid by the owner or applicant.
I hereby certify that a copy 'of this decision and plans is on file
with the City Clerk and a copy is on file with the Planning Board.
Walter B. Power, III. L
Chairman, Planning Board