31 STATION ROAD - BUILDING INSPECTION 31 STATION ROAD :, "
J
CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEAL
120 WASHINGTON STREET, 31RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970
gBq,.�q°N TEL. (978) 745-9595
FAX (978) 740-9846
STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR,
MAYOR
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF TIMOTHY & TARA BOUCHER REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 31 STATION ROAD R-1
A hearing on this petition was held June 19, 2002 with the following Board Members
present: Nina Cohen, Joan Boudreau, Nicholas Helides and Joseph Barbeau. 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.
The petitioner is requesting a Variance from front yard setback and rear yard setback to
construct a 2 -car garage for the property located at 31 Station Road located in an R-1
zone.
The Variances, which have been requested, may be granted upon a finding by this
Board that:
a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building
or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings and
structure involve.
b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioners.
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 of the
purpose of the Ordinance.
The Board of A\ppeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
1. Petitioner i s seeking relief of a front & rear yard setback to construct a 2-car garage.
2. A petition signed by seven of their neighbors in favor of this request was presented
to the Boa rd.
3. The proposed addition would only encroach on a small portion of the rear setback,
and only 3 feet of the front setback.
4. Plans were submitted showing the proposed garage.
5. There was ho opposition to this petition.
,E
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF TIMOTHY & TARA BOUCHER REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 31 STATION ROAD R-1
pagetwo
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on, the evidence presented at the
hearing, the Zoning 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 4-0 to grant the Variances 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. 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 finishes of the new construction shall be in harmony with the existing
structure.
6. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having
jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Conservation Commission.
VARIANCE GRANTED
June 19, 2002 �C��
J6eph Barbee SC)
Board of Appeal
1
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
certificate of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed,
or that, if such appeal has been filed, that is 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
el'.nnlwg4
:7y
JOSEPH F. COLLINS 3 � � 3 LEONARD F. FEMINO
+r J J
ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR J — J' ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
q! u1m.l��
93 WASHINGTON STREET 93 WASHINGTON STREET
AND CITY OF SALEM - MASSACHUSETTS AND
22 SO. MAIN STREET MICHAEL E. O'BRIEN ONE SCHOOL STREET
TOPSFIELD. MA 01983 CITY SOLICITOR BEVERLY, MA 01915
745-4311 93 WASHINGTON STREET 745-4311
887-6401 AND 921-1990
PLEASE REPLY TO 22 SO. MAIN STREET 81 WASHINGTON STREET PLEASE REPLY TO ONE SCHOOL STREET
SALEM, MA 01970
745-4311
744-3363 c'� O
PLEASE REPLY TO 81 WASHINGTON STREET -< N _
December 22 , 1989
r s
William H. Munroe, Building Inspector
City of Salem
One Salem Green
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Re : 31 Station Road, Salem, Massachusetts
(Assessor' s Map 22 , Lot 69 )
Dear Mr. Munroe :
I have received a communication from your office and
I assume you are requesting my opinion as to whether or not
the above lot of land containing 11, 000 square feet of land
and 145 feet of frontage should be afforded the protection
of the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of GLc40A §6
set out as Section VIII (B) ( 1 ) in the City of Salem Zoning
Ordinance.
It appears that the lot in question conforms to all
the requirements of the existing zoning ordinance with the
exception of the area and frontage requirement. An examination
of the records at the Registry of Deeds indicates that the
most recent instrument of record prior to August 27 , 1965
(effective date of the zoning ordinance ) indicates the lot
was separately owned and it has retained it' s separate identity
since that time.
Accordingly, in my opinion, the parcel should be afforded
the benefit of the "grandfather" provision of GLc40A §6 as
enumerated in Section VIII (B) ( 1 ) of our Zoning Ordinance.
7chael
ruly your
E. O'Brien /
City Solicitor
MEO/jp
;:;LEI'-?, MA
fatty of "'5ttlem, 2ISS2ILIjuSP#fs L`,K'l S OFFICE
PnttrD of '�Vpenl
1999 FEB 23 All: 40
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF TIMOTHY &TARA BOUCHER REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 31-,33 STATION ROAD R-1"- .1,
A hearing on this petition was held February 17, 1999 with the following Board Members
present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Michael Ward, Stephen Buczko and
Stephen Harris. 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.
Petitioners are requesting a Variance from front setback to construct a single family
dwelling for the property located at 31-33 Station Road located in an R-1 zone.
The Variances which have 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
structures involved and which are not generally affecting other lands, buildings and
structures involve.
2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve
substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioners.
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 of 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 petitioners, Timothy & Tara Boucher are prospective purchasers of the property
located at 31-33 Station Road. Timothy Boucher presented the petition.
2. The parcel of land at 31-33 Station Road is owned by Donald & Delinda Goudreau of
66 Moffatt Road, Salem.
3. The petitioners received approval to apply for a variance regarding the parcel of land
at 31-33 Station Road.
4. The petitioners seek a variance for front setback for the property located at 31-33
Station Road to allow the construction of single family dwelling 6'1"from the front
property line.
5. The subject property is located in an R-1 District.
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF TIMOTHY& TARA BOUCHER REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 31-33 STATION ROAD
page two
6. Mr . Boucher presented the Board with a petition in support of the proposed
residence at 31-33 Station Road which was signed by Dina Taruz, 35 Station-'Road,
Donald & Delinda Goudreau, 66 Moffatt Road and Fran & John Nutting, 68'Moffatt Rd.
7. Correspondence from Stephen Dibble, Conservation Administrator, City of Salem,
conveyed that there are several existing constraints on the property including
wetlands, neighborhood flooding, and a City of Salem easement across the rear of
the property. Mr. Dibble also indicated that there exists a private sewer force line from
35 Station Road along the front property line. Mr. Dibble requested that any approval
should include a provision for and subject to required Conservation Commission
approval.
8. There was no opposition to the petition.
On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on, the presented at the hearing, the
Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0 to grant the variances requested,
subject to the following condition;
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 the
Building inspector.
3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety
shall be strictly adhered to.
4. The petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction.
5. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained.
6. Petitioner shall obtain proper street numbering from the City of Salem Assessors C.
Office and shall display said number so as to be visible from the street.
7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having w —
jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Planning Board. N �,
c�
8. Petitioner shall install a sidewalk if requested by the City Engineer. D
r:-
m
s D
Variances Granted o
February 17, 1999 0
Stephen Buczko
Board of Appeal, Member
DECISION OF THE PETITION OF TIMOTHY & TARA BOUCHER REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 31-33 STATION R-1
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
certificate of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed,
or that, if such appeal has been filed, that is 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
W l�
n•
-= rn
X D
O
w
Citp of &alem, f ag!5arbu!5ett,5
Public Propatp �Departntent
Wuilbing Mepartment
One 9palem &reen
(97S) 745-9595 Cxt. 3S0
Peter Strout
Director of Public Property
Inspector of Buildings
Zoning Enforcement Officer
November 25 , 1998
RE : 31 Station Road
Map 22 , Lot 69
To Whom it May Concern:
The above lot of land containing 11 , 000 square feet
of land and 145 feet of frontage should be afforded the
protection of the first sentence of the fourth paragraph
of GLc40A s6 set out as Section VIII (B) ( 1 ) in the City
of Salem Zoning Ordinance .
It appears that the lot in question conforms to all
the requirements of the existing zoning ordinance with the
exception of the area and frontage requirement . An
examination of the records at the Registry of Deeds
indicates that the most recent instrument of record prior
to August 27 , 1965 (effective date of the zoning
ordinance ) indicates the lot was separately owned and it
has retained it' s separate identity since that time .
Accordingly, in my opinion, the parcel should be
afforded the benefit of the "grandfather" provision of
GLc40A S6 as enumerated in Section VIII (B) ( 1 ) of our
Zoning Ordinance.
Since
Peter Strout
Zoning Enforcement Officer
PS : scm
-
JOSEPH F. COLLINS 3 x
LEONARD F FEMINO
ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
93 WASHINGTON STREET 93 WASHINGTON STREET
AND CITY OF SALEM - MASSACHUSETTS AND
22 SO. MAIN STREET ONE SCHOOL STREET
TOPSFIELD, MA 01983 MICHAEL E. OBRIEN
745-4311
CITY SOLICITOR BEVERLY, MA 01915 887-6401 93 WASHINGTON STREET 745-4311
AND 921-1990
PLEASE REPLY TO 22 SO.MAIN STREET 61 WASHINGTON STREET PLEASE REPLY TO ONE SCHOOL STREET
SALEM. MA 01970
745-4311
744-3363 D
rn
i c7 P
PLEASE REPLY TO Bt WASHINGTON STREET
December 22 , 1989
r'.
L^r.
l-r. o
William H. Munroe, Building Inspector - =9
City of Salem 'n —
One Salem Green n v
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Re : 31 Station Road, Salem, Massachusetts e
(Assessor' s Map 22 , Lot 69 )
Dear Mr. Munroe :
I have received a communication from your office and
I assume you are requesting my opinion as to whether or not
the above lot of land containing 11, 000 square feet of land
and 145 feet of frontage should be afforded the protection
of the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of GLc40A §6
set out as Section VIII (B) ( 1 ) in the City of Salem Zoning
Ordinance.
It appears that the lot in question conforms to all
the requirements of the existing zoning ordinance with the
exception of the area and frontage requirement. An examination
of the records at the Registry of Deeds indicates that the
most recent instrument of record prior to August 27 , 1965
(effective date of the zoning ordinance) indicates the lot
was separately owned and it has retained it ' s separate identity
since that time.
Accordingly, in my opinion, the parcel should be afforded
the benefit of the "grandfather" provision of GLc40A §6 as
enumerated in Section VIII (B) (1 ) of our Zoning Ordinance.
Ve ruly your
chael E,—O'Brien
City Solicitor
t r
Ol
t �
t
/A•
OX ~'r0` �`..
i
dd'
! r
I f l
I 1
r
I , '.• I e �'\ r q:' ` if'. l '.1 t i r:. � 1 , -� 1 i
I � 1 �,(r: rl r •v�, r .r.. Y .c� S r t:` r A > 5t r�•
fI' r �.It ,'I „ , 1 � • 1 er. I 11., t +et 1 1�,,�Ir I I` i� ` 1 VY. f �yYr 1�`•f 11, S) f
5 1
I) I
t i !1 1 - IY y. )) t y IY
�' I Lt If ;� +'rl
t1 r _ te. 11 1 1. : , •.. ..n r Ilfi.:l }• n.L., 1 } �r�i, .yu��' r qq r }} ..
.1 I. .. � I cr Y I . �°b..: I , I r.i...•M1 tia .I ..tl�'i �v 4,dw+d r.f Ly4n{: rV I�.MIr ht"
Dec. 8, 1989
Bill :
Could your office let me know when an
answer to this request is ready and I will
nick it uo.
Thanks.
A /�:]�
Mike Beatrice
4 745-8712
O7 N
m �
is l
W
� N W�
N >
z o_ Wa
CD
W N
W
_J m �p
® V F—
W U
O
� ( $'
1
_' L . u.
._ . .� . i 1.� '
1
S��/
I
Y tI 1 t
n-L ' i llJ Llj �j:. iil o it l� r.�.�.��i�'�CILiuhltc �Jrtlurrtu �rpariu;cnt }
r iSilllll>lllll, ,�l'U:IrllllCtll =�,' r '
r. r
v `
- U213 4 y " ...
\l'illi:un H. Munroe
Maurice \1: %larnnuau, Ass't Inspcc tor'
lIr Director of Public Propcnv
b% Inspector of Duil im_s Edgar !. Payurn 'Ass's In�pcctor,
John L. Leclerc, Plu
Zoning Enforcement Officer motnc'Gas" (mp =
'
iDEPARTMENT FOLICY
GRANDFATHER LOTS REOUIRE:"•ENTS
Y
' 3 In order to determine whether a lot qualifies for the separate lot, protection ,
found in Chapter 40A, Section 6,, MGL the 'following must be answered,,, in
' 1 writing by your Legal Council.
O
t • Does the Lot have at last 5 ,000 square feet and 50 feet of frontage, .`yj
"E on an improved street?
1P 2, Is the lot }.located in an area Zoned for single or two family,use? €
a� + 3, Did the lot conform to existing Zoning when legally created?
4: Doe`s _[he most recent instrument of record prior to the effective date ;A
e " . ,
aiF, �, of the Zoning change from ,which ,the exemption is sough[ August 2 „ 1965 ,
show that the lot was separately owned? h'
x
f l[;�' _ 5• ;hen conveyed after ttie Zoning change , has the lot retained
it ' s separate
, • _ identity by continually being descr4bed as a separate ::nd dist c lo[' a
y°e Y,.
6. Has' the been a separate lot and noc •availabLe for use ' -n co�necrion
P
I'll
4{ t
`-} with adjoining land on the effective date, of the Zoning requtremen[s, 'f, �
p August 27, 1965, which made the lot substandard? '
a , @k
p�4� c ..
„.. To be entitled to.. Grandfacer Protection under the ProvisionsYof Chapter 40At s
Sec[ion '6,. MGL, : a yes answer is required,of all the above. ' ; ^
t §9� ' December,6,; 1989
i '
NIF
r Buildina Deoartment .;
Salem', MA i
RE; parcel of -land at 31 Station Road, Salem, sh^ s on;'City Assessors, Dlao '�
as Lot 69, PL. 22, c r
The answer to all of the above questions is "Yes,” and the 10 is ` a ,
f� 7 therefore entitled to Grandfather Protection - +
x ! + `4n School. Street”
J�1zJ8 el . y`(517) 227; 6060 , af'
. .m�:..-. ..-.w. +..--w.�...».� .. ..ww+•.,�5.. �'Mfp�:,:r,�*x2•,++ r-o.•.-
R \\
MOFFATT
Joel n a . do4 scGjd d
17
A
� L c3•�-° � d ��b
Vl oJn °va
O
q ,c, \ Q�
O o J � ( 6
a / �
V) "' +/ na�fP �l LOCUS MAP
r ..
— 61.4-b �° 1• . w� SCALE I"= 400NN '
v-
yn
�ea�9e f r 11 ,810 S .F.
• 8•SI
�\ �' �1�.So•' S3 � i
1 O[A
F�► R
OAD
PLAN OF LAND
SALEM PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL. �e �z�ences SALEM MASSACHUSETTS
NOT REQUIRED UNDER THE SUBDIVISION
Fla, 1� 3
��`
PREPARED FOR * MICHAEL BEATRICECONTROL LAW.
.loftSCALE ,
' 20 JULY 9 1950
. I -_
PARSONS AND FAIA INC.
mo 480 LINCOLN AVE.
SAUGUS MASS .
1 CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED IN - 0 20 40 60 80 100
ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULE, AND REGULATIONS
�. OF THE REGISTERS OF DEE
c
DATE : 2000
5
a.. I
Ctv of "in em, fflttssar4use##s
�; � �ltuurixcg �nuxa
@M "Sa6mGreen �, z
m o cn
7�N
r
om c
FORM A - DECISION " a'
s
mD
Ms. Josephine Fusco
City Clerk
Salem City Hall
Salem, MA 01970
Dear Ms. Fusco:
At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board
held on November 5, 1992 it was voted to endorse "Approval Under
Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described
plan:
1. Applicant:
Michael H. Beatrice
2. Location and Description:
31 Station Road
Pickman Park Subdivision - Salem, Acres, Inc.
Deed of property records in Essex South District Registry.
Sincrtrte��r��e����ly,
v"
W *11 b- P
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
EX\DH\BPFORMA
JOSEPH F. COLLINS # w 3 LEONARD F. FEMINO
ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR T''a — J? ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR
93 WASHINGTON STREET 93 WASHINGTON STREET
AND CITY OF SALEM - MASSACHUSETTS AND
22 SO. MAIN STREET MICHAEL E. O'BRIEN ONE SCHOOL STREET
TOPSFIELD, MA 01983 CITY SOLICITOR BEVERLY, MA 01915
745-4311 93 WASHINGTON STREET 745-4311
887-6401 AND 921-1990
PLEASE REPLY TO 22 SO. MAIN STREET 81 WASHINGTON STREET PLEASE REPLY TO ONE SCHOOL STREET
SALEM, MA 01970
745-4311 -
744-3363 n I!=
-i e-7 Pm
PLEASE REPLY TO BI WASHINGTON STREET 't C
December 22 , 1989 b "'
v c� —
7Y m
m t to
im �1 r,7
William H. Munroe, Building Inspector gt3 g M.
City of Salem �" s
One Salem Green Y' coo
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Red 31 Station Road, Salem, Massachusetts
�(-Assessor' s—Map-22-, LoV 69 )
Dear Mr. Munroe:
I have received a communication from your office and
I assume you are requesting my opinion as to whether or not
the above lot of land containing 11, 000 square feet of land
and 145 feet of frontage should be afforded the protection
of the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of GLc40A §6
set out as Section VIII (B) ( 1 ) in the City of Salem Zoning
Ordinance.
It appears that the lot in question conforms to all
the requirements of the existing zoning ordinance with the
exception of the area and frontage requirement. An examination
of the records at the Registry of Deeds indicates that the
most recent instrument of record prior to August 27 , 1965
(effective date of the zoning ordinance) indicates the lot
was separately owned and it has retained it' s separate identity
since that time.
Accordingly, in my opinion, the parcel should be afforded
the benefit of the "grandfather" provision of GLc40A §6 as
enumerated in Section VIII (B) (1 ) of our Zoning Ordinance.
5ichae
ruly your
l E. O'Brien
City Solicitor
MEO/jp